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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LiberalArkie

(19,915 posts)
Wed Dec 18, 2024, 01:47 PM Dec 2024

Huge math error corrected in black plastic study; authors say it doesn't matter

DEC 16, 2024 4:23 PM



Editors of the environmental chemistry journal Chemosphere have posted an eye-catching correction to a study reporting toxic flame retardants from electronics wind up in some household products made of black plastic, including kitchen utensils. The study sparked a flurry of media reports a few weeks ago that urgently implored people to ditch their kitchen spatulas and spoons. Wirecutter even offered a buying guide for what to replace them with.

The correction, posted Sunday, will likely take some heat off the beleaguered utensils. The authors made a math error that put the estimated risk from kitchen utensils off by an order of magnitude.

Specifically, the authors estimated that if a kitchen utensil contained middling levels of a key toxic flame retardant (BDE-209), the utensil would transfer 34,700 nanograms of the contaminant a day based on regular use while cooking and serving hot food. The authors then compared that estimate to a reference level of BDE-209 considered safe by the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA's safe level is 7,000 ng—per kilogram of body weight—per day, and the authors used 60 kg as the adult weight (about 132 pounds) for their estimate. So, the safe EPA limit would be 7,000 multiplied by 60, yielding 420,000 ng per day. That's 12 times more than the estimated exposure of 34,700 ng per day.

However, the authors missed a zero and reported the EPA's safe limit as 42,000 ng per day for a 60 kg adult. The error made it seem like the estimated exposure was nearly at the safe limit, even though it was actually less than a tenth of the limit.

Snip

https://arstechnica.com/health/2024/12/huge-math-error-corrected-in-black-plastic-study-authors-say-it-doesnt-matter/

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Huge math error corrected in black plastic study; authors say it doesn't matter (Original Post) LiberalArkie Dec 2024 OP
Wonder what other slipshod mistakes they made ? MichMan Dec 2024 #1
I'll stick to my stainless steel one fromt he 1960's gay texan Dec 2024 #2
Who did peer-review for this study by "Toxic-Free Future"? Is peer-review just not a thing anymore? 0rganism Dec 2024 #3
Make the study fit the desired outcome Progressive dog Dec 2024 #4
it happens, people are fallible mike_c Dec 2024 #5
I avoid plastic of any sort VGNonly Dec 2024 #6

MichMan

(17,388 posts)
1. Wonder what other slipshod mistakes they made ?
Wed Dec 18, 2024, 01:57 PM
Dec 2024
While being off by an order of magnitude seems like a significant error, the authors don't seem to think it changes anything. "This calculation error does not affect the overall conclusion of the paper," the correction reads. The corrected study still ends by saying that the flame retardants "significantly contaminate" the plastic products, which have "high exposure potential."

0rganism

(25,709 posts)
3. Who did peer-review for this study by "Toxic-Free Future"? Is peer-review just not a thing anymore?
Wed Dec 18, 2024, 02:16 PM
Dec 2024

Clearly the post-truth world will take some getting-used-to. Does "Toxic-Free Future" have ties to makers of stainless steel cookware or perhaps RFK jr.? Oh well, innocent math error, right?

Progressive dog

(7,612 posts)
4. Make the study fit the desired outcome
Wed Dec 18, 2024, 02:58 PM
Dec 2024

is not science. I wouldn't trust their estimate of the exposure either.
I have a black plastic spatula that gets used a couple of times a week to avoid scratching a non-stick pan. I don't think I need to be worried.

mike_c

(37,130 posts)
5. it happens, people are fallible
Wed Dec 18, 2024, 03:08 PM
Dec 2024

That's one of the reasons for peer review. Still, errors will always happen occasionally.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Huge math error corrected...