NEWS    RECALLS    COMPLAINT FORM    SCAM ALERTS   RESOURCES  
Small Claims Guide   Class Actions   Lemon Laws   FAQ   Newsletters  
Share


Complain about a product or service

Automotive    Education    Employment    Electronics    Family    Finance    Health    Homeowners    Insurance    Pets    Shopping    Travel     Print This     Email This    



NEWS   Latest |  Archives |  Auto |  Cells, etc. |  Computers |  Financial |  Health |  Homeowners |  Parents |  Privacy |  Scams |  Seniors |  Travel

Teflon Suit Slides Off DuPont

Cookware contains likely carcinogen





By Jon Hood
ConsumerAffairs.com

May 19, 2009

Teflon
Teflon graphic
Teflon Suit Slides Off DuPont
Teflon Chemicals Found In Human Breast Milk
DuPont Hopes Teflon Charges Don't Stick
Study Finds Teflon Chemical In Newborns' Umbilical Cords
DuPont Agrees To Teflon Pollution Curbs
Whistleblower Claims DuPont Failed to Act on Food Contamination Danger
Claims Against Teflon May Not Stick
Teflon Ingredient Found in North Carolina Groundwater
Grand Jury Probes Chemical Used in Teflon
Teflon Chemicals Found in Humans

A federal court in Des Moines, Iowa on May 1 dismissed a group of consolidated cases against chemical and housewares company DuPont. The 22 suits, consolidated from 15 states, alleged that DuPont knew for more than 20 years that cookware containing the company's non-stick coating, popularly known as Teflon, could make consumers sick, but concealed evidence of this from the public.

U.S. District Judge Ronald Longstaff found that individual issues differing among the plaintiffs would each require their own inquiry, making the suits improper. In his order, the judge wrote that "the only common factor binding together all of the present plaintiffs is use of nonstick-coated cookware ... Each of [the other] issues will require an individualized inquiry, which the court believes will render each class action unmanageable."

The actions alleged that, when heated to normal cooking temperatures, Teflon-coated pans release toxic particles that pose a health risk to consumers. The suits claimed that DuPont had a duty to warn consumers of the dangers of Teflon but failed to do so.

The suits specifically singled out perflourooctanoic acid, colloquially known as PFOA, as the culprit of the emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has said that PFOA is likely a cancer-causing agent in humans. This concern originated with an EPA study showing the chemical to be present in the bloodstream of 90% of Americans.

Millions of consumers were covered by the actions and, had they been successful, damages would have likely reached into the billions. At the time the suits were filed, attorney Alan Kluger said the class "could well contain almost every American that has purchased a pot or pan coated with ... Teflon."

A whopping 70% of cookware sold in the United States contains a non-stick coating. The equipment is far more popular than traditional stainless steel cookware, which is generally preferred by chefs but harder to clean. Teflon was approved by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) in 1960 after the agency found elevated levels of flourinated compounds on a hamburger cooked in a Teflon-coated pan but judged them to be of little significance.

The suits sought damages, the cost of replacement cookware, and labeling warning consumers of the the possible dangers posed by Teflon. It also asked for the creation of two funds: one to monitor the health of class members, and another to fund scientific research to further study the potentially damaging effects of Teflon use.

DuPont insists that no studies have ever shown Teflon to be dangerous. Indeed, DuPont's website has a prominently featured section devoted solely to the cookware's professed safety. DuPont notes that the EPA, on its own site, asserts that it "does not believe there is any reason for consumers to stop using any consumer or industrial related [non-stick coated] products." Further, DuPont points out that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) rejected a petition to require warning labels for the cookware.

However, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) notes that the EPA has never extensively tested the safety of Teflon. Indeed, in 2006 a group of scientific advisors to the EPA unanimously recommended that PFOA be considered a likely carcinogen.

In that recommendation, the board members questioned why the EPA had ignored certain unpublished studies, and noted that the EPA itself had conceded that animal studies had provided "suggestive evidence" that PFOA is a possible human carcinogen.

A study from the 1980s, which was never published, found tumors in lab rats linked to the chemical. A rebuttal study, conveniently funded by DuPont and 3M, questioned the former study's veracity.

DuPont is the world's largest chemical company, second only to BASF. The company is responsible for the creation of a number of popular chemicals, including Teflon, Corian, Kevlar, and Lycra.



Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Share

Follow us on Twitter.

FREE CONSUMER NEWSLETTERS

The Daily Consumer
Afternoons M-F

Sign up now!


Consumer News & Alerts
Every Sunday

Sign up now!





CONSUMER NEWS

SAFETY RECALLS

Back to the top |

Advertisement


Custom Search
AUTOMOTIVE
• Dealers
• Manufacturers
• Service
• Extended Warranties
• Lemon Laws
• Recalls
• Tires
• Transporters

FAMILY
• Aging
• Children, Parenting
• Recalls
• Dating
• Education
• Entertainment
• Pets
• Weddings
FINANCE
• Annuities
• Banks
• Credit Cards
• Debt Collection
• Debt Counseling
• Insurance
• Investing
• Loans
• Mortgages
• Payday Loans
• Student Loans
• Tax Prep

HEALTH
• Doctors
• Drugs, Pharmacies
• Health Clubs
• Hearing Care
• Hospitals
• Nursing Homes
• Nutrition, Diets
• Vision Care
• Weight Loss
HOUSE & HOME
• Appliances
• Cookware
• Furniture
• Home Improvements
• Lawn & Garden
• Movers
• Pools & Spas
• Realtors, Rental Agents
• Recalls
• Utilities

ELECTRONICS
• Cable TV/DBS
• Cameras
• Cell Phones
• Computers
• Home Electronics
• Internet Access
• Local Phone Service
• Long Distance
• VoIP
SHOPPING
• In-Home
• Online
• Retail Stores
• Sporting Goods
• Supermarkets
• Telemarketers

TRAVEL
• Airlines
• Bus Lines
• Car Rental
• Cruises
• Hotels
• Travel Agents
• Trains

RESOURCES
• Class Actions
• Complaint Form
• Small Claims Guide
• Lemon Laws
CONSUMER NEWS
• Latest News
• Automotive
• Telecom
• Financial
• Health
• Homeowners
• Scams
• Seniors
• Travel
• More ...

RECALLS
• Automotive
• Children's Products
• Drugs
• Food
• Household Products
• Sporting Goods

ABOUT US
• FAQ
• Privacy Policy
• Advertise With Us
• Newsroom
• Syndication
• Terms of Use

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.    The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission.