Industry ad ignites Deca bill backers

This comes to us from the Bangor Daily News in response to the terrible and misleading ad that the chemical corporations are now airing on TV to try and kill this important Deca toxic pollution ban.  The chemical company lobby is the true special interest here... spending who knows what spreading false and misleading information all over the airwaves.

Meanwhile, Maine firefighters wholeheartedly endorse a ban on Deca, since safer, more effective flame retardants are readily available.  Please watch our online flash video and forward to your friends so people can get the full story!

Industry ad ignites deca bill backers       

By Kevin Miller

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - Bangor Daily News

The political firefight over a chemical that helps keep televisions from bursting into flames has spread to — where else? — the television airwaves.

Several Maine television stations are airing advertisements, paid for by a chemical industry trade group, suggesting that bills under consideration in the state Legislature could put people and property at risk during a fire.

A legislative leader responded to the ad with some heat of her own...

Last week, lawmakers heard hours of testimony on a bill that would ban the chemical flame retardant known as "deca" in televisions, electronics and other household products sold in Maine.

A type of polybrominated diphenyl ether, or PBDE, deca is the most common flame retardant used in plastic television casings.

Proponents of the ban, including the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, contend that deca is a neurological toxin that seeps out, often in the form of dust. Deca has been found in the environment, in wildlife and, most alarmingly, in human mothers’ breast milk and in toddlers.

The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum’s ad opens with film of a blazing fire and the words "Dangerous" and "Deadly" on the screen.

"In a matter of minutes, fire can destroy a home, a business, a family," the narrator says in the ad, which is airing this week on WLBZ-TV, Channel 2, in the Bangor area. "But in Maine today, special interests want to ban flame-resistant products that help prevent fires, even though independent analysis shows the most common flame retardant in use today is safe and effective, protecting property and saving thousands of lives."

With images of a house rooftop and windows engulfed in flames, the narrator concludes with: "Tell your state legislators, ‘Don’t play with fire, keep Maine families safe.’"

According to the group’s Web site, the Bromine Science and Environmental Forum is a trade group of major manufacturers formed to further "scientific and regulatory understanding of bromine and brominated products."

The ad prompted a stinging rebuke by the lead sponsor of the bill to ban deca, House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree.

"The fact that they would spend all of this money and resources into a coordinated attempt to protect the chemical industry – while the product they’re defending is slowly poisoning babies and the environment – is unconscionable," Pingree, D-North Haven, said Monday in a statement.

"If they’re really nervous that they’re going to lose on the issue, they should come to Augusta with proof of their argument instead of launching a statewide smear campaign aimed at deceiving the public into supporting a chemical that is hazardous to their health."

Several representatives of deca manufacturers did speak during last week’s legislative hearing. They defended the safety record of deca and cautioned lawmakers on the Natural Resources Committee that banning the chemical could force product manufacturers to switch to less-studied and potentially less effective flame retardants.

Many major television and computer manufacturers have already shifted away from deca. Maine also banned several related PBDEs, known as "octa" and "penta," several years ago.

In the statement from Pingree’s office, John Martell with the Professional Firefighters of Maine said that fumes released by burning deca-treated products also pose risks to firefighters.

"We would never support legislation that would put the lives of Maine people at risk," said Martell, a Portland firefighter.

In addition to the DEP, Pingree’s bill has the support of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics and various environmental and health groups.

Comments

[Elaine Clark]

Everyone, please write your local representatives to let them know you recognize the TV ads for what they are. Your local rep. may need to know they have your support to vote for the DECA ban. Those TV ads are very effective if you don't know the whole story.

[Jim]

Wow! I can't believe that the chemical industry folks are so desperate for profits from Deca that they are spending all this money on misleading TV ads. And now we have the somewhat infamous Patrick Moore to try and discredit the NRCM.

Click on my name to read the wikipedia article on Mr. Moore. Not sure I can trust what you say, Mr. Moore. Also, your assertion that a ban on Deca isn't backed up with facts is especially erroneous. See NRCM's own website for the research (citations included) http://www.nrcm.org/deca_bill.asp

[Patrick Moore]

As a co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace, I am saddened to see environmental activists get their facts -- and their priorities -- so wrong
NRCM supports a bill that ultimately would ban the Deca form of chemical flame-retardants known as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs. Yet the so-called facts upon which this ban is based are plain wrong.
The State of Maine’s most recent survey of freshwater lakes and rivers -- and the fish in those bodies of water -- found no evidence of Deca. These are the same lakes and rivers that are the conduits of pollution in Maine.
So banning PBDEs, including Deca, is not going to clean up Maine because PBDEs are not the issue in Maine’s toxic issues.
More important, in my view, such a ban is irresponsible because it would contribute to reduced health and safety among Mainers who benefit from the use of life-saving Deca-BDE, the only PBDE in use, whether in homes, schools, hospitals, automobiles, airplanes or elsewhere.
The State of Maine has no flammability standards for furniture, so if Deca is removed, there is absolutely no requirement for furniture manufacturers to replace it with anything.
I believe that leaves Mainers at serious risk.
The fact is the European Union and California both conducted long scientific studies and ultimately chose a more responsible course of action than the State of Maine is pursuing -- one that was far less likely to endanger their constituents by decreasing fire safety.
The House had a proposal that would have protected people and the environment. Instead, they chose to promote a blanket ban that would rob Mainers of the safety benefits of Deca-BDE.
After a 10-year risk assessment, which evaluated more than 580 studies, the EU concluded that Deca-BDE, an important flame retardant with the most scientific data proving its compatibility in terms of human health, low and manageable risks for the environment and its tremendous contribution to society in terms of fire safety, does not pose health or environmental risks.
For California's part, the state Senate Office of Research conducted in-depth scientific analysis of Deca-BDE and concluded in 2004 that no action should be taken against Deca-BDE.
As for other U.S. jurisdictions, there is no ban or restriction on the use of Deca-BDE in any product anywhere. While activist-funded studies show that trace amounts of the compounds can be measured in humans, agencies have tended to acknowledge these measurements are in parts per billion, or parts per trillion, and that no harm to human health or the environment has been documented.
While activists promote a ban on Deca, detailed safety studies on the alternatives simply have not been done. How do we know that proposed alternatives, which have yet to even be named, will be any safer, or will not pose serious risks? The fact is we don't.
When I helped found Greenpeace, I had in mind an organization -- and later a movement -- that would not simply speak truth to power, but more specifically would speak scientific truth to power. In the case of NRCM’s recent work, I fear scientific truth has fallen off the table in favor of misinformation and scare tactics.
Such an outcome needlessly puts people's safety at risk, when there is simply no evidence of human harm and much evidence of great benefit to human safety.

[Sandra]

I was present at the public hearing on the DECA ban and listened to endless hours of testimony from opponents and proponents. The issue is as simple as this: Mainers want to ban chemicals, such as PBDEs, that are toxic to our children, ourselves and our environment. The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum are only concerned about loss of profits when Maine people ban their toxic chemicals. As testified to by The Maine Professional Firefighters, there are safer alternatives to PBDEs which are especially toxic to firefighters when burned. (yes they do burn!) If the firefighters are supporting the ban of DECA from Maine, as well as the NRC, CDC, AAP and numerous other groups (even a representive from Maine PTA was there to support the ban) shouldn't we?

[Linda]

We are lucky to have the NRCM working on this issue. We citizens must do everything we can to make sure they are successful against the powerful chemicals special interest. Contact your legislator today and tell them to support the ban on deca-DBE!

[Jackson]

the chemical industry has an ad in the blethen papers, a full-pager with a photo of a fire alarm, saying its all hypocrosy, I don't get that. what is hypocritical to say you want Deca banned because it is bad? seems like scare tactics and smeer tactics by yet more billion dollar businesses.

[Charlie]

You'd think these chemical corps suits didn't have kids of their own. But you can't teach love, and if they don't have it, they don't have it.