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

General Discussion

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)

6. Reducing one hazard, largely due to smoking, should not create a hazard for all

Reply to Mugu (Reply #5)

Thu May 9, 2013, 01:20 PM

May 2013

Apparently the consumer protection people didn't talk to the environmental hazards people about the medical consequences of flame retardants used to meet the standard.

Probably the more flammable fabrics should have been prohibited, rather than being treated with chemicals.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Flame Retardants Linked to Lower IQs, Hyperactivity in Children [View all] FarCenter May 2013 OP

Holy crap! This isn't woo. it's from Scientific American. hedda_foil May 2013 #1

Last time I checked, flame retardants were standard in infant's clothes and bedding. LeftInTX May 2013 #2

Oh, I'm not touching this one! sofa king May 2013 #3

That's upsetting. Warren DeMontague May 2013 #4

It's been 15 or 20 years ago now. Mugu May 2013 #5

Reducing one hazard, largely due to smoking, should not create a hazard for all FarCenter May 2013 #6