Thursday, December 15, 2011
Stay away from untrained acupuncture
A Licensed Acupuncturist (L.Ac) will typically have about 3000 hours of training, 660 of which are supervised clinical practice. MD"s can take a distance-learning course and become "certified" in 500 hours (although many states do not recognize that certification and do not allow them to practice". Chiropractors can take 200 hours as part of their schooling and earn their own "certification" (and again many states do not recognize them as qualified and do not allow them to practice acupuncture). Now physical therapists are "certifying" themselves in acupuncture with 27 hours of classroom instruction and NO supervised clinical practice. They call it "Dry Needling" and claim it is not acupuncture but is like massage. It is the insertion of acupuncture needles into acupuncture points by untrained hands. Beware and stay away.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Acupuncture treats nerve pain associated with cancer treatment
Acupuncture 'could ease nerve pain after cancer treatment'
6 December 2011Acupuncture could reduce severe nerve pain experienced as a result of cancer treatment, according to a new study.
Research published in the Acupuncture and Medicine journal suggested that patients who undergo treatment with drugs such as taxanes, vinca alkaloids or platinum compounds can often develop chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), which damages nerves in the calves and feet and could lead to sharp pains as a result.
Out of 11 patients experiencing the peripheral neuropathy, six had acupuncture sessions and commented that the intensity of the nerve signalling improved and pain lessened. In comparison, those who did not receive any acupuncture treatment felt the same.
Authors of the study said: "The data suggest that acupuncture has a positive effect on CIPN, as measured by objective parameters [nerve conduction studies]."
They added that results were similar to those who suffered nerve damage as a result of diabetes and also patients with CIPN from an unknown cause.
Conclusions were made to further the research to distinguish the true benefits of the therapy.
According to the National Cancer Institute Cancer Bulletin, around 30 to 40 per cent of cancer patients treated with chemotherapy experience CIPN.
As found on spirehealthcare.com
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
If nutritionists sold cars
Introducing the new Chevy Bounce. The best car in the world. Most cars have only 20 pounds of rubber. Our scientists know that rubber is integral to the performance of a car. So we have made the Chevy Bounce which has over 300 pounds of rubber in it. No other car can compete with it. 15 times the rubber of a standard car must be better; so buy yours today.
Here's the point. Things are more than just the sum of their parts. Vegetables are good and vegetables have vitamins. That does not mean that you can give people isolated vitamins and think that they are a substitute for food. Green Tea causes health benefits. Green Tea extract has 100 times the ingredients, but is it 100 times as helpful? I have heard nutritionists argue that no one could ever drink enough green tea to get the benefits. How then did they discover the benefits before the extract was available?
There is no substitute for good food. Anyone who tells you different is just trying to sell you something.
Here's the point. Things are more than just the sum of their parts. Vegetables are good and vegetables have vitamins. That does not mean that you can give people isolated vitamins and think that they are a substitute for food. Green Tea causes health benefits. Green Tea extract has 100 times the ingredients, but is it 100 times as helpful? I have heard nutritionists argue that no one could ever drink enough green tea to get the benefits. How then did they discover the benefits before the extract was available?
There is no substitute for good food. Anyone who tells you different is just trying to sell you something.
Friday, November 25, 2011
Don't take these drugs!
Writing in AlterNet, Martha Rosenberg says:
"In the pharmaceutical industry's rush to get drugs to market, safety usually comes last.Here are some of the drugs she identifies as being so plagued with safety problems, it's astonishing they're on the market:
Long studies to truly assess a drug's risks just delay profits after all -- and if problems do emerge after medication hits the market, settlements are usually less than profits. Remember, Vioxx still made money."
Lipitor and Crestor
These worthless statins are so over-prescribed that far too many patients get their side effects -- such as weakness, dizziness, pain and arthritis.
Yaz and Yasmin
These birth control pills were so hyped in their advertisements that they sounded too good to be true -- and they were. 18-year-olds experienced blood clots, gall bladder disease, heart attacks, and strokes.
(I would add ALL birth controls are dangerous and should be avoided. In my view there is virtually no reason to ever take these dangerous and completely synthetic hormones.)
Lyrica, Topomax and Lamictal
These epilepsy seizure drugs are now prescribed for pain. But all seizure drugs increase the risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, and all three drugs can make you lose your memory and your hair.
Humira, Prolia and TNF Blockers
Not only are biologics like Humira and Prolia made from genetically engineered hamster cells, and not only do they suppress your actual immune system, but they can lead to tuberculosis, lethal infections, melanoma, lymphoma and "unusual cancers in children and teenagers". In addition, the Humira warns against the possible side effect of "new or worsening" psoriasis -- a condition it is supposed to treat.
(These drugs should be banned. No reason to EVER take any of them as there are loads of natural therapies that are far superior. Please use my site as resource to find out which ones you can use in these autoimmune conditions like MS, RA and Crohn's.Disease)
Chantix
After 397 reported cases of possible psychosis, 227 domestic reports of suicidal behavior and 28 suicides, the U.S. government banned pilots and air traffic controllers and interstate truck and bus drivers from taking Chantix. It is also linked to angioedema, serious skin reactions, visual impairment, accidental injury, dizziness, muscle spasms, seizures and loss of consciousness.
Ambien
Sleeping pills like Ambien, Lunesta, Sonata and Rozerem only decrease get-to-sleep time by 18 minutes. Then Ambien adds in somnambulism side effects -- people walk, drive, make phone calls and even have sex while they are sleeping.
Tamoxifen
Tamoxifen causes cancer and birth defects. One study showed that 57.2 percent of women on continuous Tamoxifen developed atrophy of the lining of the uterus, 35.7 coexisting hyperphasia and 8.1 percent uterine polyps.
Boniva
After you take Boniva, you have to avoid lying down for at least 60 minutes to "help decrease the risk of problems in the esophagus and stomach." Then you need to wait at least 60 minutes before eating or drinking anything except water, and you must never take it with mineral water, sparkling water, coffee, tea, milk, juice or other oral medicines -- including calcium, antacids, or vitamins.
(I would most definitely include ALL the biphosphonates here, like Fosamax. They are dangerous, loaded with side effects, do not lower fracture risk and should never be taken unless you want to further enrich the drug industry coffers)
Prempro and Premarin
The hormone drugs Prempro, Premarin and Provera cause a 26 percent increase in breast cancer risk, 41 percent increase in stroke risk, 29 percent increase in heart attack risk, and double your risk of blood clots. They have also been linked to deafness, urinary incontinence, cataracts, gout, joint degeneration, asthma, lupus, scleroderma, dementia, Alzheimer's disease and lung, ovarian, breast, endometrial, gall bladder and melanoma cancers.
| Dr. Mercola's Comments: |
Thursday, November 17, 2011
The CDC and American Dental Association recommend NOT drinking flouridated water
This from Consciousness TV
A new study in the Journal of the American Dental Association finds once again that, contrary to what most people have been told, fluoride is actually bad for teeth.
Exposure to high levels of fluoride results in a condition known as fluorosis, in which tooth enamel becomes discolored. The condition can eventually lead to badly damaged teeth. The new study found that fluoride intake during a child’s first few years of life is significantly associated with fluorosis, and warned against using fluoridated water in infant formula.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is of a similar opinion. According to their website:
“Recent evidence suggests that mixing powdered or liquid infant formula concentrate with fluoridated water on a regular basis may increase the chance of a child developing … enamel fluorosis.”It was 2007 when the American Dental Association (ADA) first warned that parents of infants younger than a year old “should consider using water that has no or low levels of fluoride” when mixing baby formula, due to concerns about fluorosis.Now the Journal of the American Dental Association has published a study that found increased fluorosis risk among infants who were fed infant formula reconstituted with fluoride-containing water, as well as used fluoridated toothpastes.The authors noted:“Results suggest that prevalence of mild dental fluorosis could be reduced by avoiding ingestion of large quantities of fluoride from reconstituted powdered concentrate infant formula and fluoridated dentifrice.”The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has also followed suit, warning on their Community Water Fluoridation page that mixing powdered or liquid infant formula concentrate with fluoridated water on a regular basis may increase the chance of a child developing enamel fluorosis.They also state:“In children younger than 8 years of age, combined fluoride exposure from all sources—water, food, toothpaste, mouth rinse, or other products—contributes to enamel fluorosis.”This is as far as the CDC warnings go, however, and they continue to state that water fluoridation is safe — and dental fluorosis is only a “cosmetic” problem. In reality, neither of these assertions is true.Dental Fluorosis is a Sign of Excessive Fluoride Intake
Dental fluorosis results in white and brown spots on your teeth. It is only caused by fluoride — typically due to ingesting too much fluoride during your developing years, from birth to about 8 years of age. According to the CDC, about one-third of U.S. children aged 12 to 15 years have very mild to mild forms of enamel fluorosis on their teeth.Promoters of fluoridation say that these markings are “just cosmetic,” but it can also be an indication that the rest of your body, such as your bones and the rest of your organs, including your brain, has been exposed to too much fluoride also.As Dr. Paul Connett, a chemist specializing in environmental chemistry, explained in our recent interview:“We know that 32 percent of American children have been overexposed to fluoride because you have this telltale sign of dental fluorosis, which in its mildest form is little white specs. But when it gets more serious, it affects more of the surface of your teeth and it becomes colored; yellow, brown and orange mottling of the teeth …The teeth are the window to the bones. If you’ve seen the damage to the teeth, what damage can you not see?”In other words, if fluoride is having a detrimental, visual effect on the surface of your teeth, you can be virtually guaranteed that it’s also damaging something else inside your body, such as your bones.Bone is living tissue that is constantly being replaced through cellular turnover. Bone building is a finely balanced, complicated process. Fluoride has been known to disrupt this process ever since the 1930s.Why it’s Dangerous to Swallow Fluoride
The United States is one of only eight countries in the entire developed world that fluoridates more than 50 percent of its water supply. It is added under the guise that it helps prevent and control tooth decay …This is in spite of the fact that there never been any demonstrated difference in tooth decay between countries with fluoridated and non-fluoridated water, and no difference between states that have a high- or low percentage of their water fluoridated.Even promoters of fluoridation concede that the major benefits are topical; fluoride works from the outside of the tooth, not from inside of your body, so why swallow it?The fluoride added to your drinking water is in fact a chemical waste product! It is NOT something you should use as a supplement to your diet.There are plenty of studies showing the dangers of fluoride to your health, such as:
- Increases lead absorption
- Disrupts synthesis of collagen
- Hyperactivity and/or lethargy
- Muscle disorders
- Brain damage, and lowered IQ
- Arthritis
- Dementia
- Bone fractures
- Lowers thyroid function
- Bone cancer (osteosarcoma)
- Inactivates 62 enzymes
- Inhibits formation of antibodies
- Genetic damage and cell death
- Increases tumor and cancer rate
- Disrupts immune system
- Damages sperm and increases infertility
As far as tooth decay is concerned, this is not caused by lack of fluoride.Tooth decay is caused by acids in your mouth, typically created from sugar being metabolized by bacteria (Streptococcus mutans), and as you may already know, the number one source of calories in the United States is high fructose corn syrup.The acid produced then attacks your enamel. Eventually the bacteria can get into the dentine, at which point tooth decay sets in. So there are far better options for decreasing tooth decay than using a topical or ingested poison, with a chief one being minimizing your intake of sugary foods and eating a healthful diet.You typically don’t find dental caries in more primitive societies that do not consume vast amounts of sugar like in the United States.Make Sure Your Children are Not Exposed to Fluoride
One of dentist Bill Osmunson’s main concerns is water fluoridation for infants. The ADA and the CDC now both recommend that infants NOT receive fluoridated water for drinking, nor for making their formula, as fluoridated water contains 250 times more fluoride than mother’s milk.“We shouldn’t fluoridate water and harm our most vulnerable,” Dr. Osmunson says.It is my strong belief and recommendation to avoid giving your children fluoridated water.Unfortunately, the only way to ensure your water is pure enough to drink is by installing ahigh quality water filtration system in your house, such as a reverse osmosis filter that can filter out much of the fluoride and other dangerous water contaminants like disinfection byproducts (DBPs).Remember that most bottled water also typically contains fluoride, even though it’s not stated on the label, and whatever you do, avoid using “nursery water,” which is fluoridated water sold specifically for infants.Fluoride in your drinking water is one more reason why breast feeding your infant is so essential. Nature has kept breast milk virtually fluoride-free for a reason.If you are unable to breastfeed and are instead using formula, make sure the water you use is fluoride-free. Again, for now the best way you can provide pure, fluoride-free water to your family is by using a reverse osmosis filter, which you can install in your home.Even better, if you are unable to breastfeed use this recipe to make homemade infant formula using raw milk and no water at all.Keep in mind also that if you are a pregnant woman it is equally important for your water to be fluoride-free, as this chemical can harm your developing fetus.The Ultimate Solution is to Get Fluoride Out of Tap Water
Even though the ADA and the CDC have issued warnings that parents not use fluoridated tap water to make infant formula, neither of them has openly informed the public!So there are millions of parents out there using tap water to make up formula, oblivious of the fact that the agencies that promote fluoridation in this country have issued a specific warning against using fluoridated water for this purpose.Not only that, but by fluoridating the municipal water supply you doom many low-income families to fail to protect their young children from this dangerous drug, even if they have this information, as they simply don’t have the resources to install a reverse osmosis system.This is why the only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of water fluoridation in the United States.The Fluoride Action Network is an absolutely phenomenal resource for further education, and they’re doing much to pressure the US government for change. We will be working together to devise a complete game plan to tackle this issue head on. Once we reach the tipping point, which may be as little as 5 percent of the population, we will be able to reverse the policies of water fluoridation.Our strategy will begin with addressing Canada, because 60 percent of Canada is already un-fluoridated. If we can get the rest of Canada to stop fluoridating their water, we believe the U.S. will be forced to follow.You can visit www.FluorideAlert.org for the most recent updates and progress, as well as tips on how you can get involved and take action in this important cause.In addition, I highly recommend getting a copy of Dr. Connett’s new book, The Case Against Fluoride, for more information on the bad science and political agendas that got this toxic chemical in our drinking water and is, at least for now, keeping it there.
Beware: Aspartame has changed name and is calling itself a "natural sweetener"
From the Health Freedom alliance http://healthfreedoms.org/2010/02/15/aspartame-has-been-renamed-and-is-now-being-marketed-as-a-natural-sweetener/
Artificial sweeteners especially aspartame has gotten a bad rap over the years, most likely due to studies showing they cause cancer. But not to worry Ajinomoto the company that makes Aspartame has changed the name to AminoSweet. It has the same toxic ingredients but a nice new sounding name. And if you or your child happens to be allergic to Aspartame, well don’t take it personally it’s just business.
Despite the evidence gained over the years showing that aspartame is a dangerous toxin, it has remained on the global market . In continues to gain approval for use in new types of food despite evidence showing that it causes neurological brain damage, cancerous tumors, and endocrine disruption, among other things.
Most consumers are oblivious to the fact that Aspartame was invented as a drug but upon discovery of its’ sweet taste was magically transformed from a drug to a food additive. HFA wants to warn our readers to beware of a wolf dressed up in sheep’s clothing or in this case Aspartame dressed up as Aminosweet.
Over 25 years ago, aspartame was first introduced into the European food supply. Today, it is an everyday component of most diet beverages, sugar-free desserts, and chewing gums in countries worldwide. But the tides have been turning as the general public is waking up to the truth about artificial sweeteners like aspartame and the harm they cause to health. The latest aspartame marketing scheme is a desperate effort to indoctrinate the public into accepting the chemical sweetener as natural and safe, despite evidence to the contrary.
Aspartame was an accidental discovery by James Schlatter, a chemist who had been trying to produce an anti-ulcer pharmaceutical drug for G.D. Searle & Company back in 1965. Upon mixing aspartic acid and phenylalanine, two naturally-occurring amino acids, he discovered that the new compound had a sweet taste. The company merely changed its FDA approval application from drug to food additive and, voila, aspartame was born.
G.D. Searle & Company first patented aspartame in 1970. An internal memo released in the same year urged company executives to work on getting the FDA into the “habit of saying yes” and of encouraging a “subconscious spirit of participation” in getting the chemical approved.
G.D. Searle & Company submitted its first petition to the FDA in 1973 and fought for years to gain FDA approval, submitting its own safety studies that many believed were inadequate and deceptive. Despite numerous objections, including one from its own scientists, the company was able to convince the FDA to approve aspartame for commercial use in a few products in 1974, igniting a blaze of controversy.
In 1976, then FDA Commissioner Alexander Schmidt wrote a letter to Sen. Ted Kennedy expressing concern over the “questionable integrity of the basic safety data submitted for aspartame safety”. FDA Chief Counsel Richard Merrill believed that a grand jury should investigate G.D. Searle & Company for lying about the safety of aspartame in its reports and for concealing evidence proving the chemical is unsafe for consumption.
The details of aspartame’s history are lengthy, but the point remains that the carcinogen was illegitimately approved as a food additive through heavy-handed prodding by a powerful corporation with its own interests in mind. Practically all drugs and food additives are approved by the FDA not because science shows they are safe but because companies essentially lobby the FDA with monetary payoffs and complete the agency’s multi-million dollar approval process.
Changing aspartame’s name to something that is “appealing and memorable”, in Ajinomoto’s own words, may hoodwink some but hopefully most will reject this clever marketing tactic as nothing more than a desperate attempt to preserve the company’s multi-billion dollar cash cow. Do not be deceived.
Update: As many comments are being posted by readers who are allergic to Aspartame we ask that you please forward this article to as many people as you can.
Artificial sweeteners especially aspartame has gotten a bad rap over the years, most likely due to studies showing they cause cancer. But not to worry Ajinomoto the company that makes Aspartame has changed the name to AminoSweet. It has the same toxic ingredients but a nice new sounding name. And if you or your child happens to be allergic to Aspartame, well don’t take it personally it’s just business.
Despite the evidence gained over the years showing that aspartame is a dangerous toxin, it has remained on the global market . In continues to gain approval for use in new types of food despite evidence showing that it causes neurological brain damage, cancerous tumors, and endocrine disruption, among other things.
Most consumers are oblivious to the fact that Aspartame was invented as a drug but upon discovery of its’ sweet taste was magically transformed from a drug to a food additive. HFA wants to warn our readers to beware of a wolf dressed up in sheep’s clothing or in this case Aspartame dressed up as Aminosweet.
Over 25 years ago, aspartame was first introduced into the European food supply. Today, it is an everyday component of most diet beverages, sugar-free desserts, and chewing gums in countries worldwide. But the tides have been turning as the general public is waking up to the truth about artificial sweeteners like aspartame and the harm they cause to health. The latest aspartame marketing scheme is a desperate effort to indoctrinate the public into accepting the chemical sweetener as natural and safe, despite evidence to the contrary.
Aspartame was an accidental discovery by James Schlatter, a chemist who had been trying to produce an anti-ulcer pharmaceutical drug for G.D. Searle & Company back in 1965. Upon mixing aspartic acid and phenylalanine, two naturally-occurring amino acids, he discovered that the new compound had a sweet taste. The company merely changed its FDA approval application from drug to food additive and, voila, aspartame was born.
G.D. Searle & Company first patented aspartame in 1970. An internal memo released in the same year urged company executives to work on getting the FDA into the “habit of saying yes” and of encouraging a “subconscious spirit of participation” in getting the chemical approved.
G.D. Searle & Company submitted its first petition to the FDA in 1973 and fought for years to gain FDA approval, submitting its own safety studies that many believed were inadequate and deceptive. Despite numerous objections, including one from its own scientists, the company was able to convince the FDA to approve aspartame for commercial use in a few products in 1974, igniting a blaze of controversy.
In 1976, then FDA Commissioner Alexander Schmidt wrote a letter to Sen. Ted Kennedy expressing concern over the “questionable integrity of the basic safety data submitted for aspartame safety”. FDA Chief Counsel Richard Merrill believed that a grand jury should investigate G.D. Searle & Company for lying about the safety of aspartame in its reports and for concealing evidence proving the chemical is unsafe for consumption.
The details of aspartame’s history are lengthy, but the point remains that the carcinogen was illegitimately approved as a food additive through heavy-handed prodding by a powerful corporation with its own interests in mind. Practically all drugs and food additives are approved by the FDA not because science shows they are safe but because companies essentially lobby the FDA with monetary payoffs and complete the agency’s multi-million dollar approval process.
Changing aspartame’s name to something that is “appealing and memorable”, in Ajinomoto’s own words, may hoodwink some but hopefully most will reject this clever marketing tactic as nothing more than a desperate attempt to preserve the company’s multi-billion dollar cash cow. Do not be deceived.
Update: As many comments are being posted by readers who are allergic to Aspartame we ask that you please forward this article to as many people as you can.
Air fresheners cause and exacerbate asthma
As written at http://www.nrdc.org/policy/
Protect Your Family from the Hidden Hazards in Air Fresheners
Air fresheners have become a staple in many American homes and offices, marketed with the promise of creating a clean, healthy, and sweet-smelling indoor atmosphere. But many of these products contain phthalates (pronounced thal-ates)—hazardous chemicals known to cause hormonal abnormalities, birth defects, and reproductive problems. NRDC’s independent testing of 14 common air fresheners, none of which listed phthalates as an ingredient, uncovered these chemicals in 86 percent (12 of 14) of the products tested, including those advertised as “all- natural” or “unscented.”
To protect consumers, government action to conduct more thorough tests and enact basic measures to limit exposure to phthalates is urgently needed. Until consumers are given the information they need to make informed decisions about whether to use these products, it is best to avoid using air fresheners—especially in places where there are children or pregnant women.
Phthalates: Health Hazards in Many Forms Phthalates are used in many common consumer products—to soften plastics in children’s toys, as sealants and adhesives in nail polish, and in perfumes and air fresheners. When people use air fresheners, the phthalates are released into the air where they may be inhaled or may land on the skin and be absorbed. Once these chemicals enter the bloodstream, they can alter hormone levels and cause other health problems.
Phthalates are known to interfere with production of the male hormone, testosterone, and have been associated with reproductive abnormalities. Numerous animal studies have linked prenatal exposure to certain phthalates with decreases in testosterone, malformations of the genitalia, and reduced sperm production. The State of California notes that five types of phthalates—including one that we found in air freshener products—are “known to cause birth defects or reproductive harm.” Phthalate exposure in indoor environments has also been associated with allergic symptoms and asthma.
Improving Your Home’s Air Quality and Safety Air fresheners are not a solution for poor air quality and cannot substitute for good ventilation. The best solution is to open windows to bring in fresh air or to use fans to maintain air circulation.
Health Facts
Protect Your Family from the Hidden Hazards in Air Fresheners
If you decide to use an air freshener, however, careful selection may reduce phthalate exposures to you and your family. The table shows which brands we tested contained phthalates.
Stronger Regulations Are Needed to Protect Consumers There is a clear need for closer monitoring of the types of chemicals manufacturers are allowed to put into air fresheners—and for consumers to be provided with better information about what is in the products they do purchase. NRDC recommends the following immediate steps:
n Consumers should avoid using air fresheners, but when necessary should use products with the lowest levels of phthalates to limit exposures to these potentially dangerous chemicals.
n The Environmental Protection Agency should require manufacturers to test and submit data on phthalates found in air fresheners, the extent of human exposure to phthalates in air fresheners, the health effects of the exposure, and the toxicity, persistence, sensitization, and other health effects of inhaling chemicals in air fresheners.
n The Consumer Product Safety Commission should ban phthalates in consumer products and should require that manufacturers provide ingredient information on the label.
According to studies done by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the majority of the U.S. population is routinely exposed to at least five different phthalates. Although the measured levels in the human blood stream are small, they are significant because a mixture of phthalates at low doses can act in an additive manner to cause the same health hazards as just one phthalate at a higher dose. The difficulty of avoiding general exposure is all the more reason to eliminate further exposure in an environment over which you have much more control—your home.
Toxic Phthalates Found in Air Fresheners
The chemicals below were found in at least one of the 14 air fresheners NRDC tested.
n Di-ethyl Phthalate (DEP): Has been associated with changes in hormone levels and genital development in humans.
n Di-n-butyl Phthalate (DBP): Is recognized as a reproductive toxicant by the National Toxicology Program and the State of California, and can lead to changes in genital development.
n Di-isobutyl Phthalate (DIBP): DIBP metabolites have been associated with changes in male genital development.
n Di-methyl Phthalate (DMP): Inconclusive evidence has shown reproductive toxicity in animal studies.
n Di-isohexyl Phthalate (DIHP): Limited toxicity testing has shown that DIHP is probably a developmental and reproductive toxicant.
Phthalate Level in Air Fresheners Tested
Brand Level of Toxic Phthalates Found Phthalates Found
Air Wick Scented Oil Ω 0.75 ppm DBP; 6.3 ppm DEP; 1.6 ppm DIBP; 2.1 ppm DIHP
Citrus Magic 0.25 ppm DBT
Febreze Air Effects Air Refresher 0
Febreze NOTICEables Scented Oil Ω 0.19 ppm DBP; 1.5 ppm DIBP
Glade Air Infusions Ω 1.5 ppm DEP
Glade PlugIn Scented Oil Ω 4.5 ppm DBP
Lysol Brand II Disinfectant 0.12 ppm DBP; 0.49 ppm DEP
Oust Air Sanitizer Spray Ω 5.7 ppm DEP
Oust Fan Liquid Refills 0.78 ppm DEP; 0.24 ppm DIBP
Ozium Glycol-ized Air Sanitizer l 360 ppm DEP; 0.15 ppm DMP
Renuzit Subtle Effects 0
Walgreens Air Freshener Spray l 1,100 ppm of DEP
Walgreens Scented Bouquet Air Freshener l 7,300 ppm of DEP; 0.47 ppm of DBP; 6.5 ppm DMP
Protect Your Family from the Hidden Hazards in Air Fresheners
Air fresheners have become a staple in many American homes and offices, marketed with the promise of creating a clean, healthy, and sweet-smelling indoor atmosphere. But many of these products contain phthalates (pronounced thal-ates)—hazardous chemicals known to cause hormonal abnormalities, birth defects, and reproductive problems. NRDC’s independent testing of 14 common air fresheners, none of which listed phthalates as an ingredient, uncovered these chemicals in 86 percent (12 of 14) of the products tested, including those advertised as “all- natural” or “unscented.”
To protect consumers, government action to conduct more thorough tests and enact basic measures to limit exposure to phthalates is urgently needed. Until consumers are given the information they need to make informed decisions about whether to use these products, it is best to avoid using air fresheners—especially in places where there are children or pregnant women.
Phthalates: Health Hazards in Many Forms Phthalates are used in many common consumer products—to soften plastics in children’s toys, as sealants and adhesives in nail polish, and in perfumes and air fresheners. When people use air fresheners, the phthalates are released into the air where they may be inhaled or may land on the skin and be absorbed. Once these chemicals enter the bloodstream, they can alter hormone levels and cause other health problems.
Phthalates are known to interfere with production of the male hormone, testosterone, and have been associated with reproductive abnormalities. Numerous animal studies have linked prenatal exposure to certain phthalates with decreases in testosterone, malformations of the genitalia, and reduced sperm production. The State of California notes that five types of phthalates—including one that we found in air freshener products—are “known to cause birth defects or reproductive harm.” Phthalate exposure in indoor environments has also been associated with allergic symptoms and asthma.
Improving Your Home’s Air Quality and Safety Air fresheners are not a solution for poor air quality and cannot substitute for good ventilation. The best solution is to open windows to bring in fresh air or to use fans to maintain air circulation.
Health Facts
Protect Your Family from the Hidden Hazards in Air Fresheners
If you decide to use an air freshener, however, careful selection may reduce phthalate exposures to you and your family. The table shows which brands we tested contained phthalates.
Stronger Regulations Are Needed to Protect Consumers There is a clear need for closer monitoring of the types of chemicals manufacturers are allowed to put into air fresheners—and for consumers to be provided with better information about what is in the products they do purchase. NRDC recommends the following immediate steps:
n Consumers should avoid using air fresheners, but when necessary should use products with the lowest levels of phthalates to limit exposures to these potentially dangerous chemicals.
n The Environmental Protection Agency should require manufacturers to test and submit data on phthalates found in air fresheners, the extent of human exposure to phthalates in air fresheners, the health effects of the exposure, and the toxicity, persistence, sensitization, and other health effects of inhaling chemicals in air fresheners.
n The Consumer Product Safety Commission should ban phthalates in consumer products and should require that manufacturers provide ingredient information on the label.
According to studies done by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the majority of the U.S. population is routinely exposed to at least five different phthalates. Although the measured levels in the human blood stream are small, they are significant because a mixture of phthalates at low doses can act in an additive manner to cause the same health hazards as just one phthalate at a higher dose. The difficulty of avoiding general exposure is all the more reason to eliminate further exposure in an environment over which you have much more control—your home.
Toxic Phthalates Found in Air Fresheners
The chemicals below were found in at least one of the 14 air fresheners NRDC tested.
n Di-ethyl Phthalate (DEP): Has been associated with changes in hormone levels and genital development in humans.
n Di-n-butyl Phthalate (DBP): Is recognized as a reproductive toxicant by the National Toxicology Program and the State of California, and can lead to changes in genital development.
n Di-isobutyl Phthalate (DIBP): DIBP metabolites have been associated with changes in male genital development.
n Di-methyl Phthalate (DMP): Inconclusive evidence has shown reproductive toxicity in animal studies.
n Di-isohexyl Phthalate (DIHP): Limited toxicity testing has shown that DIHP is probably a developmental and reproductive toxicant.
Phthalate Level in Air Fresheners Tested
Brand Level of Toxic Phthalates Found Phthalates Found
Air Wick Scented Oil Ω 0.75 ppm DBP; 6.3 ppm DEP; 1.6 ppm DIBP; 2.1 ppm DIHP
Citrus Magic 0.25 ppm DBT
Febreze Air Effects Air Refresher 0
Febreze NOTICEables Scented Oil Ω 0.19 ppm DBP; 1.5 ppm DIBP
Glade Air Infusions Ω 1.5 ppm DEP
Glade PlugIn Scented Oil Ω 4.5 ppm DBP
Lysol Brand II Disinfectant 0.12 ppm DBP; 0.49 ppm DEP
Oust Air Sanitizer Spray Ω 5.7 ppm DEP
Oust Fan Liquid Refills 0.78 ppm DEP; 0.24 ppm DIBP
Ozium Glycol-ized Air Sanitizer l 360 ppm DEP; 0.15 ppm DMP
Renuzit Subtle Effects 0
Walgreens Air Freshener Spray l 1,100 ppm of DEP
Walgreens Scented Bouquet Air Freshener l 7,300 ppm of DEP; 0.47 ppm of DBP; 6.5 ppm DMP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Is there Such a Thing as a Safe Drug?
More Dangerous Drugs
Americans are Dangerously Over-Drugged
Do You REALLY Need Those Drugs?
To Medicate or Not to Medicate, That is the Question
Take Control of Your Health
This info comes from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/12/09/15-dangerous-drugs-big-pharma-shoves-down-our-throats.aspx