Your browser (Internet Explorer 7 or lower) is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites. Learn how to update your browser.

X

Teflon As A Carcinogen

Alas, all those teflon pans and accompanying non-stick hype, may prove to lead to cancer. . . .

Yes, we had the Teflon President [Reagan], and pans that we cooked in
that prevented sticking of the food to the pan material. But now we have to
worry that this chemical maybe was not so good for us after all [and perhaps, neither was that President].

An Envirnonmental Protection Agency [EPA] advisory panel of scientists states “that the fact that animal studies have identified four different kinds of tumors in both male and female rats and mice that had been exposed to the compound
[perfluorooctanoic acid or PFOA a chemical compound used to make Teflon] convinced a majority of its members that it is a likely carcinogen.

Environmental Working Group Senior Vice President Richard Wiles,
whose advocacy organization has urged the EPA to regulate
the compound, called the panel’s findings “huge.”

“What this report says is they need to take action,” Wiles said,
adding that officials are now required to conduct a
cancer-risk assessment of PFOA. “At least we have a shot
now at protecting the public health.””

“The EPA is in the midst of a major investigation into how the compound, which is used to make stain- and stick-resistant surfaces and materials for products including Gore-Tex fabrics and pizza boxes, gets into consumers’ blood and whether it affects their health. It is also seeking millions of dollars in fines from DuPont Co., which makes PFOA in Parkersburg, W.Va., on the grounds that the chemical giant failed for 20 years to report possible health and environmental problems linked to the compound.”

“DuPont, which settled a class-action lawsuit brought by residents living near its Parkersburg plant last year for $300 million, has consistently maintained that it has met all federal reporting requirements and that PFOA does not pose a serious health threat. Yesterday, company spokesman R. Clifton Webb said DuPont’s studies on its workers suggest that there is no connection between the compound and cancer.”

So, the spin is on. Now that you know this, inject this information into your
conversations with friends and acquaintances. Some chemicals are safe to use; some are not. Teflon appears to be in the “not” category, for you and those you love.

See more at this webpage:

http://www.organicconsumers.org/foodsafety/dupont070105.cfm

***************************************************

Some facts about Teflon:

“Invented in USA in 1930s

1946, first marketed by DuPont as “Teflon”

Has the lowest coefficient of friction of any solid material known to man

Found on pots, pans, overcoats, bullets and
pine lining”

the above facts come from
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:8nnnIx0VR64J:news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3697324.stm+teflon+epa&hl=en

Also from the same webpage:

“Today, all new man-made chemicals must undergo rigorous testing to be marketed in Europe. But PFOA is one of 100,000 or so chemicals which avoided the test because they were invented before 1981.

Teflon was invented in the 1930s by DuPont, the US firm which uses it today to make non-stick cookware, and also markets it as a coating for clothes and carpets.

Bucky Bailey’s mother became pregnant while working at DuPont’s West Virginia plant.
The company recently agreed to an out-of-court settlement to a class action lawsuit brought by around 50,000 residents who lived near its West Virginia plant.

The residents, who lived along the Ohio river south of Parkersburg, West Virginia, claimed the company had contaminated local water supplies with PFOA, which they alleged was linked to birth defects and other health hazards.

Among the plaintiffs was Bucky Bailey, who was
born with a single nostril and a deformed face.
His mother fell pregnant with him while working
at DuPont’s Parkersburg plant.

DuPont eventually agreed to pay $50m in cash
to the plaintiffs, plus $22m in legal costs.
The company also agreed to spend $10m on
special water treatment facilities to filter
out PFOA.

But, crucially, DuPont did not accept liability
and maintained PFOA did not pose any danger
to the public.”

Leave a comment