This information seems to be avoiding the mainstream, but a couple of weeks ago I heard a little snippit about one of the ingredients being linked to problems in laboratory animals… perfluoroocatanyl sulfonate
Like I said, I’m not going to use it anymore. I don’t know if I’ll use the ‘new formula’ when 3M comes out with it. This is really bothersome to me. I honestly don’t know what to do about cases people already have.
I am going to start putting a piece of cloth or a paper towel between the fipples and the case on my own, that can be washed or changed frequently. Even though the treatment is concentrated on the outer fabrics, it is there.
Annie, are you sure this isn’t old news? Take a look:
History of phase out.
For 50 years, 3M sold state-of-the-art protective carpet, textile, and leather treatments under the Scotchgard™ Brand name utilizing Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) compounds. However, in May 2000 3M voluntarily decided to phase out of the production of these specific compounds. 3M’s decision was taken after research indicated that PFOS at very low levels was widely dispersed in wildlife around the world and also had been detected at low levels in people. Although extensive research showed there was no adverse human health or environmental effects at the levels found, 3M did not want to add to the presence of this persistent compound in the environment or in people. 3M no longer manufactures PFOA except for a single subsidiary in Europe that recovers and recycles PFOA for internal use as a necessary manufacturing aid in the production of fluoropolymers.
Scotchgard™ Protector products manufactured by 3M after December 31, 2000, are not made with or degrade to PFOS or PFOA.
I also checked on the article you linked, Annie, and, according to the WayBack Machine, it’s at least 3 and a half years old (unfortunately, the article itself doesn’t list the original date). Judging for the article itself, I would assume it’s from 2000.
Hmmm… I couldn’t find much in my search, that might explain it. The article I linked appeared to be dated July this year, but that could just have been the date that Google archived it. But I know that sometimes such info doesn’t get the light of day it deserves.
Well… that would be a relief indeed. That would mean that the current formula is the revamped one that doesn’t have the nasties. (or at least not those nasties)… and explain the foggy sense of deja vu …
There are at least a hundred thousand chemicals in current use by manufacturers that have never been tested for safety in humans or in the environment. When safety standards were being drafted about thirty-five years ago it was considered too great a task to tackle to start testing all of them, and afterall, no-one appeared to be at any immediate health risk.
It’s like that business a year or so ago when they “suddenly” discovered that teflon coating on pots and pans does, in fact, come off and persists in the human body for decades. No-one has proven that it is immediately dangerous to carry this stuff around in our bodies, although it’s just as true to say that no-one knows what the long term health effects may be.
I expect many more chemicals that we have all been exposed to regularly for our entire lives are going to “suddenly” be found to be suspect as the quality of testing improves and more involvement by government comes on-line.
