Enviro agency may sue Apple following Greenpeace iPhone report

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 63
    PVC: Environmental health disaster

    PVC is the worst plastic from an environmental health

    perspective, posing major hazards in its manufacture, product

    life and disposal.

    Toxic Manufacturing Byproducts: Dioxin (the most

    potent carcinogen known), ethylene dichloride and vinyl

    chloride are unavoidably created in the production of PVC and

    can cause severe health problems, including:

    ? Cancer

    ? Endocrine disruption

    ? Endometriosis

    ? Neurological damage

    ? Birth defects & impaired child development

    ? Reproductive and immune system damage2

    In the US, PVC is manufactured predominantly near lowincome

    communities in Texas and Louisiana. The toxic impact

    of pollution from these factories on these communities has

    made them a focus of the environmental justice movement.

    Global impact: Dioxin?s impact doesn?t stop there. As a

    persistent bioaccumulative toxin (PBT), it does not breakdown

    rapidly and travels around the globe, accumulating in fat tissue

    and concentrating as it goes up the food chain. Dioxins from

    Louisiana manufacturing plants migrate on the winds and

    concentrate in Great Lakes fish. Dioxins are even found in

    hazardous concentrations in the tissues of whales and polar

    bears and in Inuit mother?s breast milk3.

    The dioxin exposure of the average American already poses a

    calculated risk of cancer of greater than 1 in 1,000 - thousands

    of times greater than the usual standard for acceptable risk.

    Most poignantly, dioxins concentrate in breast milk to the point

    that human infants now receive high doses, orders of

    magnitude greater than those of the average adult4.
  • Reply 62 of 63
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    This has zippo with the kind of plastics used in baby bottles. The concern was for bisphenol-A (BPA) leeching out of baby bootles under use. I note that BPA was not in the alphabet soup you listed. Nor is acytel tributyl citrate (ATBC)...the other plasticizer of potential concern in baby bottles.



    No, this has just about everything to do with baby bottles.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kasper View Post


    "Brominated compounds [were found] in half the samples, including in the phone's antenna, in which they made up 10 percent of the total weight of the flexible circuit board," the activist group said. "A mixture of toxic phthalates was found to make up 1.5 percent of the polyvinyl plastic (PVC) coating of the headphone cables."





    The concerns mentioned in the suit were about phthalates not any of mels other laundry list of alphabet soup chemicals. Phthalates are the softeners used in most flexible plastics including the PVC family. They are used in PVC baby bottles, just as they are in about any other type of flexible plastic - including the PVC that is on wiring insulation inside the iPhone. Problem with the suit is that the proposition 65 doesn't talk about phthalate regulation in PVC, it concerns itself with lead levels in PVC where PVC is directly mentioned.



    Hmmm, suing over something legal to use in a baby bottle*. Which comes into extended contact with food, food that goes directly into the intestinal tract for absorption? Compared to a headphone cable that sits outside the body. I think we have a bit of a mis-application of reading ability by the plantiff's legal team.



    * California just passed a law allowing phthalates in baby bottles and teething toys until 1 Jan 2009. Yes, those products are specifically called out in the legislation. New car smell phthalates will still be legal in CA. Do you think dashboards and floor mats will have more off-gassing than a set of iPhone headphone cables? And they are still legal.
  • Reply 63 of 63
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,576member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hiro View Post


    No, this has just about everything to do with baby bottles.









    The concerns mentioned in the suit were about phthalates not any of mels other laundry list of alphabet soup chemicals. Phthalates are the softeners used in most flexible plastics including the PVC family. They are used in PVC baby bottles, just as they are in about any other type of flexible plastic - including the PVC that is on wiring insulation inside the iPhone. Problem with the suit is that the proposition 65 doesn't talk about phthalate regulation in PVC, it concerns itself with lead levels in PVC where PVC is directly mentioned.



    Hmmm, suing over something legal to use in a baby bottle*. Which comes into extended contact with food, food that goes directly into the intestinal tract for absorption? Compared to a headphone cable that sits outside the body. I think we have a bit of a mis-application of reading ability by the plantiff's legal team.



    * California just passed a law allowing phthalates in baby bottles and teething toys until 1 Jan 2009. Yes, those products are specifically called out in the legislation. New car smell phthalates will still be legal in CA. Do you think dashboards and floor mats will have more off-gassing than a set of iPhone headphone cables? And they are still legal.



    What you are saying is very true. Of course, most responsible companies phase out these products as fast as they can after a regulation comes into effect, even though the date may be in the future. I think I already mentioned that.



    I'm totally against allowing dangerous chemicals into the environment, except for very rare circumstances, where the ingredient is required in a few critical products, and then only if the leeching is at very low levels, and when the products will be replaced after a short interval.



    We do have to be realistic.



    But many uses are frivolous, such as the smell treatments for cars. This should be banned right away. Sometimes, I think that they don't realize that babies travel in cars.



    But, my original post was merely in response to someone who claimed that labware was always glass, which is very much untrue.
Sign In or Register to comment.