EPA determines formaldehyde poses an 'unreasonable risk' to humans and must be regulated
Source: The Hill
01/03/25 4:20 PM ET
The Biden administration has officially determined the chemical formaldehyde poses an unreasonable risk to human health and should be regulated. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said this week that formaldehyde presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health, specifically to workers and consumers.
The agency noted that the chemical is found nearly everywhere and so people are routinely exposed to formaldehyde in indoor and outdoor environments, often from more than one source at a time.
It also said that long-term exposure to the substance can cause cancer, as well as reduced lung function and worsened asthma. As a result, it said it would try to address the unreasonable risk by proposing a rule to protect workers and consumers.
Having made that unreasonable risk determination, [the Toxic Substances Control Act] requires EPA to issue a rule that fully eliminates formaldehydes unreasonable risks, Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz, a senior attorney at environmental group Earthjustice, told The Hill.
Read more: https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5066408-epa-formaldehyde-unreasonable-risk/
Link to EPA RELEASE - EPA Finalizes TSCA Risk Evaluation for Formaldehyde
NJCher
(38,345 posts)To put a finish on the fabric. Over three weeks ago, I tried on a top, and walked away with an extreme itching on my arms and upper chest that took days to go away.
I still have it a little bit. I looked up the symptoms and found that it could be an allergic reaction to formaldehyde.
BumRushDaShow
(144,733 posts)that it will be difficult to actually regulate the use of it by foreign countries for that HUGE category of products that we import.
Evolve Dammit
(19,224 posts)NJCher
(38,345 posts)Needless to say.
Of course I always wash new clothes.
Evolve Dammit
(19,224 posts)C0RI0LANUS
(2,106 posts)BumRushDaShow
(144,733 posts)many having been newly built and still having fumes from the formaldehyde within their interiors.
September 28, 2012 / 10:35 PM EDT / AP
NEW ORLEANS A federal judge gave his final approval Thursday to a $42.6 million class-action settlement between companies that made and installed government-issued trailers after hurricanes in 2005 and Gulf Coast storm victims who claim they were exposed to hazardous fumes while living in the shelters.
U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt ruled from the bench after hearing from attorneys who brokered a deal resolving nearly all remaining court claims over elevated levels of formaldehyde in trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency following hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Roughly 55,000 residents of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas will be eligible for shares of $37.5 million paid by more than two dozen manufacturers. They also can get shares of a separate $5.1 million settlement with FEMA contractors that installed and maintained the units.
Gerald Meunier, a lead plaintiffs' attorney, said the deal provides residents with "somewhat modest" compensation but allows both sides to avoid the expense and risks of protracted litigation. "Dollar amounts alone do not determine whether a settlement is fair and reasonable," he said. Jim Percy, a lawyer for the trailer makers, said Engelhardt would have had to try cases individually or transfer suits to other jurisdictions if the settlement wasn't reached. "It was not going to end quickly, and it was going to be even more monumental for all the parties concerned," he said.
Formaldehyde, a chemical commonly found in building materials, can cause breathing problems and is classified as a carcinogen. Government tests on hundreds of trailers in Louisiana and Mississippi found formaldehyde levels that were, on average, about five times what people are exposed to in most modern homes.
(snip)
C0RI0LANUS
(2,106 posts)I have absolutely no clue what took the government so long to do something about formaldehyde.
Link:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/05/health/formaldehyde-cancer-air-pollutant-propublica/index.html
BumRushDaShow
(144,733 posts)is so ubiquitous and has been for centureis - including for embalming, and preserving (anyone who did dissections of various critters in high school would have encountered it as the critters were stored in it). I know in my lab, we worked with it in a hood.
There are literally thousands and thousands of museums, schools (all levels), and research facilities filled with jars or other containers that used formaldehyde and/or formalin (and in some cases, ethanol) to preserve various things. E.g. -
Fish specimens are preserved using formaldehyde at the Australian National Fish Collection. CSIRO, Author provided
(above from here - https://theconversation.com/old-goopy-museum-specimens-can-tell-fascinating-stories-of-wildlife-history-finally-we-can-read-them-165013)
At this point, about the only thing that can be done is to phase out any further use and try to make sure that whatever is stored using it, is kept in a ventilated location.
C0RI0LANUS
(2,106 posts)Baitball Blogger
(48,550 posts)It said oak, but it was only oak on the parts you could see. Underneath there was particle board.
I was so worn down by then. I got railed by my family when I threw out the George Foremans.
orleans
(35,352 posts)Baitball Blogger
(48,550 posts)I have no idea what they're made out of now.
orleans
(35,352 posts)BComplex
(9,175 posts)to formaldehyde fumes, as have so many people I've known. I'm well over 70 years old. The first time I had a problem was in high school biology class. I got a horrible headache and my eyes became swollen. A few years later while away at college, some of us got a brand new mobile home rental, and I couldn't live there, it was so toxic with formaldehyde.
Wonder how the industry managed to avoid this new "risk evaluation" for over 50 years!?
Damn it!!
BumRushDaShow
(144,733 posts)As I mentioned above - there is so much stuff that used it over the centuries that to try to tackle how to start to remove it, is daunting.
It's just like dealing with phasing out the coolants (like Freon) that were blowing holes in the Ozone layer of our atmosphere and coming up with alternatives while laying out a timeline to transition out of the use of it, and find ways to dispose of it. In the case of the coolants, the effort started back in the late '80s finally leading to a phase out starting over 30 years ago, and finally a ban of the latest version of it just under 5 years ago.
Similarly we are seeing how PFAS is finally being handled as another one of those groups of chemicals that have been around for some time and are everywhere - with a need for a process to help transition out of their use and come up with disposal solutions.
niyad
(120,877 posts)could not wear nail polish, and on through not being able to be around new mobile homes, new carpeting, particle board, etc. Fotunately, none of my reactions have been as severe as others have described here, mostly headaches, burning throat, teary eyes, itchy skin.
But, per BRDS's post above, we are facing an enormous task.
IcyPeas
(22,818 posts)There's a sub-reddit about nail care and the subject of formaldehyde often gets discussed. People looking for polish with no formaldehyde. There are brands now that don'thave it.
I have wondered about the nail care technicians at salons. Some wear masks.
niyad
(120,877 posts)did not contain formaldehyde. I have no idea what the stats are now, because I have not worn any in over 40 years.
I worry for the techs at the salons, being around that all the time.
chouchou
(1,476 posts)Wicked Blue
(6,855 posts)and marinates in it every night.
chouchou
(1,476 posts)Evolve Dammit
(19,224 posts)Martin68
(24,780 posts)dissecting specimens preserved in formaldehyde, we were warned to "be careful" (whoever that means).
IcyPeas
(22,818 posts).
Finally, if the milk was threatening to sour, dairymen added formaldehyde, an embalming compound long used by funeral parlors, to stop the decomposition, also relying on its slightly sweet taste to improve the flavor. In the late 1890s, formaldehyde was so widely used by the dairy and meat-packing industries that outbreaks of illnesses related to the preservative were routinely described by newspapers as embalmed meat or embalmed milk scandals.
the dairy industry to deal with milks bacterial problems simply by dumping formaldehyde into the mix. And although Hurty would later become a passionate advocate of pasteurization, at first he endorsed the idea of chemical preservatives.
In 1896, desperately concerned about diseases linked to pathogens in milk, he even endorsed formaldehyde as a good preservative. The recommended dose of two drops of formalin (a mix of 40 percent formaldehyde and 60 percent water) could preserve a pint of milk for several days. It was a tiny amount, Hurty said, and he thought it might make the product safer.
In the summer of 1900, The Indianapolis News reported on the deaths of three infants in the citys orphanage due to formaldehyde poisoning. A further investigation indicated that at least 30 children had died two years prior due to use of the preservative, and in 1901, Hurty himself referenced the deaths of more than 400 children due to a combination of formaldehyde, dirt, and bacteria in milk.
This article is very interesting:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/19th-century-fight-bacteria-ridden-milk-embalming-fluid-180970473/
C0RI0LANUS
(2,106 posts)pnwmom
(109,645 posts)womanofthehills
(9,369 posts)To kill live virus.
When I was younger and making pottery - we would make up glazes in our classes in 5 gallon buckets and then pour in lots of formaldehyde to keep bacteria out - and the worst part - stir it with our arms. This was at UNM years ago where we also had lead and uranium in jars to use in glazes if we wished. We also filled up the cracks in the kilns with asbestos. Art was dangerous in those days. No vents in classrooms or darkrooms.
My long time honey used to be a builder - so when he and I built most of my current house - we framed it with real wood, not plywood to avoid formaldehyde.
EPA lists it as a possible carcinogen.
OverBurn
(1,116 posts)live love laugh
(14,590 posts)KT2000
(20,987 posts)We can thank the Koch brothers for this taking so long. As premier manufacturers of formaldehyde, they stalled safety investigations.
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/lies-koch-brothers-tell
Japan and Europe do not allow it in children's clothing - we do.
Self- monitoring by manufacturers has not worked in the US.
It should be regulated as a pesticide because it is used to retard mold growth.
An Italian study found formaldehyde levels in a factory to be within limits. When they tested the dust, it was 5000 ppm and that is what goes up the noses of workers. We can surmise that the dust in our home is full of formaldehyde.
Formaldehyde is in just about everything - particle board in home construction, furniture, clothing, glues, personal care products, paint, yard chemicals, medical supplies, and more.
bucolic_frolic
(47,763 posts)plywood, flake board and the like.
Marthe48
(19,461 posts)His dr. prescribed it to treat foot fungus or something. I massaged his feet with that smelly stuff for months. It didn't help, and he stopped using it. Mid 60s.
Tweedy
(1,231 posts)flamingdem
(39,970 posts)Buy organic and "non-toxic" everything. But it gets pricey.
womanofthehills
(9,369 posts)Some leather couches are were treated with formaldehyde- I dont know if they still are. They stunk to me.