Know what is in your environment

July 28, 2010

The Price of Pollution; how XRF testing can protect people and save billions of dollars

Filed under: About the business, Health, News, Technology — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 10:30 am

Environmental toxicants are harmful to people, the environment and economics.  Several studies have been done to estimate the cost of these toxicants and the diseases that they cause.  Michigan is the latest to produce a report showing direct and indirect costs associated with environmental related diseases. Michigan Network for Children’s Environmental Health and the Michigan Ecology Center has produced a report that gives an estimate of environment-related childhood disease in Michigan.  You can review this report here.

This report found that four childhood environmental disorders (lead poisoning, asthma, pediatric cancer and neurodevelopmental disorders) cost Michigan on average $5.85 billion per year.  That is just the cost for these disorders, neurodevelopmental disorders include; cognitive impairment, autism and cerebral palsy. 

These costs include both direct and indirect costs; direct costs include things such as prescriptions and hospitalizations, indirect costs include such things as parental wages lost due to their children’s missed school days and loss of lifetime earnings.  The methodology used to develop these estimates was originally published by Landrigan et al. (2002).

The overall annual cost estimate for Michigan is $5.8 billion, with a range of $3.65 to $6.68 billion.

  • Lead Poisoning: $4.85 billion (range $3.2 to 4.85 billion) annually
  • Childhood Asthma: $88.4 million (range $29.5 to $103.2 million) annually
  • Pediatric Cancer: $17.3 million (range $6.9 to $34.6 million) annually
  • Neurodevelopmental Disorders: $845 million (range $423 million to $1.69 billion) annually

    • These cost estimates represent approximately 1.5% of Michigan’s Gross domestic Product every year.

    If people and businesses can learn what is in their environment, they can mitigate harm.  If you can reduce the amount of exposure you have to a particular environmental toxicant, not only can you improve your quality of life, it could be potentially economically advantageous.  

    Safety V. Money

    I can only speak about lead poisoning and autism, as those areas I have been greatly involved in.  Essco Safety Check has been providing non-destructive environmental testing for potential harmful toxicants such as lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury and other heavy metals by utilizing X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzers and software to collect and analyze the environment around us.  Autistic families contact us because they claim their children have a variety of heavy metals in their blood and we can quickly identify a variety of heavy metals non-destructively, quickly, efficiently and accurately.  We specialize in helping people and businesses know what is in their environment.

    A study that I wrote earlier this year, The potential economic impact of the CPSIA, was submitted US House of Representative, House Energy Commerce Sub-Committee for Consumer Protection by the Handmade Toy Alliance as “Allowing XRF testing for CPSIA compliance could save $3.7 billion and save small businesses”  This study looked at new federal regulation, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) and how businesses are affected by the regulations and how XRF technology can help them reduce costs in testing, getting products to market faster and creating jobs.

    If we can now combine these two visions of protecting children and saving small businesses, we are not only doing the ethical thing, were are going to be creating jobs, improving lives, while protecting children, creating jobs and saving people, businesses and government billions of dollars.

    Essco Safety Check is proud to be a leader in XRF testing services and environmental software solutions as well as, equally proud to help protect children, homeowners, businesses and government.

    Know what is in your environment and mitigate harm.

    Share

    Essco Safety Check

    July 13, 2010

    Warning to homeowners, renovators and contractors; beware of lead and other heavy metals in tile.

    Filed under: Health, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 9:45 am

    This is a cautionary warning to homeowners, renovators and contractors about heavy metals being found in tile and understanding the potential risks.  If tile is disturbed during renovation and dust is formed, you are creating a situation that may cause harm to you, your employees or the tenants of the property you are renovating.  Make certain to contain and clean up all dust created by disturbing tile.

    On April 22, 2010 the EPAs Renovation Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule went into effect to address lead dust hazards created during renovation of properties older than 1978, this rule only applies to painted surfaces.  Tile is not considered a painted surface, but tile can possess lead and other harmful heavy metals.  If tile is disturbed during renovation, dust can be created that can be potentially harmful. 

    Renovators and contractors should be advised to use lead safe work practices if they disturb tile, unless they know what the tile is made of. 

    Recently I purchased tile from Home Depot and decided to use an X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzer to look for heavy metals in the tile, I own and operate an environmental testing and software business, Essco Safety Check and am a certified HUD Lead Inspector and Risk Assessor.  Using an XRF analyzer I found lead and cadmium in brand new tiles sold today (June 2010).  One of the tiles showed lead over 3mg/cm2, the regulation limit for lead in paint within the RRP Rule is 1mg/cm2, the other showed cadmium over 600 parts per million, there is no regulation for cadmium in the RRP rule.

    Tile found with lead and cadmium

    In both cases (in the lead and cadmium tile) I suspect that the heavy metals are in the glaze or the coloring of the tile and not the ceramic.  According to the HUD Guidelines, Chapter 7, Lead-Based Paint is defined as;

    Any paint, varnish, shellac, or other coating that contains lead equal to or in excess of 1.0mg/cm2 as measured by an x-ray fluorescence analyzer or laboratory analysis or 0.5 percent by weight by laboratory analysis.

    Tile is not considered a painted surface and therefore does not meet the qualifications of lead-based paint, even though it is glazed or painted.

    In May 2010 I was contacted by a colleague who is a certified lead inspector, EPA approved renovator and general contractor for 25 years.  While performing an inspection for RRP compliance, he used his XRF analyzer on some floor tile that he was going to replace.  The test results from the XRF analyzer showed lead over 5mg/cm2, he called me to ask what to do? 

    My first question was would he disturb the tile during his renovation project, and if so, would dust be created?  He said yes.  I suggested that he use lead safe work practices, but he wanted to know the specifics of the law, so I contacted another colleague from the EPAs Region 10 to ask for help finding the specific regulation with the RRP rule and tile.  She searched on the EPAs website under the RRP FAQs and typed in “tile”, but not one response was found in the frequently asked questions page by the EPA.  What is a contractor suppose to do when they disturb tile?

    The approved testing method for the average contractor who is not a lead inspector or risk assessor and who does not have access to an XRF analyzer or inspector with such an instrument is to use approved testing “swab” kits.  These kits will not penetrate tile like a drywall painted wall.  In a sample case with tile I purchased from Home Depot, I used an XRF analyzer on the tile and found lead over the 1.0mg/cm2 but when I tested it with the approved lead “swab” testing kits, no lead was found.  How is this protecting the homeowners, renovators or contractors working on their own renovation projects?  What if there are children that live at this work site?

    As I have mentioned, the RRP Rule only applies to homes built before 1978, but I was able to find brand new tiles that have lead and cadmium.  To my knowledge and having several discussions with Washington State Officials and EPA personal, there is currently no regulation regarding heavy metals in tile.  Since tile purchased today can contain heavy metals like lead, it may be found in homes newer than 1978.

    Homeowners, renovators and contractors need to be aware that tile purchased today, or tile found in homes (of any age) may contain harmful heavy metals.  If you disturb tile and create dust, you could be creating a potential hazard.  You should make sure you contain and clean up all dust created from disturbing tile.  This is only a cautionary warning; there is no regulatory authority behind this.  I wish only to share knowledge that I have obtained by operating my environmental testing and software business, Essco Safety Check.

    Additionally, business owners and workers who disturb tile for installation in properties (i.e. bathroom and shower installation companies) should be aware of this and take precautions when doing preparation work and properly contain and cleanup any dust created.  Don’t forget to consider all OSHA regulations, if any lead is found on the property; during a renovation, remodeling or painting of any property.

    I would advise using lead-safe work practices if you disturb tile and create any dust.  Or have your local certified lead inspector or risk assessor use their XRF analyzer to check if the tile you are about to disturb has any harmful heavy metals. 

    Contact Bob Angeline Lead-Based Paint Assistant Manager at the Washington State Department of Commerce, at 360-725-2929 for questions about the RRP rule in Washington State or contact Seth Goldberg, Essco Safety Check at 425-749-4136 or info@essco-safetycheck.com if you have any questions or comments about this article.

    Know what is in your environment and mitigate harm.

    Share

    Essco Safety Check

    June 8, 2010

    Heavy Metals found in Protein Drinks

    Filed under: Health, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 11:41 am

    An investigation by Consumer Reports has found lead, cadmium, arsenic and mercury in fifteen different protein drinks.  Some of these drinks can potentially pose health problems over time (consumption of heavy metals and excessive protein).  These drinks were all sold as “ready-to-drink” liquids or powders and had varying levels of heavy metals (from low to moderate).  Dietary supplements have voluntary standards for health products, which are set by the U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP) and protein drinks and other dietary supplements are not required to be tested before they are sold.

    Three out of the fifteen drinks tested were found to contain levels of heavy metals above the USP limits for lead, cadmium or arsenic.  These drinks are commonly used by athletes, baby boomers, pregnant women and teenagers.  The proposed limits set by the USP for lead are 10 micrograms per day; the proposed limit for cadmium is 5 micrograms per day; the proposed limit for arsenic is 15 micrograms per day.

    One drink was found to contain 16.9 micrograms of arsenic and 5.1 micrograms of cadmium.  Another drink was found to contain all three metals with 13.5 micrograms of lead, 5.6 micrograms of cadmium and 12.2 micrograms of arsenic.  And a third drink was found to contain 12.2 micrograms of lead and 11.2 micrograms of arsenic.  All findings are based on three servings per day and all samples were either purchased in the New York metro area or online.

    It appears that the federal government is not protecting the consumer and better regulation or oversight of “consumer products” such as protein shakes, toothbrushes, or baby spoons should be common sense and is needed.  But lack of regulations has cause states to write their own, more strict regulations.  According to this study by Consumer Reports, eight of the fifteen drinks would be required by Proposition 65 (California Law) to have manufacturers notify consumers because of lead content.

    This investigation was prompted by Dr. Kathy Burns, a Boston-area Toxicologist and founder of Sciencecorps and Judy Braiman of Empire State Consumer Project.   

    To view the report from Consumer Reports, please visit.  To view the press release from Consumer Reports, please visit.

    This is just another “consumer product” that is not a consumer product and Essco Safety Check is working to help people and businesses know what is in their environment and mitigate potential harm.

    Share

    Essco Safety Check

    June 4, 2010

    McDonald’s is recalling “Shrek Forever After” glassware

    Filed under: Health, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 8:22 am

    12 Million "Shrek" glasses recalled by McDonald's

    Cadmium was found in the paint of glasses sold at McDonald’s.  12 Million Drinking glasses that feature characters from the movie “Shrek Forever After” are being voluntarily recalled by McDonald’s in collaboration with the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

    The 16-ounce glasses were sold at McDonald’s restaurants for $2, beginning on May 21st, 2010.  The four designs include Puss n’ Boots, Shrek, Princess Fiona and Donkey and were manufactured by ARC International, based in Millville, N.J.

    No injuries have been reported and, “The glasses have far less cadmium than the children’s metal jewelry that CPSC has previously recalled,” said a spokesperson for the CPSC.

    Customers cag get instructions to return the glassware and request a refund by visiting www.mcdonalds.com/glasses beginning June 8th or call 1-800-244-6227.

    This marks the fifth recall for cadmium issued by the CPSC this year.  Prior to this year, no recall has ever been issued for cadmium.  Essco Safety Check is continuing to work with CPSC and FDA on issues involving heavy metals in consumer products.

    Do you “know what is in your environment?”

    Share

    Essco Safety Check

    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 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

    April 20, 2010

    Run, play and take the lead home with you

    Filed under: Health, News, Regulation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 8:52 am

    Spring is here and the parks are full of families with children, soccer games being played, and people enjoying the sunshine.  Would you suspect that running or playing on a field can be potentially harmful to you or your children and pets? 

    I’m a creature of the sunshine and when I get an opportunity to go to the park, I tend to go.  Last week I went to a local park and tossed the football around with a friend on a field made of field turf. 

    When I got home from playing at the park and took off my shoes, I found a bunch of small black pellets in the bottom of my shoes and on my socks.  I was curious as to what they were made of, especially since I brought them home to my personal environment. 

    I happen to own an environmental technology company (Essco Safety Check) that utilizes X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzers to help people and businesses know what is in their environment.  XRF analyzers are a non-destructive testing source that can identify certain elements; we use them primarily to detect heavy metals in consumer products, housing, soil, but virtually anything can be tested. 

    I decided to test the black pellets that I brought home with me to find out what they are made of.  The results showed that approximately 180 parts per million (ppm) of lead are present in these black pellets.

    The amount of lead found in the black pellets is below the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) which regulates consumer products designed for children and has a limit standard of 300ppm of lead.  The Washington State soil action level is at 400ppm, so in each case, the level of lead is below either regulation.  However, lead is present and after playing on this field, I took the lead home with me.

    Artificial field turf consist of plastic fibers and typically include an “in-fill” material which is commonly made of rubber pellets, made from recycled automobile tires, known as “crumb rubber.”

    What about children playing on that field?  What about dogs playing Frisbee?  What about bringing these pellets to your home environment?  What about when it rains and the water runoff?  I had many questions about these findings and decided a little more field work and research was needed.

    I went back to the field to collect more samples of the black pellets, and a soil sample from near the field.  I planned on running around the field turf for some exercise, primarily to collect samples.  I walked to the corner of the field, where a corner kick would take place from and tossed my knapsack down.  I was just about ready to run when I noticed that the white painted area of the corner kick section was dotted with black specks.  I got down on my hands and knees and realized those black specks were “crumb rubber”.

    Collecting samples was as easy as wiping the surface of the field, but simply placing my hand or knee on the field surface, black pellets stuck to my skin.  I collected my samples of black pellets, grabbed a soil sample from an open patch of soil under a tree (I’ve seen families eat lunch there) and went back to my office to analyze the samples and contact city and state officials.

    The amount of lead found in the second sample of “crumb rubber” matched the first test results of 180ppm.  In addition to lead, zinc was also found at a level of 11% or 110000ppm.  The potential problem with zinc is potential water contamination from leaching or runoff.  The fact that zinc and lead are found does not mean that they will cause harm, but since they are present, there is a potential for harm.

    To be honest, field turf offers some benefits to the user and environment.  These fields offer all-weather playability, which results in longer playing hours.  There is reduced maintenance, including hours worked, reduced water consumption, herbicides, pesticides and equipment used.

    Unfortunately, there are some environmental concerns, specifically about potential toxicants.  Using recycled tires, “crumb rubber” as in-fill, can create some concerns, especially about the chemical composition and exposure, which can potentially harm the field users, especially children and pets.  Tires are known to contain toxic and potentially carcinogenic compounds including, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), phthalates, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), heavy metals (lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury, nickel, iron, zinc, manganese) and more.

    I unfortunately do not know the chemical composition of the “crumb rubber” I tested, but lead and zinc are positively present.  I additionally found levels of bromine, which can be of some concern to particular health and regulatory officials (depending on location).

    The field turf that was originally tested and found with lead had two sister fields at this park.  Testing of these sister fields showed levels of lead in the “crumb rubber” to be between 20-30ppm and the zinc levels higher in both additional fields.    These additional fields were installed more recently than the original field tested and reported with 180ppm of lead.  The soil sample collected was not found with any detectable amounts of lead (the XRF analyzer used has a lower limit standard of 10ppm for lead).

    What does all of this mean?  A synthetic field has more lead than the soil around it and that lead is easily transportable to your personal environment.

    If i went on vacation to this park, my shirt should read:  I went to this beautiful park to run and play, and all I got was lead in my shoes.

    Do you know what is in your environment?

    Know what is in your environment and mitigate harm.

    Share

    April 12, 2010

    Star Wars figurines found with cadmium and lead, say it isn’t so Yoda!

    Filed under: Health, News — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Seth Goldberg @ 11:24 am
    Say it isn't so Yoda! Cadmium and Lead found in Star Wars Figurines

    Say it isn't so Yoda! Cadmium and Lead found in Star Wars Figurines

    Owning an environmental testing company, I am fairly numb as to where I find certain heavy metals like lead.  However, today I must say I’m saddened to find lead and cadmium in toys I use to play with as a child and know that many of these toys are still around today, in homes with children.

    Over the weekend, I was contacted by a concerned mother of two beautiful boys; she wanted to make sure that the toys and items they would play with are free from environmental toxicants.   This morning she visited our office (Essco Safety Check) to have me test some items from lead using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzers, however, I found more than just lead, I found cadmium too.

    The problem with today’s test is much like every other day, the randomness as to where I find, what I find.  Why does one figurine have lead or cadmium and another doesn’t?  It could be the coloring agents, or it could be involved in the making of plastic, or just a random element mixed in to the item during production.  But regardless, it is present and was found in some fairly high quantities.  

    Today I tested approximately 30 Star Wars figurines and found approximately half to contain lead or cadmium.  You should note that these Star Wars figurines I tested and found with lead or cadmium are from 1977, 1979 & 1980 (marked on each figurine), they are fairly old and were manufactured before particular regulations regarding lead.  But regardless of when they were manufactured, some of these figurines contain harmful heavy metals, making them toxic toys.

    Yoda contains approximately 1,800 PPM of cadmium, along with a Luke Skywalker figurine and Boba Fet figurine, while Lando Calrissian appears to have over 1% lead (over 10,000 PPM) in his vinyl cape.  Many other figurines had levels of cadmium ranging from 250 PPM to over 600 PPM. 

    What does all of this mean?  You should be aware that your children could have “hand-me-down” toys that could be considered toxic toys. 

    Have you given your children toys from your childhood to play with?

    Share

    Older Posts »

    Powered by WordPress