Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMy Toxic Couch’s Days Are Numbered: New Furniture Flammability Standard Proposed
This all started with a nearly 40-year-old California regulation known as Technical Bulletin 117 (TB117) that requires furniture to meet a strict flammability standard using an open flame test on the foam. The easiest and cheapest way to apply the standard has been to douse the foam with flame retardants, resulting in pounds of toxic and untested chemicals in most every piece of upholstered furniture sold today. But the problem with the current standard is that fires dont start in the foam but on the outer covering, often times by cigarettes left smoldering on furniture fabric. Even worse, TB117 has been shown to provide no real benefit in a fire. In fact, furniture treated with flame retardants doesnt burn any slower and the smoke and gases released from the fire are actually more toxic, putting firefighters health at greater risk for cancer.
In addition to being ineffective, many flame retardant chemicals have been shown to be harmful to human health and the environment. The widespread use of flame retardants has resulted in widespread exposure in humans. Most Americans carry much higher levels of these chemicals in their bodies than anyone else in the world and children in California contain some of the highest levels ever measured.
But flame retardants arent just polluting our homesthey are polluting the world, literally. During manufacturing, use and disposal, these chemicals are released into the environment where they can be found in air, water, and wildlife. Birds, fish, mammals including whales and dolphins and animals living far from sources of exposure, such as polar bears in the Arctic, have been found to have flame retardants in their bodies.
...
A revised furniture flammability standard TB 117-2013 was recently proposed for public comment. This new standard is smolder test of the furniture fabric and will provide better fire safety by addressing the most common cause of fires in furniture cigarettes at the place a fire would start the outside covering. It will also mean that no chemicals will need to be used to meet the new standard 85 percent of fabric coverings already meet the standard!
In addition to being ineffective, many flame retardant chemicals have been shown to be harmful to human health and the environment. The widespread use of flame retardants has resulted in widespread exposure in humans. Most Americans carry much higher levels of these chemicals in their bodies than anyone else in the world and children in California contain some of the highest levels ever measured.
But flame retardants arent just polluting our homesthey are polluting the world, literally. During manufacturing, use and disposal, these chemicals are released into the environment where they can be found in air, water, and wildlife. Birds, fish, mammals including whales and dolphins and animals living far from sources of exposure, such as polar bears in the Arctic, have been found to have flame retardants in their bodies.
...
A revised furniture flammability standard TB 117-2013 was recently proposed for public comment. This new standard is smolder test of the furniture fabric and will provide better fire safety by addressing the most common cause of fires in furniture cigarettes at the place a fire would start the outside covering. It will also mean that no chemicals will need to be used to meet the new standard 85 percent of fabric coverings already meet the standard!
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/02/11/my-toxic-couchs-days-are-numbered-new-furniture-flammability-standard-proposed/
People who accept the health risks of smoking should also accept the fire risks. We should not poison the rest of the people with ill advised regulations to protect them from themselves.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 610 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
My Toxic Couch’s Days Are Numbered: New Furniture Flammability Standard Proposed (Original Post)
FarCenter
Feb 2013
OP
MADem
(135,425 posts)1. I don't care for your "either-or" conclusion at the bottom.
People who accept the health risks of smoking should also accept the fire risks. We should not poison the rest of the people with ill advised regulations to protect them from themselves.
What about the non-smoking children and adults in the house/hotel/duplex/apartment building? Must they just "suck it up?"
We live in a world where not everyone lives in a single-family home, alone, with perhaps one other non-smoker, who will never invite a drunken smoker to crash on their couch rather than drive while intoxicated.
If there is a way to reduce toxicity in furnishings I am all for it--I just can't get behind your logic at the end. Hell, my furniture is not "fireproofed"--it is old as the hills and has been handed down for several generations; about the only way we're like the Royal Family is that we don't have to buy our own furniture, either!
These rules aren't designed to protect the clever and conscientious non-smoker. They're geared to the lowest common denominator.
What about the non-smoking children and adults in the house/hotel/duplex/apartment building? Must they just "suck it up?"
We live in a world where not everyone lives in a single-family home, alone, with perhaps one other non-smoker, who will never invite a drunken smoker to crash on their couch rather than drive while intoxicated.
If there is a way to reduce toxicity in furnishings I am all for it--I just can't get behind your logic at the end. Hell, my furniture is not "fireproofed"--it is old as the hills and has been handed down for several generations; about the only way we're like the Royal Family is that we don't have to buy our own furniture, either!
These rules aren't designed to protect the clever and conscientious non-smoker. They're geared to the lowest common denominator.