<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/</link>
	<description>INDULGENT YET RESPONSIBLE.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 14:58:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: oecotextiles</title>
		<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/#comment-791</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[oecotextiles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 May 2010 15:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/?p=827#comment-791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I love that phrase about chemicals being accepted as part of our everyday lives because they take on the &quot;harmless aspect of the familiar&quot;!  That is so true - we also tend to accept all these chemicals as benign until they are uncontrovertibly proven to be otherwise.  Lead is a perfect example.  Prior to 1971, the Surgeon General of the U.S. mandated that lead  was safe up to 60 micrograms per deciliter of blood; that was slowly reduced to 10 micrograms per deciliter of blood.  But now we know that ANY detectable lead levels affect neurological development, yet the U.S. threshold remains at 10.  You can read about lead in textiles in our blog post http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/cpsia-lead-and-textiles-in-your-life/.  
Flame retardants are not generally mandated for use in private homes - only for public spaces - except in certain products, like children&#039;s sleepwear and mattresses; some furniture has flame retardants - as well as lots of other products, even those you wouldn&#039;t normally think of as having them, like computers and electrical products.  The history of the requirements for children&#039;s sleepwear is interesting - the CPSIA banned Tris from children&#039;s sleepwear because it was found to cause cancer in laboratory animals.  Also some manufacturers might claim that their product (like a couch) is PBDE free, but it might contain decaBDE or penta BDE, which scientists are finding are just as bad for us and our environment as their cousin, PBDE.  The Environmental Working Group reports that PBDE&#039;s are not used in children&#039;s sleepwear.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love that phrase about chemicals being accepted as part of our everyday lives because they take on the &#8220;harmless aspect of the familiar&#8221;!  That is so true &#8211; we also tend to accept all these chemicals as benign until they are uncontrovertibly proven to be otherwise.  Lead is a perfect example.  Prior to 1971, the Surgeon General of the U.S. mandated that lead  was safe up to 60 micrograms per deciliter of blood; that was slowly reduced to 10 micrograms per deciliter of blood.  But now we know that ANY detectable lead levels affect neurological development, yet the U.S. threshold remains at 10.  You can read about lead in textiles in our blog post <a href="http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/cpsia-lead-and-textiles-in-your-life/" rel="nofollow">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/cpsia-lead-and-textiles-in-your-life/</a>.<br />
Flame retardants are not generally mandated for use in private homes &#8211; only for public spaces &#8211; except in certain products, like children&#8217;s sleepwear and mattresses; some furniture has flame retardants &#8211; as well as lots of other products, even those you wouldn&#8217;t normally think of as having them, like computers and electrical products.  The history of the requirements for children&#8217;s sleepwear is interesting &#8211; the CPSIA banned Tris from children&#8217;s sleepwear because it was found to cause cancer in laboratory animals.  Also some manufacturers might claim that their product (like a couch) is PBDE free, but it might contain decaBDE or penta BDE, which scientists are finding are just as bad for us and our environment as their cousin, PBDE.  The Environmental Working Group reports that PBDE&#8217;s are not used in children&#8217;s sleepwear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tara</title>
		<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/#comment-775</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tara]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 22:50:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/?p=827#comment-775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for your response! That is eye-opening. I recently had a baby (now 6 months old) so I&#039;ve started to educate myself on all these issues. I came across a phrase somewhere about chemicals taking on the &quot;harmless aspect of the familiar&#039; and that is so true in this case.....fabrics are so much a part of our everyday life that it requires a big shift in thinking to even accept that they can be constituted with things that are possibly harmful.  I recently found that children&#039;s sleepwear above 9 months of age has to be flame retardant....so all their pajamas are either treated with these toxic chemicals or they are made of synthetic, less flammable materials. So I&#039;m searching now for healthier alternatives.  I may end up making some myself with fabric from the store.  In general though, is it all finished home furnishings (mattresses, curtains, sheets, quilts, duvets, pillows etc)...that are treated with flame retardants?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your response! That is eye-opening. I recently had a baby (now 6 months old) so I&#8217;ve started to educate myself on all these issues. I came across a phrase somewhere about chemicals taking on the &#8220;harmless aspect of the familiar&#8217; and that is so true in this case&#8230;..fabrics are so much a part of our everyday life that it requires a big shift in thinking to even accept that they can be constituted with things that are possibly harmful.  I recently found that children&#8217;s sleepwear above 9 months of age has to be flame retardant&#8230;.so all their pajamas are either treated with these toxic chemicals or they are made of synthetic, less flammable materials. So I&#8217;m searching now for healthier alternatives.  I may end up making some myself with fabric from the store.  In general though, is it all finished home furnishings (mattresses, curtains, sheets, quilts, duvets, pillows etc)&#8230;that are treated with flame retardants?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oecotextiles</title>
		<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/#comment-698</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[oecotextiles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 17:55:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/?p=827#comment-698</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Tara:  Your question is not beginner level - most people have no idea.  In answer to your question - not all fabrics are treated with flame retardants (in fact, probably none of the fabrics in a store would have these flame retardants) but the fabrics are filled with lots of other chemicals.  The weaving, dyeing and finishing of the fabrics requires lots of chemicals.  In fact, it is documented that the finished fabrics are, &lt;em&gt;by weight&lt;/em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;, at least 10% synthetic chemicals which remain in the fabric.  Washing them prior to use may get rid of some of the chemicals but I do know that it won&#039;t affect many of them:  think of the dyes used for example.  The dye chemicals are designed NOT to wash out or rub off - and the dyestuffs routinely contain some of the worst  chemicals, like lead, mercury and cadmium.  Any functional finishes - such as anti wrinkle, anti stain...or any of the &quot;anti&#039;s&quot;...are also made of highly toxic chemicals which are designed to be persistent.   I mean, you&#039;d be upset if your anti wrinkle finish washed out, or if your clothes faded in the wash,  right?  And phthalates are used in textile printing inks.  The list, unfortunately, goes on.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tara:  Your question is not beginner level &#8211; most people have no idea.  In answer to your question &#8211; not all fabrics are treated with flame retardants (in fact, probably none of the fabrics in a store would have these flame retardants) but the fabrics are filled with lots of other chemicals.  The weaving, dyeing and finishing of the fabrics requires lots of chemicals.  In fact, it is documented that the finished fabrics are, <em>by weight</em><strong>, at least 10% synthetic chemicals which remain in the fabric.  Washing them prior to use may get rid of some of the chemicals but I do know that it won&#8217;t affect many of them:  think of the dyes used for example.  The dye chemicals are designed NOT to wash out or rub off &#8211; and the dyestuffs routinely contain some of the worst  chemicals, like lead, mercury and cadmium.  Any functional finishes &#8211; such as anti wrinkle, anti stain&#8230;or any of the &#8220;anti&#8217;s&#8221;&#8230;are also made of highly toxic chemicals which are designed to be persistent.   I mean, you&#8217;d be upset if your anti wrinkle finish washed out, or if your clothes faded in the wash,  right?  And phthalates are used in textile printing inks.  The list, unfortunately, goes on.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tara</title>
		<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/#comment-696</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tara]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 17:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/?p=827#comment-696</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi - I am new to this blog and am just starting to get a better understanding of the wide array of chemicals we are exposed to, through everyday, familiar things. I did have a question that I&#039;m hoping you can help with, and I apologize in advance if it&#039;s a very &quot;beginner-level&quot; question. My question is &quot;In a regular fabric store, are all fabrics treated with flame retardants &amp; other chemicals regardless of the type of fabric? Does washing them prior to use get rid of or reduce these chemicals?&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi &#8211; I am new to this blog and am just starting to get a better understanding of the wide array of chemicals we are exposed to, through everyday, familiar things. I did have a question that I&#8217;m hoping you can help with, and I apologize in advance if it&#8217;s a very &#8220;beginner-level&#8221; question. My question is &#8220;In a regular fabric store, are all fabrics treated with flame retardants &amp; other chemicals regardless of the type of fabric? Does washing them prior to use get rid of or reduce these chemicals?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oecotextiles</title>
		<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/#comment-661</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[oecotextiles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 01:23:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/?p=827#comment-661</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Andrew:  I wish I could decipher the workings of the government - and I agree that not all evaporating chemicals are toxic!  For example, CO2 is the most prevalent greenhouse gas - yet we all breathe it out with each breath.  And then there are the naturally occurring chemicals, such as formaldehyde in an organic apple.  I think that perhaps a reason might be  related to that old saw, the &quot;dose makes the poison&quot; - in other words, sodium hydroxide, common table salt, is the most commonly used chemical in textile processing.  Table salt is not considered a problem - unless a mill is dumping it in great quantities into our streams, where high concentrations kill invertebrates and plants.   Also MSDS sheets are designed specifically for workers who may be handling these chemicals each day - they&#039;re exposed to concentrations much higher than what we&#039;d be exposed to from one product.  But maybe somebody else has some insight?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Andrew:  I wish I could decipher the workings of the government &#8211; and I agree that not all evaporating chemicals are toxic!  For example, CO2 is the most prevalent greenhouse gas &#8211; yet we all breathe it out with each breath.  And then there are the naturally occurring chemicals, such as formaldehyde in an organic apple.  I think that perhaps a reason might be  related to that old saw, the &#8220;dose makes the poison&#8221; &#8211; in other words, sodium hydroxide, common table salt, is the most commonly used chemical in textile processing.  Table salt is not considered a problem &#8211; unless a mill is dumping it in great quantities into our streams, where high concentrations kill invertebrates and plants.   Also MSDS sheets are designed specifically for workers who may be handling these chemicals each day &#8211; they&#8217;re exposed to concentrations much higher than what we&#8217;d be exposed to from one product.  But maybe somebody else has some insight?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Oxenford</title>
		<link>http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs/#comment-658</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Oxenford]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 17:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/?p=827#comment-658</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why do you have to record VOC content on MSDS when the VOCs are benign: do not Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs), Persistent Air Pollutants (POPs) and do not impact on CODs or BODs?
Current legislation does not seem to differentiate between benign VOCs and those that contain highly volatile components that aggregate to the same VOC content.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do you have to record VOC content on MSDS when the VOCs are benign: do not Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs), Persistent Air Pollutants (POPs) and do not impact on CODs or BODs?<br />
Current legislation does not seem to differentiate between benign VOCs and those that contain highly volatile components that aggregate to the same VOC content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
