Discover says:

In a new class action lawsuit, dozens of women are claiming that Victoria’s Secret bras have given them painful, unsightly rashes. One of the plaintiffs, Roberta Ritter of Ohio, says the company’s “Angels Secret Embrace” and “Very Sexy Extreme Me Push-Up” bras gave her persistent itchy rashes that caused severe discomfort. When Ritter’s lawyers purchased the same bra types and sent them to a lab, she claims, they tested positive for formaldehyde.
Formaldehyde is considered a probable human carcinogen by the EPA and is also a known allergen.

Though people often associate the chemical with embalmed specimens in jars, it is actually found in many everyday products.
“Formaldehyde is the big thing these days,” says dermatologist Susan Tillman Elliott, consulting physician to the Center for Laser Surgery in Washington D.C. “It’s been known for a zillion years that it’s the major component of most fabric finishers. It’s a major contact allergen.”

Despite the lawsuit and allegations of itchiness — Victoria's Secret denies that they use the chemical on their bras and are keeping them in stores, says Discover. Using formaldehyde on fabrics is perfectly legal in the U.S.

Why Are Victoria’s Secret Bras Causing Skin Rashes? [Discover]

those with the largest amount of BPA in their urine had nearly three times the risk of heart disease and more than twice the risk of diabetes as those who had the lowest levels.

We already know there's concern about whether BPA harms babies, but frankly this author is a baby-free grown up, and I want to know whether BPA hurts me. This study may indicate a link but the co-author says it's not conclusive—the heightened BPA levels may be a reflection of the diets of those with heart disease and diabetes, and not a cause.

Still, there is some evidence from previous animal studies that BPA may interfere with insulin production:

"Even those with the highest BPA levels still had levels way below the currently established 'safe' level," says David Melzer, an epidemiologist at the University of Exeter in England and coauthor of the study. Other researchers say there's enough evidence from previous animal studies to suggest that BPA is harmful to adults. BPA levels that are slightly elevated but still just one-fifth the safe dose limit established by the Food and Drug Administration trigger an alarming release of insulin in the pancreatic cells of mice—and higher levels lead to pre-diabetes or insulin resistance, says Frederick vom Saal, a biologist at the University of Missouri. BPA also suppresses the release of a hormone from fat cells that normally protects against diabetes and heart disease.

"Heart Disease, Diabetes Linked to Chemical in Plastics" [U.S. News & World Report] (Thanks to Shaula!)
(Dramatization of BPA attack: Brymo)

Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine have linked [BPA] to problems with brain function and mood disorders in monkeys—the first time the chemical has been connected to health problems in primates.

Last month, the FDA declared BPA safe enough to keep using in manufacturing, but yesterday another federal group reignited the issue:

The National Toxicology Program, a federal interagency initiative, released a final report saying it has “some concern” that BPA is linked to health and developmental problems in humans. Of the NTP’s five categories of concern, “some” would rate a three, or the middle of the dial between the extremes of negligible and serious.

The report doesn't call for a ban, but suggests more research is needed. And here we go: this new study on monkeys seems to add more evidence to the argument that BPA may have negative consequences on humans.

The FDA will hold a public meeting on September 16th to discuss the matter some more, with academics and industry reps in attendance.

"Chemical in Plastic Is Connected to Health Problems in Monkeys"
(Photo: mape_s)

Now—right before California decides whether to ban BPA in children's products—the FDA has revisited its earlier studies and reaffirmed that "the trace amounts of bisphenol A that leach out of food containers are not a threat to infants or adults."

Critics are saying the FDA is cherry-picking what studies to consider in its decision:

"It's ironic FDA would choose to ignore dozens of studies funded by (the National Institutes of Health) — this country's best scientists — and instead rely on flawed studies from industry," said Pete Myers, chief scientist for Environmental Health Sciences.

Myers said the agency disregarded recent studies of bisphenol's effects included in the National Toxicology Program's April draft report.

That group's review of animal studies suggested low doses of bisphenol can cause changes in behavior and the brain, and that it may reduce survival and birth weight in fetuses. A final version of the group's findings is expected next month.

Commenting on those studies in its 105-page assessment, the FDA said they had "inconsistencies and inadequacies which limit the interpretations of the findings."

We're not sure what sort of effect this will have on the pending lawsuits or on California's potential ban, but the BPA debate should take on new energy next month, when the National Toxicology Program's final report is released and the FDA brings in outside "advisors" to debate its own findings.

"FDA says chemical found in plastic bottles is safe" [Associated Press]
(Photo: Oop)

"PVC is just bad from cradle to cradle," said Martha Dina Argüello, executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. "It's a mess when you create, it's a mess when you get rid of it, and it's off-gassing when you're using it."

So is it possible to buy PVC-free shower curtains? Yes! Target and Sears/Kmart say they're phasing out PVC, while Bed Bath & Beyond is increasing the number of PVC-free curtains it offers. However, the authors of the report said that Wal-Mart didn't respond to repeated requests for its PVC policy—which is odd, considering how quickly it moved to announce it would pull BPA products from shelves back in April.

"That 'new shower curtain smell' gives off toxic chemicals, study finds" [Los Angeles Times]
(Photo: Getty)

When Flanagan tested microfiber products herself, she found that they worked as promised but made people feel that something was off—and illustrated how deeply packaging and brand expectations control our cleaning purchases:

Robbed of the sensory excitement of cleaning solutions—bright colors, heady fumes, sudsing, foaming, and definitive rinsing—everyone felt ineffective and disarmed. The rituals didn't feel right. But unquestionably, the stuff worked. Windows disappeared, floors gleamed, the Subaru sparkled.

She went on to ask the big cleaning companies what they thought of microfiber, and was met with a generalized "meh":

Several lines of questioning, repeated over the course of two months, via approximately 100 phone calls and countless emails, uncovered several facts. First, large makers of household chemicals are very, very hard to reach and are unwilling to reveal their ingredients for fear of piracy. Second, they're hell-bent on convincing customers to disinfect their premises using the strongest chemicals possible to annihilate bacteria and viruses, evidenced not just by the kind of products they sell and the scare tactics by which they're marketed, but also by the corporate refrain I heard over and over: Okay, maybe microfiber can remove germs, but it does not kill them.

(To disinfect or sanitize, technically one must kill 99.999 percent of microorganisms in 30 seconds.)

Never mind that removing germs is likely to be enough for the average homeowner, assuming he or she takes the time to wash the microfiber cloth properly afterward. Never mind that new university research finds that "safe" household chemicals are proving unhealthy now that so many of them are building up and mixing together inside our hyper-sealed homes, then draining outdoors. Never mind that more scientists are predicting the rise of superbugs as over-disinfecting threatens to create invincible strains of bacteria and viruses.

But of course corporate self-interest is only half the story, because U.s. companies are responding to the desires of their market, and the U.S. market remains a place where chemicals and no-work convenience win out over a re-usable cloth.

The observation that all company spokespeople confirmed, whether makers of disinfectant toilet-bowl cleaner or makers of microfiber, was quite a revelation: America loves its cleaning chemicals, and lots of them. We have a distinct cleaning culture. And as much as that culture makes us look stubborn, superstitious, underinformed, and overly aggressive, it's who we are.

"The Strange Case of the Missing Microfiber" [I.D. Magazine]

The chemicals industry maintains that polycarbonate bottles contain little BPA and leach traces considered too low to harm humans. The industry cites multiple studies in the United States, Europe and Japan.

But the lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in New Haven, contends that hundreds of studies and papers have repeatedly shown that BPA can be toxic even at extremely low doses.

"Lawsuit filed against plastic baby bottle maker" [MSNBC]
"U.S. lawsuit alleges plastic baby bottles contain dangerous chemical" [The Canadian Press]

Walmart is saying nothing at all, although Stiles says that of the 200-350 people who contacted her after she posted photos of her "burns" on the internet, a few have "settled with Walmart for undisclosed amounts." The retailer has pulled the flip flops in question from store shelves, but they do still sell shoes from "chemical flip flop" manufacturer.

Kelly told WCSC, "So far I have been contacted by no less than 200 hundred and I think no more than 350 people who have said you know I had the same thing happen."

"We're scared. We don't know what we have been exposed to."

If you're new to this story and you have a strong stomach, you can check out this gallery of Kelly's injured feet , or read about others who've shared her fate. Above is the most recent picture of Kelly's feet that she has up on her site. It was taken 2-27-08. She bought the flip flops last April. Ouch! Get better, Kelly.

LaMana Photography
Burned By Flip Flops From Walmart [WCSC](Thanks, Alex!)

"They address the issue of BPA in their bottles (on their Web site); they cite the (Food and Drug Administration) stating that they see no problem with it. The problem is they didn't cite the many other studies that show there is a risk and there is a great concern about the issue," attorney Harold Hewell, who represents Felix-Lozano, said.

The lawsuit does not describe any physical ailment suffered by the plaintiffs and seeks unspecified damages.

"Nalgene sports bottle maker sued over toxic claims" [Reuters]
(Photo: Getty)

"The Z Report on BPA In Children's Feeding Products, Third Edition" [Z Recommends]

David writes, "I'd be interested to hear if Babies R Us and other retailers (or the bottle companies) would offer an exchange to concerned parents." Somehow we doubt that will happen unless there's an official plastic bottle recall in the future.

"Plastic baby bottles may pose danger" [MarketWatch]

RELATED
Press Release: "Dr. Brown's New Glass, Polypropylene Bottles Provide More Options For Parents" [Dr. Brown's]
"Chemicals In Baby Products May Be Dangerous"
(Really cute baby photo: pfly)

The rest of Nair is a bunch of animal, plant, and mineral moisturizers to try to repair the damage inevitably caused when you chemically burn away part of your body.

"What's Inside: Nair Hair Remover, Feel the Burn!" [Wired]
(Photo: Kevin)

Turns out that mercury sometimes finds its way into mascara and other products used around your eye, says the AP.

"Mercury does cause neurological damage to people even in tiny quantities," said Sen. John Marty, the Democrat from Roseville who sponsored the ban. "Every source of mercury adds to it. We wanted to make sure it wasn't here."

Most makeup manufacturers have phased out the use of mercury, but it's still added legally to some eye products as a preservative and germ-killer, said John Bailey, chief scientist with the Personal Care Products Council in Washington. That group doesn't track mercury in beauty products and favors a national approach to regulating cosmetics, instead of laws that vary from state to state.

Federal law allows eye products to contain up to 65 parts per million of mercury. The exposure a person would get from a product used in small quantities around the eyes would not cause a problem, Bailey said.

"It's added at very low levels, and for good reason," he said.

Mercury in mascara? Minn. law bans it [Yahoo!] (Thanks, Dan!)
(Photo:Getty)

Phthalate is a chemical used to soften plastics, and it's used in a variety of industries. There have been several studies that indicate it may affect hormone levels as well as cause other lasting damage. But the issue is fairly controversial, because there are other existing studies that show it poses no danger. The president of the American Chemistry Council says, ""This law is the product of the politics of fear. It is not good science, and it is not good government." For now, in California at least, the health advocates have prevailed whether the science is there or not.

According to Greenpeace, phthalates are used in the antenna and headphones of the iPhone. According to Wikipedia, phthalates are used in "nail polish, fishing lures, adhesives, caulk, paint pigments, and sex toys made of so-called 'jelly rubber.' Some vendors of jelly rubber sex toys advise covering them in condoms when used internally, due to the possible health risks. " Some products containing phthalates (mostly toys and childcare articles) have been banned in Europe.

"A nationwide toxic toy ban likely to follow state lead" [SFGate]

RELATED
"Scientific tests reveal iPhone contains hazardous chemicals and materials, says Greenpeace" [Greenpeace]
Phthalates [Wikipedia]

In 2005, the manufacturer replaced the active ingredient to something called Flexipel S-22WS, and a few weeks later, reports of problems began to trickle in.

Terri Keenan of Kyle, Tex., was one of those callers. Ms. Keenan used the spray in late May 2005 to seal tile in her kitchen and bathroom. Within an hour or so, she began feeling dizzy, thirsty and short of breath. Minutes later, she started foaming at the mouth; then she could not get up from the ground. Her husband rushed her to the hospital, where she remained for five days.

It took almost three months to wrangle a recall for the spray, and then the manufacturer simply included an additive to give it a stronger smell, but left the emergency-room chemical untouched.

Finally, in March 2007, Home Depot pulled all cans of Stand 'n Seal from its shelves and offered rebates to anyone who purchased either the officially tainted cans or the officially good—but still tainted—cans.

(Thanks to Zen!)

"Dangerous Sealer Stayed on Shelves After Recall" [New York Times]

"When he broke open the bags, after the steam came out, he would often inhale the fragrance because he liked it so much," Dr. Rose said. "That's heated diacetyl, which we know from the workers' studies is the highest risk."

Dr. Rose measured levels of diacetyl in the man's home after he made popcorn and found levels of the chemical were similar to those in microwave popcorn plants. She asked the man to stop eating microwave popcorn.

"He was really upset that he couldn't have it anymore," Dr. Rose said. "But he complied."

Doctor Links a Man's Illness to a Microwave Popcorn Habit [NYT]
PREVIOUSLY: Microwave Popcorn May Cause Lung Damage
(Photo: and parsecs to go)

You probably thought the new, digitally zombified Orville Redenbacher was the most disturbing popcorn-related thing you'd see in 2007, but CNN is reporting (warning: video) that the butter flavoring in microwave popcorn causes permanent, debilitating asthma-like effects in popcorn factory workers.

The chemical, diacetyl (pronounced DIE-ASS-UH-TEAL) has been known to be dangerous for some time. In 2004, a worker was awarded 18 million in damages, according to the CNN video. The EPA has been working on a draft study of the dangers of the chemical to consumers, but hasn't finalized it yet.

So far one manufacturer, Pop Weaver, has announced that it has stopped using the chemical. ConAgra, the company behind the Orville Redenbacher and Act II brands, says it won't comment on the final report of the EPA draft until blah blah blah but it will remove diacetyl "in the near future." Until then, you eat ConAgra popcorn at your own peril.

That's right! Popcorn. Causes. Lung damage. Welcome back from your holiday.

"Toxic Popcorn" [CNN]

(Photo: Getty)

The tests concluded that some clothes had concentrations of formaldehyde 900 times the "level that causes harm." Formaldehyde is used as a preservative and as an embalming fluid and may cause cancer. From the Washington Post:

"Target" production manager Juanita Dobson said the garments tested were "randomly selected items" that are "readily available from common outlets round New Zealand."

"We are not releasing further details" of brand names or importers ahead of the show airing on Tuesday, she told The Associated Press.

A woman with the media office of China's General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, who gave only her surname Xia, said she had not heard of the New Zealand case. The administration is China's product safety watchdog.

People who answered phones at the China National Garment Association and the China Textile Industry Association also said they had not heard of the case.

"We were tipped off by a consumer who contacted us because her son had bought 100 per cent cotton pants and had an allergic reaction to them," she said.

"So we started looking into the types of chemicals that are used in production and manufacture of clothing and treatments that they receive along the way. For example, something like formaldehyde is used to prevent mould and mildew, things like that."

"Quite often we hear about formaldehyde in building materials and things like that, so it was quite hard to find out what it would mean on clothing, but basically there are worries about it being cancer-causing and things like that.

"The laboratory we spoke to was really surprised at the results and actually went back and double-checked that they'd done everything right because our results were so high."

NZ Investigates China Clothes Imports [Washington Post]
NZ tests find formaldehyde in Chinese-made clothes [ABC News, Australia]
(Photo:Getty)

How bad are they? They've been linked to developmental and reproductive health risks, and some big name brands are reformulating to remove them.

How do you avoid them? You can check labels but since disclosure isn't required, they might not be listed.

What is being done? California has a new law going into effect this year that will require cosmetic manufacturers that sell over $1 million dollars worth of product a year in the state to "report any products containing a chemical that is either a carcinogen or a reproductive or developmental toxic agent. Among those that must be disclosed are the phthalates DBP and di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)." California will make this info public, so companies might start reformulating...

Consumer Reports Conclusion: "While the scientific jury is still out, we at ShopSmart believe it makes sense to reduce your exposure to phthalates, especially if you're nursing, pregnant, or trying to become pregnant." —MEGHANN MARCO

What you should know about chemicals in your cosmetics [Consumer Reports]