Organophosphate flame retardants are 15 times more present in the body than 15 years ago. They are suspected of being dangerous for health.
They are present in our clothes, in furniture, electronics and pride themselves on limiting fires. But at what cost ? Flame retardants are in the crosshairs of many health authorities. And despite initiatives to reduce their use, they remain ubiquitous. Worse: contamination is increasing. A team of American researchers underlines this in Environmental Science & Technology Letters. Their review of the literature, carried out from 2002 to 2015, delivers alarming results.
15% of the market
As early as 2004, the government of the United States took the measure of the risk associated with brominated flame retardants (EDPB). Work has been initiated with manufacturers to reduce their use. But their substitute is hardly better, as this publication shows: organophosphate products are just as capable of migrating. And they are ubiquitous. They are found in the air, household dust, soil… even in nail polish! The modes of contamination are therefore multiple: ingestion, inhalation, skin contact.
These phosphorus-containing flame retardants are occupying an increasing place on the market. They would represent 15% of it. And this progression is observed in urine samples collected in the United States. Between 2002-2003 and 2014-2015, the levels of metabolites detected increased 15-fold. Levels are also higher during the summer season.
Multiple effects
In the European Union, not all flame retardants are recognized. Some, of the brominated type, are forbidden or see their use limited. Phosphorus substitutes are therefore likely to be very present. Which is not necessarily to the taste of the health authorities.
Last June, the National Health Security Agency (ANSES) published a full report on these products. They admit possible effects on reproduction, the endocrine system, the appearance of cancer or even neurotoxicity. The list is long, and the benefits are not necessarily guaranteed.
“The available data do not allow to conclude to the existence of an effectiveness of the use of the flame retardants in the upholstered furniture for domestic use”, slices the Agency. She recommends relying more on other solutions, such as public information and smoke detectors.
.
