About ToxicTrailers.com

ToxicTrailers.com is dedicated to providing information about formaldehyde poisoning, and advocating effective government regulations. The government spent more than $2 billion on FEMA trailers with hazardous levels of formaldehyde, and then dumped more than 103,000 former FEMA trailers known to be toxic on the market. The FEMA trailer tragedy exposed what is a widespread problem in RVs, mobile homes, modular buildings and even conventional buildings. If you are having burning eyes, congestion, sore throat, coughing, breathing difficulties, frequent sinus infections or rashes, and difficulties concentrating, you may have a formaldehyde problem. For questions or to share your story, write 4becky@cox.net.
Plywood made with Soyad, soy-based alternative too formaldehyde glue, is available at Home Depot at no extra cost.

Friday, September 12, 2014

Help wash formaldehyde off babies

Jim Hightower says it really well in this new article, Help wash formaldehyde off babies Posted: Thursday, September 11, 2014 1:00 pm In the U.S. alone, the cosmetics industry pulls in some $70 billion a year in sales of what's commonly called “makeup.” But lipstick, blush, mascara, etc. are not the only kind of makeup the cosmetic giants are peddling. For years, their lobbyists, lawyers and PR agents have been making up facts, stories, half-truths and whole lies to keep lawmakers and regulators from banning various cancer-causing, hormone-disrupting and otherwise destructive ingredients that their products contain. One especially nasty example of this is the continuing campaign by L'Oreal, Revlon and the industry's Personal Care Products Council to keep allowing formaldehyde in everything from baby wipes to hair straighteners. Back in 1981, the National Toxicology Program, an interagency scientific panel, first listed this noxious chemical as a likely human carcinogen. A volcano of outrage erupted from cosmetic makers, which buried the NTP findings in a suffocating ash pile of denials, attacks and false facts. But the toxicologists, pushed by consumer and environmental groups, kept doing even deeper research, and in 2011, NTP listed formaldehyde as “known to be a human carcinogen.” That should have been that, but corporate lobbyists got their congressional puppets to stall, making up more lies to assail NTP for flawed research and for interfering in private business. However, the prestigious National Academy of Science has been reviewing that research and has now unequivocally endorsed NTP's findings – even adding that new research shows that formaldehyde may cause a much wider array of cancers than previously known. So, after 33 years, the health of babies finally wins one over cosmetic profiteers, right? Not quite yet. Incredibly, the products of Revlon and L'Oreal still contain cancer-causing formaldehyde, and both of the greed-headed giants continue to balk at necessary reforms. http://www.stwnewspress.com/opinion/columns/article_7af566fe-3965-11e4-a915-5324a5291cea.html

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

NAS agrees formaldehyde causes cancer

Good story below from Center for PUblic Integrity: http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/08/08/15224/national-academy-sciences-agrees-epa-formaldehyde-causes-cancer. For years, the chemical industry has been winning a political battle to keep formaldehyde from being declared a known carcinogen. The industry’s chief lobby group, the American Chemistry Council, has persuaded members of Congress that the findings of both the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health and Human Services were wrong and should be reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences. In 2011, the academy did indeed criticize the EPA’s report on formaldehyde for being unclear. The chemical industry then used that critique to delay dozens of other ongoing evaluations of potentially toxic chemicals. But on Friday, the academy issued a second report, which found in effect that government scientists were right all along when they concluded that formaldehyde can cause three rare forms of cancer. “We are perplexed as to why today’s report differs so greatly from the 2011” report, Cal Dooley, president and chief executive officer of the American Chemistry Council, said in a statement titled “The Safety of Formaldehyde is Well-Studied and Supported by Robust Science.” Part of the disparity is that in the 2011 report, Congress asked the academy only to critique the EPA’s draft assessment rather than evaluate the dangers of formaldehyde itself. The panel concluded that the EPA’s report was too long, repetitive and lacked explanation. But after reviewing the scientific evidence itself, the academy concluded on Friday that formaldehyde is indeed a known carcinogen. Formaldehyde is widely used in wood products and clothing. In a blog posting, Jennifer Sass, a scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, called the American Chemistry Council’s efforts “a vicious attack on government scientific assessments [meant] to distort and discredit any evidence linking toxic chemicals to diseases, disabilities or death.” Using the academy to review any negative findings from the EPA has become common tactic of the chemical industry. The Center for Public Integrity reported in June that Rep. Mike Simpson, a Republican from Idaho, got the EPA to turn its negative assessment of arsenic over to the academy. At the same time, Congress also insisted that the EPA redo all ongoing assessments to address the criticisms of the 2011 formaldehyde review. Forty-seven assessments are affected. The American Chemistry Council said in its statement that the academy “misses an opportunity to advance the science.” Richard Denison, a scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund, countered: “One can only hope that this sorry episode and waste of public resources will help to expose the narrow self-interest of the industry, which for years it has deceptively sought to wrap in the mantle of sound science.” Note: These three cancers are just the tip of the iceberg. In the FEMA trailers we saw many different types of cancer, breathing difficulties, increases in asthma and significant learning disabilities in children.

Friday, July 25, 2014

Lumber Liquidators flooring emits formaldehyde 100 times higher than CA standards

These recent tests show that total lack of enforcement of formaldehyde standards in the U.S. It is too bad that the only thing that seems to make manufacturers do the right thing is lawsuits like this. Global Community Monitor: Lumber Liquidators flooring emits hazardous levels of formaldehyde Lawsuit: Products from Chinese factories emit toxic gas in excess of 100 times CA standards OAKLAND, Calif., July 23, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- In the latest environmental black eye for Lumber Liquidators, independent lab tests show that Chinese-made flooring sold by the chain emits formaldehyde at levels far above the level requiring cancer warnings under California law, according to a lawsuit filed today by Global Community Monitor. Lumber Liquidators LL +0.15% claims on its websitethat all of its flooring comes from mills certified as compliant with California's standards for formaldehyde. Plaintiffs conducted more than 50 tests of Lumber Liquidators' Chinese-made laminate flooring, using a variety of different testing methods and sample batches. Test results showed average initial formaldehyde exposures over 100 times above the amount allowed to be sold without a warning label under Proposition 65, California's main toxics law. Formaldehyde is a common ingredient in the glue used in laminate flooring and other pressed-wood products, including those sold by Lumber Liquidators. During and after installation, it is released as a gas that causes burning eyes, nose and throat irritation, coughing, headaches, dizziness, joint pain and nausea. At long-term exposure, formaldehyde is listed as a known cause of cancer in humans by both the federal government and the State of California. Proposition 65 requires products containing chemicals that cause cancer to carry a warning label if the levels exceed the so-called "safe harbor" level. But none of the Lumber Liquidators samples tested had a warning label on the box, none of the stores where samples were purchased had a Proposition 65 warning, and no warnings were provided at the time of purchase over the internet. "The levels of formaldehyde our tests found in Lumber Liquidators' laminate flooring are astounding and alarming," said Denny Larson, executive director of Global Community Monitor . "It's unconscionable that Lumber Liquidators would sell this product to customers to install in their homes without informing families of the potential health risks involved, especially since they make a point of bragging about how environmentally safe it is." http://www.marketwatch.com/story/global-community-monitor-lumber-liquidators-flooring-emits-hazardous-levels-of-formaldehyde-2014-07-23