Know what is in your environment

May 28, 2010

Lead legally permitted in toothbrushes and other “consumer” products

Filed under: Health, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 10:22 am

Over 1000ppm of lead found in yellow colored bristles of a toothbrush.  This product is not in violation of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) which regulates lead in children’s products.

Do you know what a consumer product is?

Unfortunately, toothbrushes and other patented early intervention dental products which are designed or intended for children 12 years of age or younger are in fact, not “consumer products.”  Because these products are not “consumer products,” they do not fall within the definition of children’s products that require third-party testing. Thus the lead limits in the CPSIA do not apply to this product. 

This product is regulated by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and currently there are no specifications for levels of heavy metals in dental devices.

There are many products consumers would consider a “consumer product” which are in fact not “consumer products” and not regulated as a consumer product.  Many products fall into exemptions including; toothbrushes, toothpicks, dental floss, flatware (knives, forks, spoons, baby spoons, serving utensils, etc.), ceramics (plates, cups, bowls, etc), cutting boards, bulb syringes, surgical tubing and more. 

Each of these products can be directly used by children and pregnant women, yet none have to be tested for the regulation standards of a children’s product, which means they can contain more than 300ppm of lead legally.

Essco Safety Check is an environmental technology and software integration company; utilizing X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzers (among other data collection devices) and a proprietary software platform to collect and analyze environmental data.  Essco Safety Check is now coordinating with both the CPSC & FDA on this issue.

Share

Essco Safety Check

May 24, 2010

Do you know what a consumer product is? (Part 1)

Filed under: Health, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 3:48 pm

Typical household consumables

Most people would think that the “products” you and your children use every day in your daily routine are “consumer products”, you know the things we cook, eat and drink with.  Most people would think that “products” put in your mouth, given to us or used on us by a hospital while we are patients, are tested for lead and other harmful chemicals.  Most people would think that the regulating agencies are fully protecting us and inspecting all “products.”  Most people would be wrong!

A “consumer product” is regulated by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and their definition of a consumer product is:

any article, or component part thereof, produced or distributed (i) for sale to a consumer for use in or around a permanent or temporary household or residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise, or (ii) for the personal use, consumption or enjoyment of a consumer in or around a permanent or temporary household or residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise;

There are some exemptions that we will get to in a moment. 

According to the CPSC, they are “charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of consumer products and they are committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard or can injure children.”  Essentially, the CPSC is working to ensure the safety of consumer products from harming the public.

Why are some “products” that consumer’s use on a regular basis not considered “consumer products”?  Why are these “products” not regulated or tested for heavy metals and chemicals as a children’s product would be?  Why are these “products” regulated by different governmental agencies?  And why do those agencies have different ways of testing and regulating for lead? 

Simply put, why do we permit lead and other harmful elements and chemicals into our “consumer” and “non-consumer products”? 

Why does the FDA, which regulates all food surface contact points, have a different testing regulation for lead than a child’s product?  Doesn’t a child eat off of a typical dinner plate, and drink hot chocolate out of a standard coffee cup?  Why is a product that we all put into our mouth, not tested for lead?

Because these “products” are not considered “consumer products” and ultimately not “children’s products” which means that they are not required to be tested for lead or phthalates.  You may want to ask your legislator!

Here are a few examples of items that you may think are “consumer products” but in fact are not considered “consumer products” and thus not regulated by the CPSC.  These “products” can all be used by children, all have a potential for direct epidermal contact or direct ingestion potential. In each case, these products are regulated by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and some have regulations for lead and others do not, but none are regulated for “total content” of lead and thus are all permitted to have more than 300ppm of lead (the legal amount of lead in a toy “children’s product”).

1. Toothbrushes
2. Toothpicks
3. Dental Floss
4. Band Aides
5. Bulb Syringes
6. Surgical Tubing
7. Flatware (Knives, forks, baby spoons, serving utensils, etc…)
8. Ceramics (plates, cups, bowls, etc)
9. Cutting boards
10. Pots, pans and other cooking utensils.

There whole crux of this is that there is no real definition of a “consumer product.”  Most people would think that a toothbrush is a consumer product and since children use toothbrushes, they would be inspected for lead.  Most people would be wrong!

Toothbrushes and other patented early intervention dental products which are designed or intended for children 12 years of age or younger are in fact, not “consumer products” and because these products are not “consumer products” they do not fall within the definition of children’s products that require third-party testing.  Thus the lead limits in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) do not apply to this product. 

Have you considered what is in your plates, dishes or your coffee cups?  Do you know that FDA regulates the food contact surface of a coffee cup and the CPSC regulates the exterior, non-food contact surface?

How is this protecting the public?  

Environmental Services & Solutions Corporation (Essco Safety Check) is here to help bring awareness and share information about environmental concerns.  Feel free to visit our website for more information www.essco-safetycheck.com 

Keep you eyes out for “Part 2″ of this story, more specific information on State and Federal regulations.

Share

Essco Safety Check

May 11, 2010

Another recall: Children’s jewelry contains high levels of cadmium

Filed under: About the business, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 1:15 pm

On Monday, May 10th, 2010, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a voluntary recall in cooperation with Claire’s Boutiques Inc., of Hoffman Estates, Ill.  A charm bracelet “Best Friends,” which are three bracelet sets with silver-colored chains and metal pendants contain words “Best,” “Friends” or “Forever” and a heart lock and key charms with different colored stones. 

High levels of cadmium was found in children's jewelry

These bracelets were recalled because they contain cadmium.  The CPSC did not specify how much cadmium was found in these bracelets.  There were approximately 19,000 units sold exclusively sold at Claire’s stores nationwide from February 2009 to January 2010 for about $12.  They were manufactured by Dae Yeon Industries Corporation of China.

Consumers are warned to immediately take these bracelets away from children and return the heart lock charms or the entire bracelet to any Claire’s for a full refund or replacement product.  Contact Claire’s toll-free at (866) 859-9281 between 9am and 5pm ET Monday through Friday or visit www.claires.com

This recall is a continuing effect of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) and an investigation that began back in 2009 with the Associated Press (AP) and data that was supplied to the AP by Essco Safety Check.  In October of 2009, Essco Safety Check presented data on consumer products and how much lead and cadmium were found in toys, ceramics, jewelry and other consumer products at the Northwest Children’s Environmental Health Forum.  This data had been collected with our proprietary software suite (to collect and analyze data) and by using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzers to test consumer products for moms and dads in their homes, as well as, for businesses selling children’s products.

Over several months of data analysis and sharing, the Associated Press began their own investigations which lead to the first recall for cadmium found in children’s jewelry in January 2010.  Cadmium is a known toxicant and carcinogen; it can be very harmful to children.  This recall is the third that has been prompted by the AP’s reporting, and Essco Safety Check’s initial data.  No recall had ever been issued for cadmium in consumer products prior to this year.

Claire’s and other retailers have begun to add testing procedures to ensure that their suppliers are testing for cadmium.  There are no total content standards set for cadmium in the CPSIA for children’s jewelry, unlike lead which has a limit of 300 parts per million (ppm).  In testing done by the Associated Press, their tests showed the bracelets from Claire’s contained up to 91% (910,000 ppm) of cadmium.

Several states have begun to take action including California, Connecticut, Illinois and Washington (Washington State is not currently enforcing their regulation; the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) has been superseded by the federal regulation do to interstate commerce).  The CPSC has also begun to screen imports of jewelry at the 10 largest ports in the United States by using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzers to look for heavy metals including cadmium. 

Unfortunately, I’m fairly certain that this will not be the last recall we hear about cadmium or children’s products.  It can make one wonder why do we even permit lead, cadmium and other harmful elements or chemicals in products we use regularly, specifically products for children and pregnant women.  If you are concerned about any consumer products and would like them tested, Essco Safety Check will be participating in several different community events this summer.  Checkout our website for details.

Share

Essco Safety Check

May 7, 2010

Consumer Products, Toxic Toys, Children and Pregnant Women

Filed under: About the business, Health, News, Regulation, viewpoint — Tags: , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 10:20 am

Essco Safety Check initially started in 2007 to help moms and dads “know what was in their environment.”   We wanted to provide in-home consumer product testing for moms and dads to help them make sure the toys and consumer products that their children routinely used were safe from toxicants.  Using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzers and a software suite we developed for data collection and analysis looking for lead, cadmium, mercury and other heavy metals, we began providing those services. 

This was before recalls and regulations and since then the landscape has changed.  There are now state and federal regulations regarding lead and other toxicants in children’s products (Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act – CPSIA).  These regulations were passed with the emphasis on finding toxic toys at a time when several large national recalls were happening. 

Over the past several years of providing in-home inspections for consumers, assisting autistic families with knowledge about their environment and providing testing services to businesses about the products they manufacture or sell, we have become experts in understanding the relationship between consumer products, the end-user and the regulations of those products.  This knowledge base and relationships we have developed with toxicologists, lawmakers, consumers and businesses has given us a unique perspective of the entire marketplace and market cycle.

With the knowledge that we have gained, we’ve become aware that not all products that you and I believe are consumer products are in fact, consumer products.  Certain products are exempt from heavy metal testing, because these products are considered medical devices.  Both children and adults use these products and they are sold everywhere without restrictions.  Some of these products are even put directly into the mouth, why are these products exempt from certain regulations?

Understanding the relationship between a product someone uses and what that product is made of, can easily mitigate harm.  Just because a product is not considered a children’s product does not mean that a child will not use that product.  There are some good uses for lead, but not in a toy or a coffee cup or a toothbrush. 

What about pregnant women?  In a discussion I had with Steve Gilbert (he is an expert in the field of toxicology, PhD, DABT) he has shared his knowledge with me and I’m here to share it with you.

Did you know that a child and a pregnant woman absorb 30-50% of the lead they ingest.  A typical adult only absorbs about 10%.  This is because lead substitutes for calcium and the growing body needs more calcium.  This is one of the reasons that kids are more sensitive to lead exposure. Pregnant women use all different types of consumer products, including medical devices.  Do you think that they should be exposed to lead and other potentially harmful metals during pregnancy?

Know what is in your environment and mitigate harm.

Share

Essco Safety Check

May 6, 2010

Thoughts on consumer products, pregnant women and your kitchen

Filed under: Health, Regulation, viewpoint — Tags: , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 1:47 pm

In reaction to what has been going on in the news and marketplace lately i have decided to post some thoughts based on providing consumer protection to mitigate potential harm. 

Are you aware that many OTC consumer products aren’t tested for heavy metals because they’re not considered consumer products?
Think toothbrushes, dental floss and other oral hygiene products.  Would you believe that they are not considered consumer products?  These items are considered medical devices and even thought they are designed or used by children, they do not fall within the definition of children’s products that require third-party testing for heavy metals as defined by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). 
 
Pregnant women & children absorb the same percentage of the toxins that they ingest.  Don’t you think that the products pregnant women use be regulated the same as a child’s product?
 “Pregnant women use all different types of consumer products, including medical devices.  Children and pregnant women absorb 30-50% of the lead they ingest while adults absorb only about 10% – this is because lead substitutes for calcium and the growing body needs more calcium.  One of the many reasons kids are more sensitive to lead exposure.”[1]

Contamination continues in the kitchen; do you know what is in your kitchen cabinets?
In my experience, the typical kitchen contains the most number of potentially harmful metals and toxins.  Lead and other heavy metals have been found in cutting boards, plates, coffee cups, serving utensils, pots and pans and other typical kitchen items.  If a ceramic has a chip or crack in the glaze, there is the potential that toxins could be leaching into the food or beverage that you ingest. 

                                                 ———————

My name is Seth Goldberg and I own an environmental testing and software company, Environmental Services & Solutions Corporation (Essco Safety Check).  We specialize in using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzers and our own proprietary software to identify and analyze potentially harmful and regulated heavy metals (elements like lead, cadmium, mercury, arsenic and others) in consumer products, housing and various other materials.  Our clients include moms and dads, homeowners, businesses, industries and governments who want to “know what is in their environment.”  We have been providing these services since 2007 and have been involved in three national recalls, including taking part in an AP investigation about cadmium in children’s jewelry in January 2010. 

The recent recall in children’s OTC products, spurred my concerns that some typical consumer products which are purchased OTC and are routinely used by all consumers, including children and pregnant women, are not considered consumer products and thus are not subject to particular regulations that implore safety and mitigate harm.  I can supply specific data and links to all information mentioned above.

You can learn more about our company at www.essco-safetycheck.com 

Please let me know if you have any questions.

[1]  Steven Gilbert, PhD, DABT

Share

Essco Safety Check

Handmade Toy Alliance Press Release

Filed under: News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 7:14 am

I am reposting a blog/press release from our friends at the Handmade Toy Alliance (HTA).  Several board members met with the House Energy Commerce Sub-Committee on consumer protection last week to discuss new pending regulations, the Consumer Product Safety Enhancement Act (CPSEA).  Essco Safety Check completely agrees with the HTA that alternative testing methods, such as X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzers, can help with the survival of small businesses.  XRF analyzers and the data they provide can help keep businesses compliant with regulations, lower testing costs, protect children and help get their products to market faster than traditional, expensive and destructive testing methods.

Please visit www.handmadetoyalliance.org for more information

HTA Press Release: “We strongly urge both sides to work through their differences and move forward on this important reform of the CPSIA”

The Handmade Toy Alliance (HTA) testified on April 29th at the

HTA in Washington D.C. April 29th, 2010

House Energy and Commerce Sub-Committee hearing regarding the Consumer Product Safety Enhancement Act (CPSEA). HTA Founder and Vice President, Dan Marshall (Peapods Natural Toys -MN), Board member Jolie Fay (Skipping Hippos – OR) and Board member Randy Hertzler (euroSource – PA) traveled to DC to participate in this very important process.

“The HTA has endorsed the Consumer Product Safety Enhancement Act”, Marshall stated during his testimony before the Sub-Committee. “The provisions of the bill which allow alternative testing methods for small batch manufacturers are imperative to the survival of our members.” Marshall went on to share various aspects of report language that would further serve to clarify Congress’ intentions with the amendment.

In the few days since the hearing, however, Democrats and Republicans on the committee have signaled that they might not be willing to negotiate a bipartisan bill. “We strongly urge both sides to work through their differences and move forward on this important reform of the CPSIA,” said Jill Chuckas (Crafty Baby -CT), HTA Secretary. “The livelihoods of thousands of families hang in the balance.”

In addition to testimony from the HTA, the Sub-Committee heard from representatives from Goodwill Industries, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), American Apparel and Footwear (AAFA), Motorcycle Industries, Consumers Federation of America (CFA) and Rick Woldenberg (Chairman, Learning Resources).

Following opening statements, there was a question and answer period which focused around the difficulties of small batch manufacturers and specialty retailers to understand and comply with the CPSIA. “We were pleased to hear a series of questions surrounding harmonization with EN-71 which is of special concern to those in our membership who import product directly from the European Union,” stated Hertzler. “Dan (Marshall) had the opportunity to discuss this issue in depth.”

HTA Board members also had the opportunity to visit with many of the House Committee members, as well as a number of members of the Senate Commerce Committee. “It was an incredibly busy few days, squeezing in as many legislative visits as possible,” Fay shared. Marshall added “Our focus was to share the HTA story and collective concerns with a large number of Congressional members, furthering our efforts to provide relief to small batch manufacturers, crafters and specialty retailers. It has been clear from the beginning that we were not the intended targets of this legislation, but unfortunately, our members have the most to lose. It is time to remedy these unintended consequences of the CPSIA.”

The House Sub-committee will now decide whether or not to move forward with mark up and presentation of the Consumer Product Safety Enhancement Act (CPSEA), as the bill has been named, to the House floor. “Our focus now is to help this process proceed quickly,” Marshall continued. “It has been a very long road to common sense changes to the CPSIA. The Subcommittee members now need to openly discuss this bill, come to an agreement and move forward. The time for waiting is over. Congress needs to move swiftly to fix the issues with the CPSIA.”

Share

Essco Safety Check

Powered by WordPress