> Columnist Stuart Lieberman
PBDE Raising Health Concerns All Over The U.S.
by Stuart Lieberman
Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether, or PBDE, is one of those chemicals that you may have never heard of until reading this column. But be forewarned, you will be hearing more about it in the near future. This chemical retards fires and is found in many homes throughout the U.S. You will not find it in much of Europe, where it is now banned. Maybe it will eventually be banned here as well. Here is the problem with this chemical. It appears, according to some scientists, that we are absorbing this fire retardant into our bodies. According to published reports, PBDE is already accumulating in the breast milk of nursing mothers. And scientists suggest that the chemical may make us ill. It's another one of those cases where the stuff is on the market, we are being exposed to it, and scientists are now being forced to question whether this chemical will hurt us. Isn't it just a little late? PBDE is used in furniture padding. It is designed to slow in-home fires. The question that needs to be asked is whether this chemical is causing more harm than good. Supporters claim that the product has value and the value outweighs any health risk. But not everyone is buying this argument. Chemical manufacturers say the risk of fire related death drops by 45 percent when this substance is used in furniture. However, environmentalists want this material banned because they allege that it is toxic and that it accumulates in the body. Swedish scientists first documented the increase of PBDE in humans years ago. In 1998, scientists reported that levels of PBDE in breast milk had increased 40 times since 1972. And some studies suggest that this chemical may cause brain damage in mice. California, to its credit, is not waiting for people to become ill. That state became the first in the nation to ban the chemical. While the EPA is monitoring the situation, California has decided to protect its citizens and will not take any chances. Here is my question: If the material may be harmful, if it may cause illness, if we do not fully understand the impact of this product -- why are we using it? As I understand things, in Europe products of this nature cannot be used unless they are proven to be safe. Here it seems that products cannot be banned unless they are proven to be harmful. It's a different approach with a real difference in how we are protected. MTBE is a great example of industry pushing a product without telling us about its problems. MTBE was promoted by the oil companies as a means of enhancing fuel efficiency to reduce air pollution. That was a great concept, but a bad idea. Once MTBE leaks from gas stations' underground tanks, it pollutes the drinking water. And it is very hard to get rid of MTBE. Did any one reveal to the public how bad MTBE was before industry sold us on it, and before the government bought into it? Certainly not, and now we have a national problem. A few years ago, industry sold us on a new fire retardant wood for use in multi-family dwellings all over the U.S. That material lost its structural integrity and rotted, causing lawsuits all over the US; valid lawsuits, involving large scale re-roofing projects. I wonder whether this PBDE will suffer the same fate. Some animal tests already indicate trouble. Why use this chemical without fully understanding it? California and Europe want to be safe, not sorry. Profits must wait until products are proven to be safe. When will we finally get it right? | 
