Chemicals in everyday products present health threats?

Poli-substances and perfluoralulcil substances, or PFAS, are substances used to keep the pizza boxes implacable even when oiled. This appointment may be well known while Dupont banned a chemical type a few years ago because it was related to cancer.

Subsequent replacements of this chemical, however, also have toxic qualities according to a study published in the Environmental Health Perspectives of Linda S. Birnbaum from National Institute of Environmental Health and National Tobacco Programme and Philip Grande, from Harvard School of Public Health.

PFAS makes products resistant to high temperatures, apparently increasing their longevity and sustainability. They are used in water and oilwards, as well as consumer products such as cosmetics, furniture and food ambalmage.

Chemicals have been detected in the circulation of blood to a large part of the population because of their widespread use and are said to remain there for long periods of time, though low.

Birnbaum and Grandjean's study confirmed that all PFAS chains used in these products are harmful -- not only the pre-restricted types of long chains.

“Hulum is required to find safe alternatives for all PFAS current uses,” writes the authors.

The question is, should these chemicals continue to be used in consumer products in the meantime, given their presence in the environment? And, in the absence of extremely safe alternatives, are consumers willing to give up certain product functions, such as the resistance to stains, to protect themselves from potential health risks?”

These concerns cannot be solved only by science, but should be considered in an open and informed discussion by scientific evidence”, authors added.

Not everyone agrees. Companies that produce using PFAS insists that the open alternatives are secure. Dupont head of risk management for the chemical production division, Thomas H. Samples, strongly contradicts scientists' concerns: “We do not reject people's right to contest this”, Samples told New York Times.

But we just believe that based on the 10-year history of extensive research on alternatives, that regulatory agencies have made their job determine that these things are safe for their intended use. ”

Prof. Thomas F. Webster from the Boston University School of Public Health was also declared for NYT: “It is possible that PFAS will have certain health effects, only it may take some time to understand what they are. It may take 5 or 10 years to do the research. ”