Thank you for this link. Please note that choir directors have often banned the use of scents due to the constrictions it causes in the respiratory system, affecting the quality of vocal performances for singers. Bronchial constriction has been known as a common side effect of some synthetic fragrance ingredients and athletes should certainly avoid using products unless all the ingredients are known. Full disclosure is of the utmost importance in consumer safety – everyone ought to have the right to choose the best products for their needs and with consideration of their neighbors needs as well.

Barb Rubin

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/ban-scented-products-in-the-olypmics-and-affiliated-org.html

The term ‘Green’ is really limited to sustainability issues and that’s important. However, it doesn’t make ‘green’ products and services necessarily compatible with biochemistry. We’ll be needing to find that balance ourselves through full disclosure practices which allow informed citizens to educate consumers as to where to invest their consumer dollars.

It’s important to realize that legislative processes may take thirty years to obtain a ban on a particular chemical, by which time many thousands of new and similar products will have been marketed. The substitute for the ‘popcorn lung’ chemicals is apparently no better than its predecessor. How many will know that?

Establishing consumers as part of the ‘trade’ contract is the first goal since secrecy in use and contents violates a cardinal rule in which all parties ought to know the terms of sale. This means answering the questions:

-What am I getting for my money?
-What did someone else get for THEIR money and took me along on the consumer ride?

Every town clerk’s office should have a registry of pesticide applications being made in the area. Currently, only EPA gets notified of the use of restricted use chemicals and no one is required to ever hear about the items used which don’t require a license to buy or utilize. If all properties over a certain size (increasing risks of drift) and businesses were required to list such activity in a non-punitive fashion, others could make informed decisions about whether to own property in the area, work in particular facilities etc. Exposure histories would be available to doctors and so forth.

We also have to realize that the addition of fragrance chemicals to toxicants is normal procedure to reduce or eradicate awareness of their use. That is an issue for legislation! We mustn’t be lulled into a false sense of security because of ‘good smells’. These don’t alter fumes being emitted from application sources but do alter our ability to detect them. As with natural gas and other odorless poisons, some recognizable scent tag should be associated with any poison. This would permit people to recognize that ‘low odor’ paints, pesticides and sealants aren’t necessarily safer and that re-entry times (“When the odor has dissipated), have no real basis in fact for such advice.

Personally, it would be important to find out which chemicals are in use and then test nearby dwellings for drift using a reputable laboratory. Pediatricians MUST lobby for proper medical surveillance of exposure for their patients with health problems, currently impossible to do for the most frequently used agricultural products. There are no pesticides invented just for non-farm uses and this is another area of research and development that we must demand of industry.

Barb Rubin

Barbara Rubin