The use of synthetic chemicals with the capacity to contain, stop or retard fires has grown rapidly in recent years to become one of the most profitable sectors of the chemical industry. The problem is that many of these materials or compounds (called fire or flame retardants) contain highly polluting and dangerous elements for human health.
In some cases, such as flame retardants with polychlorinated biphenyls, they have been banned or are subject to relatively strict regulations. Many other chemical products with this same fire-fighting purpose continue to be marketed, even in cases where there are suspicions about their danger. There are dozens of scientific studies on possible effects on human health of some flame retardants, although it is also true that some products are marketed with this category that seem safe for the environment and human health.
The most recent scientific contribution in this field, specifically on the presence of potentially dangerous flame retardant residues in animal tissues and organs, has been presented by the Green Science Policy Institute (GSPI), a private non-profit center. created in Berkeley (California, United States) in 2008 to study environmental problems such as pollution by synthetic chemicals.
The new GSPI study has been presented in the form of a world map in which the more than 150 species of animals in which the presence of significant amounts of flame retardant challenges have been detected are located.
"Contaminated wildlife includes orcas, red pandas, chimpanzees and other endangered species.
The authors of this study recall that products that are added to furniture, electronics, vehicles and other everyday products to meet flammability standards do not always fulfill their purpose and, on the contrary, migrate (detach) from the products. and reach the natural environment, wildlife and people.
"Flame retardants do not always make television sets and car interiors safer from fires, to give two examples where many of these chemicals are present, but their presence can harm people and animals, explains GSPI scientist Lydia Jahl.While these product flammability standards may seem protective at first glance, many cause widespread, long-lasting harm with no real benefit, Jahl says.
Flame retardants found in wildlife include both older phase-out chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), as well as newer replacement chemicals such as chlorinated paraffins and flame retardants. organophosphates. Although known to cause liver, thyroid and kidney cancers in laboratory animals, chlorinated paraffins are still commonly used in consumer products, with more than one million tons produced annually. Similarly, the use of organophosphate flame retardants is proliferating, although even low levels can harm AQ, attention, and memory in children.
Flame retardants accumulate in marine and terrestrial food chains with the highest levels in marine mammals and birds of prey. For example, PCB levels in killer whales have been linked to lower calf survival rates and weaker immune systems. Orca pods in Greenland, the Strait of Gibraltar and Hawaii have been devastated by the buildup of flame retardants. In fact, scientists estimate that PCB pollution could wipe out half of the world's killer whale populations over the next century. Even though PCBs have been banned since the 1970s.
Orcas should not swim in a sea contaminated with flame retardants and science is clear that these chemicals harm their development, as well as that of our children, said Arlene Blum, executive director of the GSPI. "We need to update ineffective flammability standards to prevent these toxics from entering the environment, wild animals and us," proposes this co-author of the study.
Species that have been shown to be harmed by the increasing use of chlorinated paraffins in products include frogs living near e-waste facilities in China. These chemicals are linked to shrinking livers in frogs and can also be transferred to their eggs.
Flame retardants are also found in species living in areas far from their production, use and disposal, showing their potential for long-range transport. For example, high levels of flame retardants have been detected in chimpanzees in a protected Ugandan National Park.
The authors indicate that some products that were confirmed as harmful have been replaced by others that do not appear to be safer, although there are still no studies that require their ban. The map now presented "illustrates the global consequences of repeatedly replacing harmful flame retardants with others that turn out to be equally harmful," said Lydia Jahl.
The first flame retardants with polychlorinated biphenyls were banned in the US in 1977 when they were discovered to be toxic3, and internationally since 2001.4 Subsequently, in 2004 the European Union began banning some brominated flame retardants, expanding the restrictions again in 2008. Its toxicity occurs especially in the event of fire, since its mechanism of action involves the release of hydrochloric acid.
Since 2004, the European Union has sponsored numerous scientific studies to evaluate the toxicity of brominated flame retardants and search for alternatives with a lower ecological impact.678. Simultaneously, multiple international organizations, such as the EFSA in the European Union and the EPA and FDA in the United States, have carried out complementary studies and proposed additional restrictions on the use of compounds with flame retardants, placing special emphasis on materials, such as cables electric, used in places of large public flow
