PCB's?

[Gypsy]

I'm not a parent, but this caught my eye: http://xfinity.comcast.net/video/Cindy-Crawford-fights-to-remove-PCBs-from-schools/319460931955/Comcast/TODAY_new/?cid=hero_sf_crawford


On the one hand I think about how I grew up: no seat belts, no helmets, no airbags... and I think... ANOTHER thing we have to protect our kids from.

And then I think... well, if it's a reasonable precaution why NOT protect the kids from it.

I thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.

 

[HopeDream]

Double post, see below.

 

[HopeDream]

Well... we've been using PCBs for a long time (since before 1930), so if there was imminent danger, epidemiologists would have picked it up by now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polychlorinated_biphenyl There have been problems with PCB contamination in the past, so the authorities know what to look for.

PCBs mainly transfer through contact with skin, or by ingestion, so as long as Cindy's kids aren't rubbing their naked bodies on their school or licking all the school surfaces, they should be fine. The PCB was from caulking, so don't rub or lick the caulk ( . The major symptom of PCB poisoning is a skin rash https://www.conncoll.edu/media/website-media/offices/ehs/envhealthdocs/Polychlorinated_biphenyls.pdf, so as long as her kids aren't showing that, they're probably fine.

Potential long term effects of PCB exposure include cancer, but that is also the result of long term exposure to sunlight, alcohol, and smoking (all of which society generally permits).

A word about regulations:

Testing and finding "elevated levels" sounds alarming, but depending on the way regulatory body sets their levels, the permissible levels are probably far below levels at which you'd see an effect. E.g. a hypothetical chemical could have a safe level of 100ppb (parts per billion) but the regulatory body chooses to set an upper limit of 20ppb just to be sure. If levels hit 25 ( "elevated levels") every one freaks out, but they're in no real danger because they are still far below the safe level of 100ppb.

I have a feeling there's no real danger here.

 

[Gypsy]

I was wondering if it was something like that. Wonder if Cindy is a helicopter mom.

 

[monarch64]

PCB's are a major concern around where I live and grew up. GM just spent a ton of money and quite a few years cleaning up thousands of tons of soil contaminated by its plant in my hometown years ago. I am not comfortable wading in creek beds here, well, really any body of water because all the groundwater is contaminated. I don't consume fish from the area (never really have). I don't know if CC's being a helicopter mom. PCB's are some serious sh*t. ETA: my dog will NOT drink water from the creek by the trail we walk on, no matter how long we've been walking. She's a beagle--their sense of smell is so acute that they can detect cancer in humans, among other things. That says something to me.

http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news-archive/3224.html

 

[perry]

Well... we've been using PCBs for a long time (since before 1930), so if there was imminent danger, epidemiologists would have picked it up by now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polychlorinated_biphenyl There have been problems with PCB contamination in the past, so the authorities know what to look for.

PCBs mainly transfer through contact with skin, or by ingestion, so as long as Cindy's kids aren't rubbing their naked bodies on their school or licking all the school surfaces, they should be fine. The PCB was from caulking, so don't rub or lick the caulk ( . The major symptom of PCB poisoning is a skin rash https://www.conncoll.edu/media/website-media/offices/ehs/envhealthdocs/Polychlorinated_biphenyls.pdf, so as long as her kids aren't showing that, they're probably fine.

Potential long term effects of PCB exposure include cancer, but that is also the result of long term exposure to sunlight, alcohol, and smoking (all of which society generally permits).

A word about regulations:

Testing and finding "elevated levels" sounds alarming, but depending on the way regulatory body sets their levels, the permissible levels are probably far below levels at which you'd see an effect. E.g. a hypothetical chemical could have a safe level of 100ppb (parts per billion) but the regulatory body chooses to set an upper limit of 20ppb just to be sure. If levels hit 25 ( "elevated levels") every one freaks out, but they're in no real danger because they are still far below the safe level of 100ppb.

I have a feeling there's no real danger here.

I hate to say it; but you have fallen for a whole bunch of misinformation. Sometimes our government is really good at it.

So if you actually look at the scientific studies: There is not a single shred of evidence anywhere that PCBs themselves cause any harm to people, fish, or wildlife.

However, pure PCB is not very useable (its a solid) and solvents were used to thin it into a useable products. Some of the solvents used to thin the PCBs are absolutely proven to cause all kinds of problems - and clearly cause all the problems ascribed to PCBs.

The EPA should have recognized that and regulated the solvents. Instead they chose to regulate PCBs. There are a number of cases where relatively safe solvents were used to thin the PCBs (i.e - no real hazard). So in the end the EPA has destroyed a useful industrial product, and told people that all PCBs are dangerous (when PCBs themselves are not dangerous); and they failed to require testing and initially failed to regulate the dangerous solvents.

Overall - the hazard from PCBs - even from people working with them - and even with the worst solvents has been overblown. Anyone who worked with *very high temperature insulation in the 1970's knew of people who developed lung cancer and died. I have never met anyone who knows of anyone getting sick from PCBs (and I have worked a lot of my adult life in the Utility Industry where PCB oils by the many thousands of gallons were used in transformers and there are people that 5 days a week for their entire career were covered in PCB based oils).

* Concerning asbestos: The most common form of asbestos that was used in buildings, auto breaks, gaskets, and homes is Crysotile - a long fiber asbestos. There is zero evidence that crysotile asbestos caused any cancer. Amosite asbestos is absolutely deadly and always causes cancer - but almost always was restricted to use to very high temperature applications (boilers, furnaces, kilns, etc). 95% of all asbestos removed was harmless - and cost the US billions of dollars and falsely scarred the bejevers out of many people. Europe for many years split out their asbestos regulations based on type of asbestos (my memory says there are 5 types, but only 3 types exist in any quantity to be used commercially).

So take it for what it is worth. I would not worry about PCB issues.

Have a great day,

Perry

 

[monarch64]

Perry, if we shouldn't worry about PCB's, then why does anyone bother to clean them up?

 

[LAJennifer]

Ha! I thought this thread was going to be about the Paul Chesne Band. He is a fabulous musician that plays the circuit in LA and his shows are sooooo fun!

Sorry about the thread jack - continue.

 

[HopeDream]

I don't know about "government misinformation"

but as per Perry's suggestion, a brief look at a few PCB-human health studies fails to show a link between PCBs and cancer:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09603123.2013.809703#.U_QkoWONbwo
"We found no statistically significant interactions between any of the PCB groups and CYP1B1 or COMT polymorphisms on the risk of breast cancer."

http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.18.1.211
"High-level exposure to selected organochlorines appears to cause abnormalities of liver function, skin (chloracne), and the nervous system." but "The epidemiologic data reviewed, considered in isolation, provide no convincing evidence that organochlorines cause a large excess number of cancers.")

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/10408449509021611
"Based on the reports on workers and the general population, no clear and convincing evidence that PCB exposures were casually associated with adverse health effects was advanced; this included cancer for a wide range of body burdens and exposures for serum PCB concentrations >1000 ppb (µ.g/1) and adipose PCB levels >400 ppm (mg/kg). No meaningful reproductive problems have been identified in female capacitor workers. In the opinion of the review author, the available evidence for cancer and for reproductive effects is inconclusive."

Did you know that the Google scholar search function will search scientific journal articles for your key words?
Accessing scientific research has never been easier! http://scholar.google.com/scholar.google.ca/

monarch64 : I'm sure there are many excellent reasons to clean up PCBs in the environment, as they function as endocrine disruptors in many different animals.

 

[monarch64]

HD, thanks for the additional info and please see my first post on this thread in which I included a link that describes studies done on the PCB-contaminated birds and fish in and around my town. I am well-aware of the effects on animals and my question to Perry was rhetorical.

One more thing re CCrawford and helicoptering: if she wanted to, she could either build an entirely new school and pay for cleanup of the soil, or she could send her children elsewhere, or hire private tutors. Instead, she has become an activist on other parents' behalf and I think that is commendable.

 

[perry]

HD, thanks for the additional info and please see my first post on this thread in which I included a link that describes studies done on the PCB-contaminated birds and fish in and around my town. I am well-aware of the effects on animals and my question to Perry was rhetorical.

One more thing re CCrawford and helicoptering: if she wanted to, she could either build an entirely new school and pay for cleanup of the soil, or she could send her children elsewhere, or hire private tutors. Instead, she has become an activist on other parents' behalf and I think that is commendable.

Monarch: But are those studies really isolating PCBs. The link is that the solvents that cause all kinds of health effects were used to thin PCBs - and if you detect PCBs that in many cases those solvents are there (and for certain PCB applications those solvents were always there in the old uses). So you can truthfully say that PCBs were detected in a number of animals with these effects. But, that does not prove that it was the PCBs that caused the effect.

But, it was not the PCBs. Back in the 80's there were some studies - and confirmatory studies - that showed the separation - and how it was the solvents that caused the health and reproduction affects. But, most research is funded by the government - and the government has a large influence on which studies to fund. Studies that propose to show effects where PCBs are detected are generally funded. Studies that wish to look for the solvents (and not the PCBs) have not been well funded since those studies in the 80's.

To answer you question on why clean up PCBs. Cleaning up PCBs in many cases cleans up the solvents. However, probably at least 25% and perhaps as much a 33% of all PCBs were cut with safer solvents with no major heath effects. In my mind what should have happened was if you detect PCBs that then you test for what solvents are there. The dangerous solvents should be cleaned up. The safer ones could be left alone.

Have a great day,

Perry

 

[sonnyjane]

I have to say I'm kind of shocked to read Perry's comment: "So if you actually look at the scientific studies: There is not a single shred of evidence anywhere that PCBs themselves cause any harm to people, fish, or wildlife."

There is an ASTOUNDING amount of evidence. As a marine biologist it's pretty much common knowledge within my field that PCB's are highly accumulated in aquatic predators (seals, sea lions, etc.) with the largest amounts being found in the apex predators (dolphins including killer whales being the big one of concern). It's not worth my time to post the links but a simple search of scientific journals yields thousands of results about the negative affects of PCB's on marine life. The amounts found in these marine animals are many, many, many, MANY times that found in humans because of what they eat, so I'm entirely willing to concede that perhaps it's more of an imminent danger to the marine mammals than it is to humans, but I don't agree at all that there is no evidence of negative effects of PCB's on wildlife.

ETA: I want to make it clear that I understand what you're saying that in those cases, there are many pollutants present and so maybe you don't have "sufficient proof" in your opinion that it was the PCB's alone that caused the ill-effects, but when animals wash up or have massive die-offs and consistently they test as having astronomical levels of PCB's, I would certainly qualify that as "evidence" of some type of correlation, so you can't say there isn't a "single shred of evidence."

 

[kenny]

I have a feeling there's no real danger here.

But but but ... Crawford is really famous and beautiful.

 

[monarch64]

I will always maintain that PCB's are unhealthy for humans to ingest, whether it be through the food chain or water or skin. Sorry, not sorry. I think it's a valid concern. If my dog won't drink the creek water, and I'm being advised not to eat the PCB-infested fish in the reservoir, I think there is probably a PROBLEM. If Cindy Crawford wants to take it so far as to have schools made over, I think she's being a cautious parent who actually "shives a git" about her children's well-being. She could EASILY find home tutors, another school, etc. Instead (in my eyes) she's using her celeb status to advocate for children who otherwise might not have someone to speak up for them.

Whether or not at this point PCB's have been determined to cause health issues in humans remains to be seen. But, didn't we say that about lots of other things in past years that turned out to be horrible for our health?

My own father is pretty lax about chemicals/moderation/etc. But even HE has always been concerned about the presence of PCB's here in our groundwater and land. That, in addition to studies and general public concern along with government agencies stepping in to help clean things up here, has me a bit on the freaked out side.

 

[eh613c]

In my profession, we always say the dose makes the poison. Anything, even water, can cause adverse effects in the human body. I suspect the air concentration of PCB's in this particular Malibu school are low, even negligent. Yes, the school is old and caulking is old and could be cracking, but unless students are purposely disturbing the caulking by creating dust, I wouldn't worry about it. There are bigger issues to worry about.