Search

Nearly 200 chemicals linked to cancer found in everyday food packaging

A new study has uncovered the alarming amount of potential carcinogens in food packaging and plastic tableware. Researchers from the Food Packaging Forum found that nearly 200 chemicals linked to breast cancer are being used in food packaging, with dozens of these carcinogens able to find their way into the body. “There is strong evidence that 76 known or potential breast carcinogens from food contact materials recently purchased all over the world can be found in people,” study co-author Jane Muncke said. “Getting rid of these known or suspected carcinogens in our food supply is a huge opportunity for cancer prevention.” Muncke is managing director and chief scientific officer at the Food Packaging Forum, a non-profit foundation based in Zurich, Switzerland focusing on science communication and research. The study, published last month in the journal Frontiers In Toxicology, compared a list of potential breast carcinogens to a list of chemicals that have been found in food contact materials to find out which of the potential carcinogens could be getting into people's diets. Of the 189 potential mammary carcinogens in food contact materials, with 143 of these found in plastics and 89 found in paper or cardboard. Of the recently detected chemicals found in food packaging, 40 have already been classified as hazardous by regulatory agencies around the world. Another research scientist, Jenny Kay, from Silent Spring Institute an organisation focused on the link between chemicals, women's health, and breast cancer said: “So many of these chemicals have already been classified as human health hazards, yet they are still allowed to be used in food contact materials thus allowing them to migrate into the food we eat." Early-onset breast cancer rates in women younger than 50 have been increasing, and experts said the trend cannot be explained by genetics alone. “Many of the mammary carcinogens are hormone disruptors, too, and many of the chemicals on our list can also damage DNA," Kay said. “Consumers should not have to keep track of all of the scientific literature on what chemicals to avoid. It should be on regulators to recognise the danger and take action.” The Consumer Brands Association, which represents the consumer products industry, said its members adhered to the US Food and Drug Administration’s evidence-based safety standards. “Packaging exists to protect and keep food safe for consumption,” the association’s senior vice president of product policy and federal affairs Sarah Gallo told CNN. “The FDA reviews and approves food contact substances through their science and risk-based system before they go to market. “The agency’s post-market review also provides continuous safety analysis and regulation of the approved substances.” Image: Shutterstock

Body

Cancer-causing chemicals found in Aussie tap water sparks safety concerns

A landmark ruling in the US has sparked safety concerns over Australian tap water, with many wondering if it is safe to drink. After the US tightened their regulations around drinking tap water, cutting the maximum level of cancer-causing so-called “forever chemicals” allowed, experts have urged Australia to do the same. Earlier this year, the US Environmental Protection Agency found there was “no safe level of exposure” of the chemicals perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in drinking water and they were likely to cause cancer. The toxic substances have also been linked to kidney and liver disease, thyroid dysregulation, reproductive problems, and developmental problems. According to a federally funded University of Queensland study published in 2011, Australia permits per-and-poly-fluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances at levels up to 140 times higher than those allowed in the US. Health Minister Mark Butler has asked key political players, including Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly, for an urgent briefing following the US developments. The National Health and Medical Research Council, which shapes the nation’s water rules, is reviewing its guidelines relating to the chemicals, and that could be expedited ahead of its 2025 end date. “Australian drinking water is regularly monitored for the presence of chemicals, including PFAS, to ensure those are within the limits assessed as safe by Australian regulators,” a spokesperson for the Health Minister said. “This independent review will consider recent guidance and reviews from international and national jurisdictions and determine whether they are suitable to adopt or adapt for Australia.” Nicholas Chartres, a senior research fellow at the University of Sydney, called for a precautionary approach and immediate widespread testing of the nation’s water supplies. “The government needs to take action. They need to be testing the water (and) it will come at a cost,” he said. Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

Why a cold beer is best – chemically speaking

A quiet moment in a bar has led two researchers to study how alcohol tastes at different temperatures. No, this is real science. <div class="copy"> “Two years ago, Xiaotao Yang and I were drinking beer together. He had just finished his doctorate degree thesis and asked me, ‘what should we do next?’” says Lei Jiang, lead author of a new study <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matt.2024.03.017" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published</a> in the materials science journal Matter. Yang and Jiang are material scientists at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. “At the time, I was a scientific committee member of one of the biggest Chinese alcoholic beverage companies, and I had the idea to ask the question ‘why does Chinese baijiu have a very particular concentration of alcohol, either 38%–42%, 52%–53%, or 68%–75%?’” Baijiu is a clear grain liquor from East Asia. It’s typically distilled from fermented sorghum (a type of grass), though it is also sometimes made from rice, wheat, barley or millet. “Then we decided, let’s try something, so I put a drop of beer on my hand to see the contact angle,” says Jiang. Contact angle is a measure of surface tension. For example, water has a low contact angle which is why it appears bead-like when placed on a surface. Solutions with high <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/body-and-mind/debunks-vices-alcohol/">alcohol</a> concentration, however, have a higher contact angle meaning they flatten and spread out. Contact angle also reveals how molecules within the droplet interact with each other and the surface below. After plotting the concentration of ethanol (alcohol) against contact angle, the scientists were surprised with what they found. There is no linear relationship between alcohol concentration and contact angle. Instead, increasing the amount of alcohol leads to a series of plateaus and sharp rises in the plot. Further experiments showed that this arises out of the formation of clusters of ethanol and water in the solutions. At low concentrations, ethanol forms pyramid-like structures around the water molecules. At high concentrations, the ethanol molecules arrange end-to-end in a chain. They also found that these structures change depending on temperature. For example, 38%–42% and 52%–53% ethanol solutions have distinct cluster structures at around room temperature, but this difference disappears at higher temperatures, like 40°C. “Although there is only 1% difference, the taste of baijiu at 51% and 52% is noticeably different; the taste of baijiu at 51% is similar to that of lower alcohol content, such as 38%–42%. So, in order to achieve the same taste at a lower alcohol content, the distribution of baijiu products ranges most within the 38%–42% and 52%–53% categories,” says Jiang. The researchers also found that there is an increase in ethanol chains at 5°C in 5% and 11% ethanol solutions – the concentration range of beer – giving it a more “ethanol-like” taste which is generally preferred. “At low temperature, the tetrahedral (pyramid-shaped) clusters become the low concentration amount, and this is why we drink cold beer,” says Jiang. The researchers say their research could help beverage companies produce the best flavour with the lowest alcohol concentration. Image credits: Shutterstock <div> <noscript data-spai="1"><img decoding="async" fetchpriority="high" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-198773" src="https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/spai/q_lossy+ret_img+to_auto/cosmosmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Cosmos-Catch-Up-embed_728x150-1.jpg" data-spai-egr="1" alt="Sign up to our weekly newsletter" width="600" height="154" title="why a cold beer is best – chemically speaking 2"></noscript> </div>  <img id="cosmos-post-tracker" style="opacity: 0; height: 1px!important; width: 1px!important; border: 0!important; position: absolute!important; z-index: -1!important;" src="https://syndication.cosmosmagazine.com/?id=303282&title=Why+a+cold+beer+is+best+%E2%80%93+chemically+speaking" width="1" height="1" loading="lazy" aria-label="Syndication Tracker" data-spai-target="src" data-spai-orig="" data-spai-exclude="nocdn" /> </div> <div id="contributors"> <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/science/chemistry/beer-taste-temperature/">This article</a> was originally published on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com">Cosmos Magazine</a> and was written by <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/contributor/evrim-yazgin/">Evrim Yazgin</a>. </div>

Food & Wine

“We still have a problem”: One in five people in aged care treated with antipsychotics

One in five aged care residents are being given antipsychotic medication - used to treat the symptoms of psychosis - that has been linked to chemical restraint by the aged care royal commission, according to new data. The data was mandatorily collected for the Department of Health from over 2400 aged care homes, revealing the industry’s heavy reliance on using antipsychotics on patients. Residents are also more likely to be given the drugs if they live in rural areas. Over half of those receiving the drugs don’t have a psychosis diagnosis, which is of particular concern as the royal commission found that “many of these medications were being used as chemical restraint”. “I have to say it was higher than I was expecting,” pharmacy researcher Dr Juanita Breen, who appeared as an expert witness at the royal commission, told the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-03-31/chemical-restraint-antipsychotic-drugs-widespread-in-aged-care/100950924" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ABC</a>. Dr Breen said this data suggested that much of the use of these drugs was inappropriate. “It means that these medications are being used for other reasons,” she said. “It would suggest that a large proportion would be used as chemical restraint … that we still have a problem.” An earlier study from 2019 made similar findings after tracking 5825 people in residential aged care facilities over the age of 65 for three years, between 2014 and 2017. The study also found that residents were being given the medication for significantly longer periods of time than was recommended, per the <a href="https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/professional/antipsychotics-overused-in-residential-aged-care-s" target="_blank" rel="noopener">RACGP</a>. Despite recommendations not to extend use of the medication beyond 84 days, the study found that the mean use for men and women sat at 212 days and 216 days (or around 30 weeks) respectively. Other experts who testified at the royal commission also indicated that a decrease in medically-trained staff at aged care facilities, combined with an increase in patients with complex needs, had contributed to the overreliance on antipsychotics. Former aged care nurse Amanda Gorton, who left the industry in 2020, told the ABC that staff shortages had regularly left her feeling overwhelmed. The same year, the home she worked at failed an audit from the aged care watchdog, the Quality and Safety Commission, over its use of antipsychotics. Ms Gorton said she saw workers use the drugs to restrain residents because they didn’t have the capacity to care for them. “I went home often in tears because I thought it can’t stay like this,” she said. “It has to get better, it has to improve, we can’t be treating elderly people like this.” According to an analysis of hundreds of aged care audits from the commission, Human Rights Watch said they found that the inappropriate use of antipsychotics was taking place all over the country. “We found homes where more than 75 percent of residents were given these drugs and there was not adequate documentation of why they needed them or relevant diagnosis,” researcher Sophie McNeil said. “We found homes where residents were so drugged up that they experienced a significant increase in falls, which resulted in injuries.” Ms McNeill also said there was a clear link between workforce issues and using chemical restraint, after finding that staff also used antipsychotics to deal with residents asking for help or who were in pain. “There’s not enough staff to look after people. So instead, vulnerable, older Australians are given these drugs when they don’t need them,” she said. The data and analyses come after the Senate passed an aged care bill on its last sitting day aimed at addressing several recommendations from the royal commission. It included an amendment to ensure every facility has a registered nurse rostered 24 hours a day. “Putting people on drugs, restraining people, is the easy option for an aged care facility that doesn’t have the necessary staff to deal with these sorts of matters,” Senator Rex Patrick, who put forward the new amendment, said. Having gone through the Senate without a formal division (where senators vote by sitting on the left or right of the chamber), the bill will be sent back to the House of Representatives for a vote. However, Senator Patrick believes the government won’t want the amendment to be successful and will “park the bill and it will never be seen again”. “The government didn’t want the optics of voting against nurses 24/7 in aged care, so they simply let it go through on the voices knowing that, tactically, they can avoid dealing with it in the house today,” he said. Image: Getty Images

Caring

No, sunscreen chemicals are not bleaching the Great Barrier Reef

For the sixth time in the last 25 years, the Great Barrier Reef <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/the-reef/reef-health" target="_blank" rel="noopener">is bleaching</a>. During bleaching events, people are quick to point the finger at different causes, including <a href="https://owlcation.com/stem/Coral-Bleaching-and-Oxybenzone-Choose-Your-Sunscreen-Carefully" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sunscreen</a>. Why sunscreen? Some active ingredients can wash off snorkelers and into the reef, contaminating the area. So could this be the cause of the Barrier Reef’s bleaching? In a word, no. I reviewed the evidence for sunscreen as a risk to coral in my <a href="https://www.publish.csiro.au/CH/CH21236" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new research</a>, and found that while chemicals in sunscreen pose a risk to corals under laboratory conditions, they are only found at very low levels in real world environments. That means when coral bleaching does occur, it is more likely to be due to the marine heatwaves and increased water temperatures that have come with climate change, as well as land-based run-off. Why have we been concerned over the environmental impact of sunscreens? After we apply sunscreen, the active ingredients can leach from our skin into the water. When we shower after swimming, soaps and detergents can further strip the these sunscreen chemicals off and send them into our waste water systems. They pass through treatment facilities, which cannot effectively remove them, and end up in rivers and oceans. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="hands putting on sunscreen" /></a><figcaption>Sunscreen isn’t the cause of the coral bleaching. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> It’s no surprise, then, that sunscreen contamination has been detected in freshwater and seas across the globe, from <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15996716/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Switzerland</a> to <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-015-5174-3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Brazil</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27235899/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hong Kong</a>. Contamination is highest in the summer months, consistent with when people are more likely to go swimming, and peaks in the hours after people have finished swimming. Four years ago, the Pacific island nation of Palau made world headlines by announcing plans to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/02/pacific-island-to-introduce-world-first-reef-toxic-sunscreen-ban" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ban all sunscreens</a> that contain specific synthetic active ingredients due to concern over the risk they posed to corals. <a href="https://www.cntraveler.com/story/these-destinations-are-banning-certain-sunscreens" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Similar bans</a> have been announced by Hawaii, as well a number of other popular tourist areas in the Americas and Caribbean. These bans are based on independent scientific studies and <a href="https://coralreefpalau.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/CRRF-UNESCO-Sunscreen-in-Jellyfish-Lake-no.2732.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">commissioned reports</a> which have found contamination from specific active ingredients in sunscreen in the water at beaches, rivers and lakes. Notably, the nations and regions which have banned these active ingredients, like Bonaire and Mexico, have local economies heavily reliant on summer tourism. For these areas, coral bleaching is not only an environmental catastrophe but an economic loss as well, if tourists choose to go elsewhere. How do we know sunscreen isn’t the issue? So if contamination concerns over these active ingredients are warranted, how can we be sure they’re not the cause of the bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef? Put simply, the concentrations of the chemicals are too low to cause the bleaching. The synthetic ingredients used in most products are highly <a href="https://www.corrosionpedia.com/definition/653/hydrophobic#:%7E:text=Hydrophobic%20is%20a%20property%20of,Oils%20and%20fats%20are%20hydrophobic." target="_blank" rel="noopener">hydrophobic</a> and <a href="https://www.greenfacts.org/glossary/jkl/lipophilic.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lipophilic</a>. That means they shun water and love fats, making them hard to dissolve in water. They’d much prefer to stay in the skin until they break down. Because of this, the levels found in the environment are very low. How low? Think nanograms per litre (a nanogram is 0.000000001 grams) or micrograms per litre (a microgram is 0.00001 grams). Significantly higher levels are found only in waste water treatment sludge and some sediments, not in the water itself. So how do we reconcile this with studies showing sunscreen can damage corals? Under laboratory conditions, many active ingredients in sunscreen have been found to damage corals as well as <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22828885/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">mussels</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17889917/#:%7E:text=BP%2D2%20was%20accumulated%20in,and%20female%20fish%20were%20observed." target="_blank" rel="noopener">fish</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24359924/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">small crustaceans</a>, and plant-like organisms such as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749111006713" target="_blank" rel="noopener">algae and phytoplankton</a>. The key phrase above is “under laboratory conditions”. While these studies would suggest sunscreens are a real threat to reefs, it’s important to know the context. Studies like these are usually conducted under artificial conditions which can’t account for natural processes. They usually don’t account for the breakdown of the chemicals by sunlight or dilution through water flow and tides. These tests also use sunscreen concentrations up to thousands of times higher – milligrams per litre – compared to real world contamination levels found in collected samples. In short, laboratory-only studies are not giving us a reliable indication of what happens to these chemicals in real world conditions. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Sea wave seen side on" /></a><figcaption>Laboratory studies don’t tend to account for dilution in seas or rivers. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> If it’s not sunscreen, what is it? The greatest threats to the reef are climate change, coastal development, land-based run-off like pesticides, herbicides, and other pollutants, and direct human use like illegal fishing, according to a <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/our-work/outlook-report-2019" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2019 outlook report</a> issued by the reef’s managing body. Reefs get their striking colours from single-celled organisms called <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial_corals/coral02_zooxanthellae.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">zooxanthellae</a> which grow and live inside corals. Importantly, these organisms only grow under very specific conditions, including narrow bands of temperature and light levels. When conditions go outside the zooxanthellaes’ preferred zone, they die and the coral turns white. As a result, the likeliest cause of this bleaching is <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/our-work/threats-to-the-reef/climate-change" target="_blank" rel="noopener">climate change</a>, which has increased ocean temperatures and acidity and resulted in more flooding, storms, and cyclones which block light and stir up the ocean floor. So do you need to worry about the impact of your sunscreen on the environment? No. Sunscreen should remain a key part of our sun protection strategy, as a way to protect skin from UV damage, prevention skin cancers, and slow the visible signs of ageing. Our coral reefs face much bigger issues than sunscreen.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/179938/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nial-wheate-96839" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nial Wheate</a>, Associate Professor of the Sydney Pharmacy School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841" target="_blank" rel="noopener">University of Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-sunscreen-chemicals-are-not-bleaching-the-great-barrier-reef-179938" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: Getty Images

Domestic Travel

Warning after child suffers horrific burn from everyday item

When it comes to using hand sanitiser, most of us don’t think twice and squeeze a little on our palms. Almost every place has hand santiser handy, but this has renewed calls to parents to keep an eye out for it around their children. Paramedic and mum-of-two Nikki took to Instagram to show the dangers of children misusing hand-sanitiser. She shared an image of a young boy named James to the <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/Cawa4MAM34G/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tiny Hearts Education</a> page, who suffered a horrific chemical burn in his eye after using a foot pump hand sanitiser dispenser. “It took days for James to be able to open his eyes and several weeks to get the all-clear of no long-term damage,” Nikki wrote. Exposure of the chemicals in hand-sanitiser to the eye can cause minor injuries or even “complete blindness”. “These kinda accidents can occur from a whole range of chemicals. It could be acidic agents such as bleach, window cleaner, vinegar and pool chemicals, or alkali agents such as fertilisers, drain cleaners, sparklers, plaster and cement - but the list is endless!” The passionate mother warned parents in similar incidents to irrigate the area first, listing how to do so, before rushing to the emergency department. “Irrigating the eye is so important as we aim to flush out as much of the chemical as possible. It is best done with Normal Saline but when this is not available running water will do the trick.” She suggested wrapping the child “like a burrito to help keep them still”, while assisting older children over the sink. Slightly warm water should be run over the eyes as the child blinks repeatedly to help flush out the chemical. This should be done for at least 15 minutes. Nikki also warned of contacts to be removed before any process. “P.S Also a reminder - PLEASE do not let little ones use foot pump hand sanitiser dispensers!!” Image: Instagram

Caring

RECALL: Popular sunscreen pulled over cancer-causing chemical contamination

Johnson & Johnson has begun a recall of their popular Neutrogena aerosol sunscreen, after cancer-causing chemicals were found in some samples. Batches of the Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Mist Sunscreen Spray SPF 50+ with the expiry date of 30th August 2023 or earlier have been flagged by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), as customers are being warned of possible health risks linked to benzene. Benzene is classified as a human carcinogen, a substance that has the potential to cause cancer depending on the length and severity of exposure. The chemical is not an ingredient of the product, but is often used in the manufacturing process. The Neutrogena sunscreen is sold at a various Australian retailers, including Chemist Warehouse, Coles and Woolworths. “Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc product testing detected benzene at concentrations less than 3 ppm in 2 of the 17 batches supplied in Australia,” the TGA explained in a statement on Monday. “Exposure to benzene in this sunscreen product, at the levels detected, would not be expected to cause serious adverse health effects, but to reduce the risk to consumers, Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Ltd is recalling all batches of the affected product supplied within Australia.” Consumers of the product are being urged to contact their GP or healthcare provider if they are concerned, or experience any issues relating to the product in question. The recall comes less than a month after Johnson & Johnson pulled other Neutrogena and Aveeno brand aerosol sunscreen products from their US markets over similar concerns of benzene contamination.

Legal

A chemical engineer explains: What makes pepper spray so intense? And is it a tear gas?

In recent weeks, the world has looked on as governments use chemical irritants to control protesters and riots. Whether it’s tear gas, pepper spray, mace or pepper balls, all have one thing in common: they’re chemical weapons. Chemical warfare agents have been used twice in Sydney in the past week alone. Police <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-07/sydney-police-defend-pepper-spray-use-on-protesters/12330558">pepper-sprayed</a> demonstrators at Central Station, following Saturday’s major Black Lives Matter protest. The next day, tear gas <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-08/tear-gas-fired-into-exercise-yard-of-sydney-long-bay-jail/12332572">was used</a> to break up a fight at Long Bay jail, as prison guards filled an exercise yard with tear gas canisters – also impacting nearby residents. These events followed the deployment of <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/05/politics/park-police-tear-gas/index.html">chemical riot control agents</a> – specifically “pepper bombs” – in Washington DC last week. They were used to clear protesters from a public park so President Donald Trump could walk from the White House to a nearby church for a photo opportunity. The White House made a highlight reel to celebrate Trump’s heroic walk across the street for his bible photo op... US Attorney General William Barr said “<a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2020/06/the-continuing-tear-gas-debate/">there was no tear gas used</a>”, claiming “pepper spray is not a chemical irritant. It’s not chemical.” I’m a chemical engineer and chemist who studies chemicals in the environment. So I thought I’d clear the air about what makes pepper spray such a powerful chemical irritant, and a chemical weapon. What’s inside pepper spray? The active compounds in pepper spray are collectively known as capsaicinoids. They are given the military symbol OC, for “oleoresin capsicum”. The most important chemical in OC is capsaicin. This is derived from chilli peppers in a chemical process that dissolves and concentrates it into a liquid. Capsaicin is the same compound that makes chillies hot, but in an intense, weaponised form. Not all capsaicinoids are obtained naturally. One called nonivamide (also known as PAVA or pelargonic acid vanillylamide) is mostly made by humans. PAVA is an <a href="https://cot.food.gov.uk/committee/committee-on-toxicity/cotstatements/cotstatementsyrs/cotstatements2002/pavastatement">intense irritant</a> used in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/09/pepper-spray-used-in-non-violent-situations-in-prison-pilot">artificial pepper spray</a>. Is pepper spray a tear gas? We’ve established pepper spray is a chemical, but is it also a kind of tear gas? “<a href="https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/riotcontrol/factsheet.asp">Tear gas</a>” is an informal term and a bit of a misnomer, because it isn’t a gas. Rather, tear gas refers to any weaponised irritant used to immobilise people. More specifically, tear gas is often used to describe weapons that disperse their irritants in the air either as liquid aerosol droplets (such as <a href="https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/a28904691/how-tear-gas-works/">gas canisters</a>), or as a powder (such as pepper balls). This definition distinguishes tear gas from personal self-defence sprays which use foams, gels and liquids. Tear gas canisters typically contain the irritants 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile (CS) and phenacyl chloride (CN). Both CS and CN are man-made chemicals discovered in a lab, unlike capsaicin (the traditional ingredient in pepper spray). But despite capsaicin coming from chilli peppers, pepper spray is still a weaponised irritant that can be delivered as an aerosol or powder. It should unequivocally be considered a type of tear gas. Pepper spray as a weapon The chemical irritants OC, CS and CN have military symbols because they are chemical weapons. They are termed “<a href="https://www.wbur.org/news/2020/06/10/rubber-bullets-protesters-victoria-snelgrove-boston">less-lethal</a>” because they are less likely to kill than conventional weapons. Their use, however, can still <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2020/06/08/tear-gas-and-pepper-spray-can-maim-kill-and-spread-coronavirus/#47f17a2a725f">cause fatalities</a>. Technically, pepper spray and other tear gases are classified as lachrymatory agents. <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-tear-gas-139958">Lachrymatory agents</a> attack mucous membranes in the eyes and respiratory system. Pepper spray works almost instantly, forcing the eyes to close and flood with tears. Coupled with coughing fits and difficulty breathing, this means the targeted person is effectively <a href="https://healthland.time.com/2011/11/22/how-painful-is-pepper-spray/">blinded and incapacitated</a>. Because lachrymatory agents work on <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK544263/">nerve receptors</a> that help us sense heat, they also induce an intense burning sensation. The combined effects of pepper spray can last anywhere from 15 minutes to more than an hour. Lachrymatory agents emerged on the <a href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germans-introduce-poison-gas">battlefields of World War I</a>. Artillery shells were filled with chemicals such as <a href="https://www.compoundchem.com/2014/05/17/chemical-warfare-ww1/">xylyl bromide and chloroacetone</a> and fired at enemy soldiers. Agents that induce choking, blistering and vomiting were added as the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/10/science/chemical-weapons-world-war-1-armistice.html">chemical arms race</a> escalated. In the 1920s, the <a href="https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/bio/1925-geneva-protocol/">Geneva Protocol</a> was enacted to ban the use of indiscriminate and often ineffective chemical weapons on the battlefield. Today, the unjustified use of chemical riot control agents <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/04/201242913130963418.html">threatens to erode</a> the systems that are meant to protect us from the most dangerous weaponised chemicals. Written by Gabriel da Silva. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-makes-pepper-spray-so-intense-and-is-it-a-tear-gas-a-chemical-engineer-explains-140441">The Conversation.</a>

Art

Nail salon workers suffer chemical exposures that can be like working at a garage or a refinery

Anyone who has walked past a nail salon is familiar with the noxious odors that emanate from acrylic nails, polishes and removers. Customers getting manicures and pedicures endure the smell temporarily, but manicurists who inhale these evaporating chemicals for hours expose themselves to health risks. The smells come from volatile organic compounds, or VOCs – compounds that <a href="https://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/chemicals-and-contaminants/volatile-organic-compounds-vocs">easily become vapors or gases</a>. These substances have been <a href="https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoor-air-quality#Health_Effects">linked to health problems</a> ranging from headaches and respiratory irritation to reproductive complications and cancer. In a normal room-temperature environment, VOCs evaporate and humans breathe them in. Our research team, along with colleagues at Colorado State University, recently investigated <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.086">chemical exposures in six Colorado nail salons</a> and found that employees spent their days exposed to high levels of VOCs. Participating technicians, who had worked in salons for up to 19 years, reported suffering headaches and skin and eye irritation. We measured levels of benzene and formaldehyde in the salons, and determined that exposure to these known human carcinogens was increasing the workers’ lifetime cancer risks above one in one million – the level that <a href="https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/iwachap10.pdf">many U.S. agencies consider acceptable</a> in regulating exposure to harmful substances. Nail salon workers in New York City rally for safer working conditions. Identifying health hazards A 2015 <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/nyregion/at-nail-salons-in-nyc-manicurists-are-underpaid-and-unprotected.html">New York Times exposé</a> highlighted underpayment and poor working conditions in New York nail salons. However, it failed to address chemical exposures that salon workers experience daily. Several research groups have sought to <a href="https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2010.300099">characterize</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2012.755152">quantify</a> VOC exposures <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1353-0">in the nail salon environment</a>, using standard measurement techniques and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-007-9084-4">self-reported health surveys</a>. Their research shows that nail salon workers are exposed to higher levels of VOCs than they would typically be expected to encounter in most homes, occupations or urban environments. As a result, these workers frequently experience work-related health symptoms. Our study measured 10 VOCs, including the carcinogens <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.086">benzene and formaldehyde</a>. We found that VOC levels in the six salons where we monitored regularly exceeded common threshold levels for <a href="https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/atoz.cfm?list_type=alpha">odor and inhalation risk</a>. In some cases this posed a significant risk of cancer over a 20-year exposure period. Twenty workers answered questionnaires about their personal health. Among them, 70% reported some form of short-term health symptom related to their employment, while 40% reported multiple related symptoms. We worked closely with salon owners to enlist volunteer nail technicians to participate. Having owners’ support was instrumental, since it allowed salon workers to accurately report on their health and working conditions without fear of reprisal. Workers have participated in making groundbreaking policy change such as passing the SF <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HealthyNailSalon?src=hash">#HealthyNailSalon</a> Program Ordinance <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/EFCSRchat?src=hash">#EFCSRchat</a> Like working at an oil refinery Many people view cosmetology as a relatively safe profession, but it isn’t. We found that exposures to aromatic hydrocarbons like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes – collectively referred to as BTEX – resembled those previously reported in studies of <a href="https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Ambient-Air-Quality-Monitoring-in-Terms-of-Volatile-Singh-Ramteke/7089e7068ccb85bca9d05f36598e2b5fb92ae910">oil refinery workers</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10807031003670071">auto garage technicians</a>. Our results aren’t unique. A 2018 Iranian study found similar concentrations of benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylene in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-018-0213-x">Tehran beauty salons</a>. Another study conducted that year in Michigan found concentrations of toluene at <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1353-0">over 100 parts per billion</a>, which is roughly 30 times higher than <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/toluene.pdf">reported urban outdoor levels</a>. Regulation of this kind of workplace exposure has not kept pace with science. Many U.S. occupational safety and health exposure limits have not been updated <a href="https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2014/12/01/Can-OSHA-Update-the-PELs.aspx">for nearly 50 years</a>. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, readily acknowledges that many of its permissible exposure limits are “<a href="https://www.osha.gov/dsg/annotated-pels/">outdated and inadequate</a> for ensuring protection of worker health.” OSHA offers only guidance and recommendations for businesses, effectively shifting the burden of worker protection onto private industry. This is especially problematic in the nail salon industry, where over 90% of salons are small businesses that <a href="https://www.labor.ucla.edu/publication/nail-files/">employ fewer than 5 people</a> and do not have safety personnel on staff. Inadequate cosmetic product regulations and labeling requirements make it hard to know which products are actually safe. A 2012 study by the California Environmental Protection Agency found that 10 out of 12 nail products labeled “toluene free” still contained <a href="https://dtsc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2018/04/DTSC-Summary-of-Data-Findings-from-Testing-a-Limited-Number-of-Nail-Products-April-2012.pdf">up to 17% toluene</a>. Products labeled free of the so-called “toxic three” ingredients – dibutyl phthalate or DBP, toluene and formaldehyde – actually contained <a href="https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/nailsalons/chemicalhazards.html#resources">greater concentrations of DBP</a>, an endocrine-disrupting compound, than products that made no claims at all. Solving the problem Owners often work in nail salons, so they generally support efforts to improve air quality inside their businesses. Those who we interviewed typically had some understanding of the problem and wanted to fix it, but didn’t always know how. The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/nailsalonguide.pdf">U.S. Environmental Protection Agency</a>, the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/99-112/pdfs/99-112.pdf?id=10.26616/NIOSHPUB99112">National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health</a> and <a href="https://www.osha.gov/Publications/3542nail-salon-workers-guide.pdf">OSHA</a> all publish healthy nail salon guides. Yet owners in our study had never heard of them – perhaps because the guides are only published in English, while many nail salon workers are Asian and Latino immigrants with limited English language skills. Several grassroots community organizations have published guides to improving salons’ air quality in both <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5783e9b9be6594e480435ffe/t/58f447f903596ebd7ca8f6f3/1492404219566/Nail-Salon-Booklet-FINAL-Vietnamese-March-26-2014-adjusted-for-color-copier-and-single-pages.pdf">Vietnamese</a> and <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5783e9b9be6594e480435ffe/t/58f447e386e6c023e6aff51c/1492404197241/Chinese-FINAL-Version-2-2012.pdf">Chinese</a>. These references discuss ventilation and use of personal protective equipment, which are paramount for mitigating chemical exposures in the workplace. Small changes, such as running ventilation continuously, wearing <a href="http://safety-zone.com/products/nitrile-gloves/">nitrile gloves</a>and utilizing proper <a href="https://www.firstaidglobal.com/product-page/carbon-filter-masks-n95-with-exhalation-valve">charcoal face masks</a>, can significantly reduce worker exposure. Results from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106499">our most recent study</a> also suggest that placing large activated carbon sinks in salons could effectively remove VOCs from the air. We are currently experimenting with embedding these chemical-absorbing materials into <a href="https://cen.acs.org/environment/pollution/Environmental-engineer-Lupita-Montoya-scrutinizes/97/i32">pieces of art</a> that can hang on salon walls. Another priority is conveying information to larger audiences and advocating for more safety training in cosmetology certification programs. Education and training are particularly important for ethnic minority groups. Many workplace standards enforced by OSHA, such as those regulating exposure to toxic and hazardous substances, <a href="https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/nailsalons/standards.html">apply to nail salons</a>. However, cosmetic manufacturers are <a href="https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/fda-authority-over-cosmetics-how-cosmetics-are-not-fda-approved-are-fda-regulated#Who_is_responsible">not required</a> to obtain federal approval for products or ingredients before they go on the market, or to file product information with the agency. In contrast, California passed a bill in 2018 that will require manufacturers to <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB2775">provide ingredient labels</a> on any professional cosmetic products manufactured after July 1, 2020 and sold in the state. The campaign for this common-sense reform was largely led by advocacy groups like the <a href="https://cahealthynailsalons.org/">California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative</a>. Practical steps like this can improve conditions for workers who receive little attention but are exposed to serious health risks on the job every day. Written by Lupita D. Montoya and Aaron Lamplugh. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/nail-salon-workers-suffer-chemical-exposures-that-can-be-like-working-at-a-garage-or-a-refinery-118152">The Conversation.</a>

Beauty & Style

Should we be worried that the chemicals from sunscreen can get into our blood?

A <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2733085#graphical-abstract-tab">recent study</a> published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) has attracted <a href="https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/health/study-finds-sunscreen-chemicals-leach-into-bloodstream-within-a-day-ng-b881191385z">widespread media attention</a> after it found chemicals contained in sunscreen could get into people’s bloodstreams: A <a href="https://www.nps.org.au/australian-prescriber/articles/sunscreens">variety of different chemicals</a> in sunscreen are used to absorb or scatter UV light – both long wavelength (UVA) and short wavelength (UVB) – to protect us from the harmful effects of the Sun. But while small amounts of these chemicals may enter the bloodsteam, there is no evidence they are harmful. Ultimately, using sunscreen <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21135266">reduces your risk of skin cancer</a>, and this study gives us no reason to stop using it. Why was the study done? The US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) recently updated its <a href="https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm473464.pdf">guidelines on sunscreen safety</a>. The guidelines indicate that if long-term users were likely to have a plasma concentration of greater than 0.5 nanograms per millilitre of blood, further safety studies would need to be undertaken. This level is just a trigger for investigation; it does not indicate whether the chemical has any actual toxic effect. The <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2733085#graphical-abstract-tab">JAMA study</a> was done to determine whether commonly used sunscreen compounds exceeded these limits, which would indicate that further safety studies were required under the new guidelines. So what did the study do? The study looked at the absorption of some common organic sunscreen ingredients (<a href="https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/51040">avobenzone</a>, <a href="https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4632">oxybenzone</a>, <a href="https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/22571">octocrylene</a>, and <a href="https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ecamsule">ecamsule</a>), in 24 healthy participants after they applied four commercially available sunscreen formulations. Each formulation contained three of the four organic sunscreen ingredients listed above. The concentrations of each individual compound were typical of commercial sunscreens and well within the permitted levels. For example, they all contained 3% avobenzone, and the <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/book/9-permitted-ingredients">maximum permitted concentration</a> is 5%. The researchers split the participants into four groups: two groups used a spray, one used cream, and the other used a lotion. The participants applied their assigned product to 75% of their body four times a day, for four days. The researchers then examined the absorption of these compounds by measuring participants’ blood over seven days using highly sensitive tests. What did they find? In all subjects, the blood levels of the sunscreen chemicals rapidly rose above the FDA guidance levels regardless of the sunscreen formulation (spray, lotion or cream). The levels remained above the FDA guidance levels for at least two days. But the conditions of the test were extreme. Some 75% of body surface was covered, and the sunscreen was reapplied every two hours and under conditions where the compounds were unlikely to be broken down or removed (for example by swimming or sweating). This was deliberately a test of a worst-case scenario, as mandated by <a href="https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm473464.pdf">FDA guidelines</a> to determine whether safety testing was needed. Of course, going above the FDA guidance levels does not indicate there is a risk; only that evaluation is required. What about in Australia? Australia’s FDA-equivalent body uses the European Union’s “non-clinical” <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/ws-sg-index">guidelines</a> to evaluate sunscreens and ensure they are safe to use. The EU guidelines are based on <a href="https://www.nps.org.au/australian-prescriber/articles/sunscreens">several studies</a> which show the components of sunscreens are not poisonous or harmful to human health. Looking specifically at the chemical <a href="https://echa.europa.eu/registration-dossier/-/registered-dossier/14835/7/7/2">avobenzone</a>, the safety studies show no toxic effect or potential harm to human health, aside from a small risk of skin sensitivity. The level of avobenzone reported in the blood after regularly applying sunscreen, (around 4 nanograms per millilitre) is around 1,000 times lower than the threshold levels for <a href="https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/85861">harm to skin cells</a>. And the safety studies report no increased risk for cancer. European researchers have also investigated whether the chemicals in sunscreens can mimic the effects of the female sex hormone estrogen. They found the levels would have to be <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/opinions/sccnfp_opinions_97_04/sccp_out145_en.htm">100 times higher</a> than are absorbed during normal sunscreen use to have any effect. The bottom line This study found that under a worst case scenario, blood levels of organic sunscreen chemicals exceeded the FDA guidance threshold. Under more realistic use the levels will be even lower. But even under this worst case scenario, the levels are at least 100 times below the European Union’s safety threshold. Given the known safety margins and the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21135266">proven ability of sunscreen to prevent skin cancer</a>, there is no reason to avoid or reduce your sunscreen use. – Ian Musgrave Blind peer review The research check is a fair and reasonable summary and interpretation of the JAMA paper on the absorption of active sunscreen ingredients. It is worth noting that the reference to “extreme” conditions in which the research was conducted is correct, however, in terms of dose, it does align with the recommended level of use of sunscreen. That is, reapply every two hours and use 2mg per 1cm₂. A single “dose” is recommended at 5ml for each arm, leg, front torso, back and head and face, or 7 x 5 = 35ml. Four such doses suggest each subject would have applied 140ml of sunscreen each day; more than a full 110ml tube, which is a common package size for sunscreen in Australia. This is extremely unlikely to occur. Most people use half or less of the recommended dose per application, and few reapply. Even fewer do so four times in a day. Written by Terri Slevin. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/research-check-should-we-be-worried-that-the-chemicals-from-sunscreen-can-get-into-our-blood-116738">The Conversation.</a>

Travel Tips

Are common garden chemicals a health risk?

As the weather warms and days lengthen, your attention may be turning to that forgotten patch of your backyard. This week we’ve asked our experts to share <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/gardening-series-31530">the science behind gardening</a>. So grab a trowel and your green thumbs, and dig in. Gardening is good for your health, but it can pose some risks if you’re not careful. For example, you should use <a href="http://www.cancer.org.au/preventing-cancer/sun-protection/campaigns-and-events/slip-slop-slap-seek-slide.html">sensible protection against the sun</a> to prevent cancer, a significant cause of death in Australia. Gardening in Australia also requires, to varying degrees depending where in the country you are, pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers. There is an enormous number of agents with multiple formulations, depending on what you are doing, what plants you are tending, the size of your garden and the kind of soil. These garden treatments are designed to be specific and potent, so they can be applied less often and work (mostly) only on the things you want them to work on. All of them – even the “natural” ones such as sulfur dusts to control caterpillars and mildew – are chemicals, which means they have health risks. Regulation of chemicals While not perfect, gardening product safety is regulated in Australia. Let me introduce you to the <a href="http://apvma.gov.au/">Australian Veterinary Medicines and Pesticides Authority</a>. This body regulates pesticide (a substance that kills pests such as insects and weeds) and herbicide (a substance that kills only weeds) products sold in Australia. The AVPMA regularly reviews products for safety concerns, though the reviews may be decades apart. It co-ordinates with World Health Organisation bodies and its counterparts in Europe, Canada and the United States. Given the sheer number of compounds and formulations available, I can’t possibly cover the safety of all chemicals, or even all groups of chemicals. If you are concerned about a particular product, you can search the AVPMA site for the ingredients in a given pesticide, herbicide or fertiliser. This may be tricky, as some will not necessarily have a chemical name on them, just the trade name. However, most pesticides and herbicides from reputable companies should have a <a href="http://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/safety-and-prevention/health-and-safety-topics/material-safety-data-sheets">material safety data sheet</a> (MSDS) with them. This should give you the details you need to check through the AVPMA site. Pesticides There are three ways to deal with pests (well, four if you count laboriously picking them off your plants): repel, smother or poison them. All these can harm people if they are exposed to significant quantities. But in an urban garden, exposure to pesticides is typically small and of limited duration. Common smothering pesticides are oils such as petroleum oils used to control, say, leaf pests on citrus, or pests in a variety of other circumstances. If you apply these often, without gloves, you might get skin irritation; or <a href="https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search2/f?./temp/%7E3mAY3J:1">lung irritation</a> if you breath the spray in. So always follow the directions, which include wearing gloves and spraying so the wind doesn’t blow the spray back into your face. Modern poisoning insecticides include the <a href="http://apvma.gov.au/node/19186">pyrethrums</a> which are found naturally in some chrysanthemum flowers. Both the natural pyrethrum and synthetic pyrethroids have low toxicity to humans – <a href="http://apvma.gov.au/node/2760">particularly at the doses</a> found in garden products. Continuous use of pyrethroid insecticides <a href="http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/pyrethrins.pdf">has no health implications</a> for humans if instructions are followed. Neonicotinoids are synthetic insecticides that mimic nicotine, which is toxic to insects. These have a place in pest control if used thoughtfully and sparingly. Unlike pyrethroids, these insecticides target a pathway in the insect nervous system shared with humans, so could potentially harm us. When used as directed, <a href="http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/imidagen.html">poisoning should not occur</a> and animal studies suggest human exposure should not lead to <a href="http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/imidagen.html#study">significant health effects</a>. Neonicotinoids <a href="http://apvma.gov.au/node/12291">are toxic to bees</a>, although <a href="https://theconversation.com/neonicotinoids-linked-to-wild-bee-and-butterfly-declines-in-europe-and-us-63999">Australia has not had the big bee crash</a> seen in the US and parts of Europe. Chronic use of neonicotinoids in a human gardening population has not been assessed for long-term health effects, but a <a href="http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/advpub/2016/7/EHP515.acco.pdf">small study of agricultural workers</a> has shown no effect of chronic exposure. Another small study, however, suggests some association with memory loss. Herbicides Again, there is a bewildering variety of herbicides, depending on what weedy species is being targeted and how the weed is being killed. Right out of the gate is glyphosate, used for <a href="http://www.lawncareadvice.com.au/lawn-weeds/94-controlling-broadleaf-weeds.html">broadleaf weeds</a>. This chemical, commonly sold as Roundup, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/apr/21/glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic-pesticide-why-cities-use-it">caused some controversy</a> after the <a href="http://www.iarc.fr/en/about/index.php">International Agency for Research on Cancer</a> (IARC) concluded it was a probable human carcinogen. However, the IARC’s determination was based on only a small number of animal studies and didn’t include a number of animal studies where glyphosate did not cause cancer. It also said <a href="https://theconversation.com/council-workers-spraying-the-weed-killer-glyphosate-in-playgrounds-wont-hurt-your-children-54831">nothing about risk</a>; that is, what is the likelihood glyphosate would cause cancer at the concentrations humans are usually exposed to? The European Food Safety Authority and the AVPMA have evaluated the evidence and determined that <a href="http://apvma.gov.au/node/13891">under appropriate handling conditions</a> applicable to general backyard gardeners, there is no risk to humans. As a comparison, a homemade herbicide of salt, vinegar and soap that is claimed as a replacement for glyphosate is <a href="https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/06/06/homemade-herbicide-of-salt-vinegar-and-soap-more-expensive-and-toxic-than-glyphosate-in-roundup/">more toxic than glyphosate</a>. Another herbicide for woody weeds, like blackberry, is <a href="http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC34645">Triclopyr</a>. This can cause eye and skin irritation, but has no serious long-term health impacts if proper safety procedures are followed. Fertilisers There are many formulations and varieties of fertilisers depending on soil type and location (where I live is basically sand). Health risks are basically related to long-term inhalation of fine particles, which could cause breathing difficulties. Once again follow the safety instruction. Caveat Just because a given product is not, or minimally, toxic to humans, that does not mean you should apply it to your garden by the bucket load. Always apply any garden chemical with care and thought, using the right amount at the right time for the right purpose. Any agent you apply or spray can cause adverse reactions if you don’t use it as directed. Getting <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/gardening/stories/s2817126.htm">“organic” garlic and soap insecticide spray</a> in your eyes will hurt like billy-o, just like the latest you-beaut synthetic pyrethrum spray, even though both are pretty much non-toxic to humans. Inhaling dusts can irritate your lungs. Always make sure you are wearing gloves, apply sprays and dusts downwind and wear goggles if necessary. Always follow the directions. Written by Ian Musgrave. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-common-garden-chemicals-a-health-risk-65643">The Conversation</a>.

Home & Garden

How to create a chemical-free garden

Australia has some of the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/2ee3f4a1-f130-465b-9c7a-79373680a067/files/nlsaw-2nd-complete.pdf">most diverse wildlife</a> in the world. In fact, more than 90 per cent of our plant species are endemic to the country and 87 per cent of our mammals are found nowhere else in the world. However, unfortunately, we also have the worst record for vascular plant and mammal extinctions in the world. According to Australia’s biodiversity <a href="https://www.wilderness.org.au/articles/australias-biodiversity-summary">summary report</a>, we have sent 126 species of plants and animals out of existence in just 200 years. By adapting some simple conservation behaviours in your daily life, you can do your bit to look after the wildlife around you, starting from your very own backyard! Ian Darbyshire, the CEO of the Foundation for National Parks & Wildlife, shares some simple ways you can create a sustainable and eco-friendly garden, chemical-free. 1. Ditch the chemical sprays While chemical pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers seem to be the modern-day solution to your garden pest woes, they are actually filled with varying harsh substances that can cause unseen damage to surrounding wildlife and may not be the most sustainable option – especially in the long term. Think of it this way: When you spray to kill those “bad” bugs you also ending up killing “good” bugs too. A bird may then eat the poisoned bug and, over time (as they continue to consume these insects), the poison builds up in their body, which may later cause the bird to become sick or die. When toxins build up in a food chain, also known as bioaccumulation, it can throw your garden's ecosystem out of balance. The best way to minimise the migration of these toxic chemicals into our natural environment is to reduce or eliminate their use. Darbyshire suggests opting for organic pest controls and natural fertilisers. 2. Attract the right insects There are a number of insects that can help create a balanced garden. Darbyshire encourages gardeners to welcome the harmless, natural predators of pests. “If you attract the right insects they will feed on the insects that you don’t want in your garden… You can put nest boxes in and [plant] some native trees to attract some of the birds that will eat the unwanted insects as well. So you can actually create quite a nice ecosystem in your back garden that looks after itself,” says Darbyshire. Ladybirds, lacewings and hoverflies feed on bugs such as aphids and these friendlier insects are able to thrive when you step away from pesticide use. Darbyshire says that these tiny critters can also be encouraged by purchasing their eggs and placing them in your garden. Introducing these species will take some time, patience and a bit of research, but the end results will speak for themselves! The Backyard Buddies <a href="http://www.backyardbuddies.org.au/">website</a> is a good place to start. 3. Plant smart Darbyshire says that you need to plan carefully when introducing plants and the best way to help out the local ecosystem is by opting for plants that are indigenous to your area. “Some plants work well together where the leaf-fall from one plant might be the nutrient for another plant. So again, put some native species in, understand the native species that suit your area – councils are usually very good at telling you that – and you’ll find that you don’t need to start putting so much help into the garden. It will start to look after itself.” But what about weeds? “There are some pretty noxious weeds that have moved into Australia. And if you do have to use chemicals, what I would advise is (and this is what I do for myself) is to just apply a gel to the leaf to kill the roots rather than spraying, which damages native plants as well as the ones you are trying to get rid of,” says Darbyshire. 4. Mulching and composting Another alternative to chemical fertilisers is using mulch, which can organically be made from leaf litter of deciduous trees. Mulching helps keep soil moist and its temperature constant while adding a nutrient-rich fertiliser for your plant’s sustained health. “So rather than applying lots of nitrates, let the ground recover by applying organic mulch,” says Darbyshire. “You can actually produce your own through composting. That is actually the best way of feeding plants in your back garden.” Not only that, it can save water as well as suppress weed growth – bonus! How have you attracted birds into your garden? Share your tips below. Written by Maria Angela Parajo. Republished with permission of <a href="https://www.wyza.com.au/articles/lifestyle/wyza-life/how-to-create-a-chemical-free-garden.aspx">Wyza.com.au</a>.

Home & Garden

Tests reveal the “very dangerous” chemical found in Aussie alcohol recall

Last month, Food Standards Australia <a rel="noopener" href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/urgent-alcohol-recall-warning-issued-over-contamination-fears-in-popular-brands" target="_blank">recalled</a> eight different brands of spirits distributed by GJ Wholesale due to possible contamination. Now, the NSW Food Authority has revealed that the “very dangerous” chemical in the products is tert-butanol. “Tert-butanol is a foul smelling and foul tasting denaturant which is added to ethanol to make it unfit to drink,” a spokesperson for the authority told <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.9news.com.au/2018/10/04/18/10/recalled-alcoholic-drinks-contained-dangerous-chemical-substance-say-food-safety-experts" target="_blank">nine.com.au </a> “Tert-butanol is also a very dangerous product in its own right.” The symptoms of consuming tert-butanol include vomiting, nausea and headaches according to the World Health Organisation, reports nine.com.au. The recalled brands are 700ml bottles of Veruschka Vodka, Mississippi Bourbon, Los Cabos Tequila, Yachtsman White Rum, Mudgee Rum, Barman’s Choice Whisky, Hunters Brandy and Her Choice Gin. All brands include a label that states, “Supplied to and bottled in Australia for GJ Wholesale.” The spokesman said the NSW Food Authority and the Australian Tax Authority would be investigating if enforcement action will be carried out. If you’ve purchased any of the recalled products, you can return the product and receive a full refund. For further information, customers are advised to contact GJ Wholesale on 0411 150 254, and if you’ve consumed these spirits recently, please seek medical advice.

Legal

How to reduce your exposure to chemicals

Dr Libby is a nutritional biochemist, best-selling author and speaker. Q: I've recently become aware of just how many chemicals we're exposed to on a daily basis. I would like to reduce this for my health and the health of my family, particularly my children. Your thoughts on this are appreciated. A: It is unknown exactly how many synthetic chemicals exist in the world today, but the Chemical Abstracts (CAS) Registry currently lists more than 100 million chemicals, most of which are not tested for long-term human safety. Chemical overexposure has been linked to developmental issues, obesity and many global diseases as a whole. The World Health Organisation estimates that 4.9 million deaths and a quarter of total disease burden can be attributed to "modifiable environmental factors". Furthermore, when your liver is burdened from trying to process foreign chemicals, it can contribute to weight gain, fatigue, food intolerances, reproductive issues and other conditions such as chronic fatigue syndrome. However, there are some simple steps you can take today to start reducing your chemical load: <ul> <li>Buy organic produce where possible and/or shop at local farmers' markets as you can often pick up spray-free produce. I know organic can be more expensive, but if you switch a few items per week to organic on your shopping list it can make a difference. Re-evaluate your budget, and see if you could reprioritise some of your expenses to include more organic produce.</li> <li>Eat foods with ingredients you would find in nature. If a food item has ingredients/additives you cannot pronounce, your body likely cannot deal with it either.</li> <li>Switch to natural cleaning products. We are fortunate to live in a time where there are conscious companies creating great quality eco-friendly cleaning products, which are better for you and the planet. Many are high quality too, so you won't need to use as much to achieve great results, thereby making it just as cost effective.</li> <li>Switch to natural body care and make-up where possible. If that is overwhelming, try starting with lipstick.</li> <li>Take your shoes off before entering the house – our shoes can accumulate synthetic chemicals, which are best left off the carpets and outside the home.</li> <li>Use reusable BPA free water bottles and BPA free tinned food (if you use tins).</li> <li>At home, store things in glass rather than plastic.</li> <li>Never heat plastic. This means not putting it in the dishwasher, too.</li> </ul> Even if you commit to implementing just a few of the above points, it can help reduce your chemical load and positively impact your health in the long run. This is just a small snapshot of how synthetic chemicals can impact our health, but remember you are in a position to vote with your wallet for the type of future you want. The advice contained in this column is not intended to be a substitute for direct, personalised advice from a health professional. Join Dr Libby for her upcoming 'Sort Your Sleep' New Zealand tour, for more information or to purchase tickets visit <a href="http://drlibby.com/">drlibby.com</a> Written by Dr Libby Weaver. First appeared on <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/" target="_blank">Stuff.co.nz.</a> <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/"></a>

Body

8 things you didn’t know you could do with borax

Borax is one of those things that many people have heard of, but don’t know exactly what it is. And that’s a shame, because this chemical compound (also known as sodium borate) is incredibly useful around your home. Before we look at the many uses for borax, a caveat: there are conflicting reports about the safety of borax. Some <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0062-0004" target="_blank">studies</a> show “no signs of toxicity”, while others <a href="http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/recall-alert-rappel-avis/hc-sc/2016/59514a-eng.php" target="_blank">cite</a> a “potential to cause developmental and reproductive health issues”. While it would seem that a majority of sources classify the compound as safe, there are those that disagree. If you’re worried, be sure to do some research of your own so you feel comfortable. Bathroom <ul> <li>If your toilet isn’t looking its shiny white best, pour a cup of borax into the bowl – focusing on any stains that might be there – and leave it overnight. Give the bowl a gentle scrub with the toilet brush the next day and watch it gleam.</li> <li>If you run out of your favourite powdered cleanser, simply sprinkle a little borax onto a sponge and carry on.</li> </ul> Kitchen <ul> <li>Clogged drains? No Draino? Pour half a cup of borax down the offending drain, and then two cups of boiling water. After leaving it alone for 20-30 minutes, run the water for several minutes and your drains should be good as new.</li> <li>To lift stains from your sink, mix a cup of borax with ¼ cup of lemon juice into a paste. Rub the paste around your sink – concentrating on any stains – and then rinse away with warm water. This works well in bathroom sinks, too.</li> </ul> General household magic <ul> <li>To get rid of sticky residue left behind by stubborn labels, price stickers, or spilt glue, mix two parts borax together with one part water. Apply this mixture and rub the mess to lift it up.</li> <li>If you find the smell from your cat’s litter tray unbearable, simply mix a tablespoon or two of borax into the litter.</li> </ul> Garden <ul> <li>Every few years, sprinkle borax around the base of your apple tree (around a cup if you have a full-size tree, a few tablespoons if it’s only young). The minerals will help encourage fruit and seed development.</li> <li>Sprinkle on those pesky weeds that grow between pavers and stepping stones. But do not use in your garden beds or lawn because it will kill your plants.</li> </ul> Do you know of any other uses? Share your tips in the comments below.

Home & Garden

Toxic chemicals found in everyday products

In recent weeks, two major medical organisations in the US have issued warnings about toxic chemicals in the everyday products all around us. These unregulated substances, they say, are sometimes linked to breast and prostate cancer, genital deformities, obesity, diabetes and infertility. "Widespread exposure to toxic environmental chemicals threatens healthy human reproduction," the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics warned in a landmark statement last month. The federation is focusing on endocrine disrupters – chemicals that imitate sex hormones and often confuse the body – found in pesticides, plastics, shampoos and cosmetics, cash register receipts, food can linings, flame retardants and countless other products. "Exposure to toxic chemicals during pregnancy and lactation is ubiquitous," the organisation said. They said that most pregnant woman in America has at least 43 different chemical contaminants in her body, quoting a National Cancer Institute report finding that "to a disturbing extent babies are born 'pre-polluted.'" Experts from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the World Health Organisation, Britain's Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and similar groups have issued warning about this issue. "Emerging evidence ties endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure to two of the biggest public health threats facing society - diabetes and obesity," the Endocrine Society said. It added that "mounting evidence" also links endocrine disrupters to infertility, prostate cancer, undescended testicles, testicular cancer, breast cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer and neurological issues. There are around 80,000 chemicals in global commerce today, but only a tiny portion has been rigorously screened for safety. In the US, chemicals don’t need to be screened to go on the marketplace, with most assumed to be safe unless proven otherwise. Tracey J. Woodruff of the University of California, San Francisco told the New York Times, "It's frustrating to see the same story over and over. Animal studies, in vitro tests or early human studies show that chemical A causes adverse effects. The chemical industry says, 'Those are bad studies, show me the human evidence.' The human evidence takes years and requires that people get sick. We should not have to use the public as guinea pigs." Until governments legislated for better chemical safety, for now experts say that people should try to protect themselves, especially women who are pregnant or may become pregnant. Eating organic, reducing the use of plastics, avoiding flame-retardant couches and not handling cash register receipts are some of the recommendations. Source: New York Times Related links: <a href="/health/wellbeing/2015/05/riboflavin-helps-treat-migraines/"></a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/health/body/2015/11/what-makes-you-jump-when-you-fall-asleep/">What makes you jump as you fall asleep?</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/health/body/2015/11/what-makes-you-jump-when-you-fall-asleep/"></a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/health/body/2015/10/diabetic-baking-tips/">Baking tips for diabetics</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/health/body/2015/11/what-makes-you-jump-when-you-fall-asleep/"></a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/health/body/2015/11/healthy-foods-bad-for-you-in-large-quantities/">Healthy foods that you are bad for you in large quantities</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/health/body/2015/11/what-makes-you-jump-when-you-fall-asleep/"> </a>

News

Chemical-free cleaning: keep your home spic and span without the nasties

If you’re trying to cut back on the number or chemicals you’re exposed to on a daily basis, your home and more specifically your cleaning products are a great place to start the cull. If you’ve ever looked at the label on the back of your bathroom or kitchen cleanser, the number of unpronounceable ingredients can be a bit of a shock. Fortunately, it’s relatively easy to cut back on the chemicals while keeping your home spic and span. And the added the bonus? You’ll save some cash while you’re at it!The Bathroom When it comes to keeping the house clean, the bathroom is usually one of the places we hit with the harshest chemicals possible. Bleach, surface spray, bottles and tubes of things with heavy levels of blue dye, our weekly cleaning session exposes us to a significant level of nasties. To keep things clean and chemical free try mixing: One cup of white vinegar with one cup of water and five to 10 drops of essential oil (tea tree or citrus based blends work well). Pour into a spray bottle and use to clean surfaces. For the toilet, try half a cup baking soda, one-quarter of a cup white vinegar and 10 drops of tea-tree or peppermint oil. Mix and while it fizzes, apply to the bowl and scrub thoroughly.<a href="/lifestyle/at-home/2015/01/handy-uses-for-wipes/" target="_blank">Related link: 20 ingenious uses for wipes</a>The Kitchen Food preparation surfaces need to be kept clean and clear and usually require multiple daily cleanses.To clean benches mix: Half a cup vinegar with half a cup water and decent squeeze of lemon juice. Spritz over the bench and wipe down with chux or paper towel.To clean and disinfect chopping boards: Rub the surface with half a cut lemon before rinsing in hot water.If you need some serious bleaching power for any room, try mixing two cups of water, two tablespoons of liquid soap (castile or pure versions work the best) and 20 drops of tea-tree oil.The LaundryAmazingly, it is possible to go non-toxic and still ensure clean, fresh clothes! If you don’t want to go down the DIY route, you can switch to an eco laundry powder/softener that will be free from nasties like sulphates and bleaches. If you want to go DIY though, try soap nuts. These completely natural cleansers actually grow on trees! They are naturally rich in saponins (the compound found in soap) and when added to your washing machine, free dirt, grime and oil from fabric. All without the need for any chemicals!Fabric softener may make clothes smell delicious but it’s pretty much a cocktail of artifice. For a snuggly soft load, try making your own by mixing up a batch of white vinegar with 20 to 30 drops of essential oil. Add one-third of a cup to your load each time.Related links:<a href="/lifestyle/at-home/2015/01/dirty-home-items/" target="_blank">5 surprisingly dirty things in your house</a><a href="/lifestyle/at-home/2014/12/home-cleaning-tips/" target="_blank">10 amazing cleaning tips everyone should know</a><a href="/lifestyle/at-home/2014/10/how-to-homemade-laundry-powder-and-softener/" target="_blank">How to make homemade laundry powder</a>

Home & Garden

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Nearly 200 chemicals linked to cancer found in everyday food packaging

Cancer-causing chemicals found in Aussie tap water sparks safety concerns

Why a cold beer is best – chemically speaking

“We still have a problem”: One in five people in aged care treated with antipsychotics

No, sunscreen chemicals are not bleaching the Great Barrier Reef

Warning after child suffers horrific burn from everyday item

RECALL: Popular sunscreen pulled over cancer-causing chemical contamination

A chemical engineer explains: What makes pepper spray so intense? And is it a tear gas?

Nail salon workers suffer chemical exposures that can be like working at a garage or a refinery

Should we be worried that the chemicals from sunscreen can get into our blood?

Are common garden chemicals a health risk?

How to create a chemical-free garden

Tests reveal the “very dangerous” chemical found in Aussie alcohol recall

How to reduce your exposure to chemicals

8 things you didn’t know you could do with borax

Toxic chemicals found in everyday products

Chemical-free cleaning: keep your home spic and span without the nasties

Our Partners