Flame retardants in U.S. furniture are on the rise, with a new study finding them in nearly all couches tested.

The findings, published today, confirm that household furniture remains a major source of a variety of flame retardants, some of which have been building up in people’s bodies and in the environment.

In the new tests, three out of every four couches purchased before 2005 contained the chemicals, with a now-banned compound in 39 percent. For newer couches, 94 percent contained flame retardants, nearly all next-generation compounds with little known about their potential health effects.

"More furniture appears to be treated with flame retardants today than, say, 15 years ago," said Heather Stapleton, an environmental chemist at Duke University and lead author of the project, which also included researchers from the University of California, Berkeley and Boston University.

In a separate study also published today, researchers found that dust in California homes is contaminated with levels of flame retardants that exceed health risk guidelines developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Some of the chemicals have been linked to cancer, altered hormones or neurological effects in lab animals, fetuses and children. Whether there are health risks from many of the newer flame retardants, however, is largely unknown, and most furniture does not carry labels that provide information to consumers.

"I am concerned by the rise in use and diversity of flame retardants on the market because we have very little information on their toxicity and potential effects on the general population, particularly vulnerable subpopulations such as pregnant women and young children," said Ami Zota, who studies flame retardants and reproductive health at the University of California, San Francisco. She did not participate in the new research.

The scientists discovered one chemical in sofas that had never been reported before as a flame retardant.

"There is little to no information about the potential health effects of these new flame retardants in the peer-reviewed literature," said Heather Patisaul of North Carolina State University, who studies endocrine-disrupting chemicals but was not involved in the research.

A spokesperson from the American Chemistry Council, which represents flame retardant manufacturers, said “this study confirms what we would expect to find: Furniture manufacturers use approved flame retardants to meet established fire safety standards, which help save lives. There is no data in this study that indicate that the levels of flame retardants found would cause any human health problems."

The use of flame retardants is traced to a California standard adopted in the 1970s, which mandates that foam used in furniture cushions must withstand a 12-second exposure to a small, open flame. Because the market in California is so large, much of the nation's furniture is manufactured with flame retardants to meet that standard.

The scientists tested 102 couches purchased between 1985 and 2010 in the first study that has examined flame retardants that have come onto the market since 2005. The foam samples were not randomly selected, so the results might not represent the United States as a whole, the authors said in their article published in the journal Environmental Science and Toxicology.

In all, 85 percent contained flame retardants. In tests of couches purchased over the past seven years, the chemicals were even more prevalent: 94 percent compared with 75 percent for those purchased between 1985 and 2004.

Tris, a suspected human carcinogen that was banned for use in baby pajamas in the 1970s, was the most prevalent compound in the couches; it was found in 41 percent.

The separate study from the Massachusetts-based Silent Spring Institute, published in the same journal, found two different mixtures of Tris in dust in each of the 16 California homes studied.

1 Comments

1. 1. greenhome123 09:55 PM 12/1/12

   I've hear the flame retardants still often end up catching on fire because are exposed to flame longer than 12 seconds, and then they create toxic smoke that fire fighters get to inhale. I believe California should repeal the Flame Retardant Mandate. Then, they could add a "foam tax" that manufacturer or consumers pay when buying foam. Then, we could use the revenue from the foam-tax to add fire sprinklers to building at high fire risk, and beef up fire departments and their response time. The cost of furniture foam would go down because it wouldn't have to be sprayed with fire retardants, but there would be the extra foam-tax so cost would end up staying about the same, but result in less people getting cancer and illness from exposure to fire retardants.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this