The same University of Washington researcher who used chemical sleuthing to deduce what’s in fragranced consumer products now has turned her attention to the scented air wafting from household laundry vents.

Findings, published online this week in the journal Air Quality, Atmosphere and Health, show that air vented from machines using the top-selling scented liquid laundry detergent and scented dryer sheet contains hazardous chemicals, including two that are classified as carcinogens.

“This is an interesting source of pollution because emissions from dryer vents are essentially unregulated and unmonitored,” said lead author Anne Steinemann, a UW professor of civil and environmental engineering and of public affairs. “If they’re coming out of a smokestack or tail pipe, they’re regulated, but if they’re coming out of a dryer vent, they’re not.”

The research builds on earlier work that looked at what chemicals are released by laundry products, air fresheners, cleaners, lotions and other fragranced consumer products. Manufacturers are not required to disclose the ingredients used in fragrances, or in laundry products.

For the new study, which focuses on chemicals emitted through laundry vents, researchers first purchased and pre-rinsed new, organic cotton towels. They asked two homeowners to volunteer their washers and dryers, cleaned the inside of the machines with vinegar, and ran full cycles using only water to eliminate as much residue as possible.

At the first home, they ran a regular laundry cycle and analyzed the vent fumes for three cases: once with no products, once with the leading brand of scented liquid laundry detergent, and finally with both the detergent and a leading brand of scented dryer sheets. A canister placed inside the dryer vent opening captured the exhaust 15 minutes into each drying cycle. Researchers then repeated the procedure with a different washer and dryer at a second home.

Analysis of the captured gases found more than 25 volatile organic compounds, including seven hazardous air pollutants, coming out of the vents. Of those, two chemicals – acetaldehyde and benzene – are classified by the Environmental Protection Agency as carcinogens, for which the agency has established no safe exposure level.

“These products can affect not only personal health, but also public and environmental health. The chemicals can go into the air, down the drain and into water bodies,” Steinemann said.

The researchers estimate that in the Seattle area, where the study was conducted, acetaldehyde emissions from this brand of laundry detergent would be equivalent to 3 percent of the total acetaldehyde emissions coming from automobiles. Emissions from the top five brands, they estimate, would constitute about 6 percent of automobiles’ acetaldehyde emissions.

“We focus a lot of attention on how to reduce emissions of pollutants from automobiles,” Steinemann said. “And here’s one source of pollutants that could be reduced.”

Buying a drink on the run has worked its way seamlessly into our hectic lifestyles, and despite best intentions is sometimes unavoidable. But does one of the packaging options come out trumps environmentally?

Bottled and canned drinks are big business in Australia. The soft drink industry generated total revenue of $8.9 billion in 2008, and while we all may try to avoid non-disposable products, sometimes buying a drink on the run is tough to avoid. 

For many soft drinks and juices, the same product comes packaged in a variety of different containers. So, what’s the best environmental option from the array of bevies facing you from the fridge – glass or plastic bottle, or aluminium can? 

http://www.gmagazine.com.au/features/2936/disposable-drink-bottles-plastic-vs-glass-vs-aluminium

Phosphates are proven to be resonsible for waterway contamination that leads to the outbreak of toxic algal blooms and super charged growth of aqua weeds that choke our rivers and catchment areas, eventually killing fish and fauna.

The human side effects of digesting algal toxins in contaminated water can be severe with symptoms ranging from skin and eye irritations to gastreonteritis, liver damage, paralysis and respiratory arrest. Some Algal toxins are now known to promote tumor growth.

By choosing SQUEEK you are making a positive step towards the protection of Australia’s most precious resource. Water.

Why Choose Squeek?

SQUEEK delivers brilliant dishwashing performance without the use pf phosphates

SQUEEK has built-in rinse aid, sanitiser and deoderisier and won’t leave toxic chemical residues or odours in your dishwasher

SQUEEK‘s child proof sachets limit the amount of detergent entering our environment to just 10g per wash

SQUEEK is 100% biodegradeable and safe for use in all bio-systems

SQUEEK is Australian made and owned

In 2007 China rejected a warning by the US Food and Drug Administration urging consumers to avoid using Chinese toothpaste because it may contain a poisonous chemical used in antifreeze.

The chemical in question was diethylene glycol, a thickening agent used as asubstitute for glycerin, and commonly used as a sweetener in drugs. The harmful chemical has also been linked to Cancer and in some cases it was found to contain up to 15.6 percent diethylene glycol.

Around the time of the accusations Japan also rejected millions of tubes of toothpaste that it had purchased from China, leaving China with no choice but to on sell it elsewhere. (Where do you think they looked to sell to first!)

Rather than sit here an argue the point and wait for something to happen we have recently rolled out a new toothpaste kit specifically containing Colgate tooth paste, tooth pick and toothbrush (please see the picture below), something we fell is better to be safe than sorry.

Please contact us if you wish to get the best possible product for your customers pearly whites.

With over 30 years of experience creating cosmetics why wouldn’t you go with a brand you can trust!