formaldehyde
cmonforton | April 19, 2017A new commentary by CUNY School of Public Health professor Franklin Mirer is timed perfectly for this weekend's Marches for Science.
Mirer writes about the ongoing interference by Members of Congress on the science behind the designation of formaldehyde as a carcinogen. His commentary, "What’s Science Got to Do with It?" appears in the current issue of April issue of the Synergist, a membership publication of the American Industrial Hygiene Association.
Mirer's example concerns a rule published by EPA in December 2016 on testing formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products (e.g.,…
oracknows | February 2, 2017I've frequently written about what I like to refer to as the "toxins gambit" with respect to vaccines. Basically, in the hard core (and even soft core) antivaccine crowd, vaccines are feared as being loaded with all sorts of "toxins," such as aluminum, formaldehyde, mercury, and various chemicals that are dangerous enough separately, but, when combined, "poison" young babies, resulting in their becoming autistic, acquiring asthma and autoimmune diseases, or even dying of sudden infant death syndrome. Of course, many of the scary-sounding chemicals to which antivaccinationists point actually…
oracknows | January 3, 2016It always irritates me when I discover a new antivaccine crank in my state; so you can imagine how irritated I become when I discover one right in my very city (OK, metropolitan area). When that happens, it becomes a bit more personal than my usual mission to refute antivaccine misinformation. So I was most alarmed when I discovered just such a beast because a former ScienceBlogs colleague now writing for Forbes, Dr. Peter Lipson, took the time to deconstruct a very ill-informed piece of antivaccine propaganda. The offending post appeared on the blog of a "holistic" physician named Dr. David…
oracknows | October 25, 2012Well, I'm here. That's right. As I mentioned yesterday, I'm at CSICon. As is the case when I'm at conferences, be they skeptical conferences or professional conferences, it's hard to predict the blogging time available. It could be a lot; it could be a little. Or it could be none. (Well, obviously it's not none, or you wouldn't be reading this.) In any case, there was lots of stuff going on, plus there was the second game of the World Series, which made me miss the live recording of The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe. Oh, well. Steve understood. So I wasn't up for any heavy lifting or taking…
cmonforton | September 11, 2012Let's say you're curious to know whether there's evidence that a particular compound is carcinogenic to laboratory animals or to humans. Maybe you're wondering about UV radiation from tanning beds, or wood dust, or the drug tamoxifen. Do you want to rely solely on the opinion of the compound's producer or an industry trade association, or might you like to know the views of a panel of independent scientists?
Hearing from the latter was the vision for the U.S.'s Report on Carcinogens. It is a program put in place in 1978 by Public Law 95-622 with amendments to the Public Health Service Act…
egrossman | April 11, 2012By Elizabeth Grossman
While the US Supreme Court was debating the Affordable Care Act, the US House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee Health Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the current federal oversight of cosmetics and personal care product safety. The hearing revealed that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the federal agency that oversees the more than eight billion such products now sold annually in the US, knows astonishingly little about these products' ingredients. This data gap - perhaps better described as a data chasm - is compounded by the inadequacy…
lborkowski | March 9, 2012by Elizabeth Grossman
Nurses face many hazards on the job, and one that clearly demands more detailed analysis than it's received to date is the effect of occupational chemical exposures on nurses' reproductive health. A recent study by researchers at the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Harvard School of Public Health, and Brigham and Women's Hospital has found that female nurses exposed to sterilizing agents and chemotherapy drugs at work are at least twice as likely to have miscarriages than those who are not. The study, published in The American Journal of…
egrossman | June 22, 2011by Elizabeth Grossman
On June 10th the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the National Toxicology Program released the department's 12th Report on Carcinogens, adding eight new substances to the overall list that now includes 240 compounds (or classes of compounds) known or reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens. Two of these eight - the industrial chemical formaldehyde and the botanical compounds known as aristolochic acids - are listed as known human carcinogens. Six others - styrene, certain inhalable glass wool fibers, o-nitrotoluene, captafol, cobalt-tungsten…
angrytoxicologist | July 3, 2008The Good
Analysts from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that the FEMA trailers had too much formaldehyde (well, yeah) but also that it was due to cheap materials, sloppy design, and drumroll please, lax or non-existing government standards. It's rare for a gov't report to directly say the standards need to be tighter.
The Bad
This is a terrible news story. Why? Just last week, the EPA said they wouldn't lower the formaldehyde standard to the CA level, but they did say that they would do some new exposure and risk assessments; a good sign of progress. This fact isn't mentioned…