Complain about a product or service

Report Finds Toxins Common in Products for Children, Pets

Car seats, backpacks, pet toys contaminated with lead, PVC, arsenic, other toxins

By Lisa Wade McCormick
ConsumerAffairs.com

September 17, 2009

• Disability Advocates 'Shocked' at Their Levels of Toxic Chemical Exposure • Fireproofing Chemicals May Cause Fertility Issues • Study: Better Chemical Safety Laws Could Reduce Chronic Disease • Study: Pregnant Women 'Contaminated With Chemicals' From Everyday Products • Study Claims Phthalates Exposure In Pregnancy Diminishes Masculinity • Study Finds Sexual Problems in Human Males Exposed to High BPA Levels • Feds Launch New Study of BPA Safety, Industry Critics Blast Consumer Reports Study • Tests Find Wide Range Of BPA In Canned Soups, Juice And More • More Kids' Products Found Containing Unsafe Chemicals • Study: BPA Exposure in Pregnancy May Cause Aggressiveness in Girls • California Senate Votes to Ban BPA In Food Containers • Harvard Study Raises BPA Concerns • Emails Suggest Cozy FDA-BPA Industry Relationship • Chinese Lawsuit Claims Toxins in American Soap, Shampoo • Babies, Bathtime, and Cancer? • Group Raps "Toxic" Bubble Bath • Six Companies Stop Using Bisphenol-A In Bottles • Judge Orders Feds to Stop Sale of Toxin-Laden Toys • Lawsuit Seeks Immediate Ban on Toxic Toys • Advisory Panel Blasts FDA Over Bishphenol-A Stand • Soon-To-Be-Banned Plastic Toys Flooding the Market • States Act On BPA in Baby Bottles • Unstable Furniture Poses Deadly Danger To Children • California Sues Baby Furniture Manufacturers • Study Links BPA with Various Diseases • FDA Again Finds BPA Safe Despite Critics' Concerns • Consumer Advocates Blame Lobbyists for Delays in New Toy Safety Rules • Shower Curtains May Be Hazardous to Your Health • ‘Killer Cribs’ Study Finds Toxins in Common Baby Products • FDA Not Worried About BPA but Critics Demand Moratorium • Wal-Mart Bans BPA, Other Retailers Likely to Follow • War on Plastic Toys Escalates • Plastic War Hits The Toy Industry • Groups Warn Baby Bottles Leach Toxic Substance • Study Warns Chemical In Baby Shampoo May Cause Harm • 'Toxic' Water Bottles Take Top Spot in Dubious Data Awards • Group Hits Apple Over 'Toxic' iPhone • California Bans Plastic-Softening Chemical in Toys • Group Warns of Polluted Air Inside Cars • Watch Out for Hidden Toy Hazards

Hundreds of common household products -- including children’s backpacks, car seats, and even pet products -- are tainted with lead, arsenic, and other toxins, according to test results released by a national environmental group.

Tests conducted by HealthyStuff.org -- part of the Michigan-based Ecology Center -- also found toxins in lunch boxes, pencil bags, purses, and several new and used vehicles.

The group tested the products for such chemicals as lead, brominated flame retardants (BFR), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), cadmium, arsenic and mercury, which studies have linked to birth defects, impaired learning, liver toxicity, and cancer.

“The more we test, the more we find that the presence of toxic chemicals is widespread in everyday consumer products," said Jeff Gearhart, Research Director at the Ecology Center, who created the site. "It should not be the responsibility of public health advocates to test these products. Product manufacturers and legislators must take the lead and replace dangerous substances with safe alternatives."

Gearhart said children and pets are especially vulnerable to the chemicals found in these products, which are common in our homes, schools, daycares, offices, and cars.

Pets, however, are considered “the canary in the coal mine in terms of chemical exposure,” according to HealthyStuff.org.

“We know there is a connection between the chemicals and levels we’re seeing (in pet products) and the levels we’re seeing in cats and dogs,” Gearhart said today. “In terms of bio monitoring (a scientific technique to determine exposure to natural and synthetic chemicals) we do see a connection between the brominated flame retardants (BFRs) showing up in these products and the levels showing up in pets.

“The growth of hyperthyroidism in cats,” he added, “could be related to the brominated flame retardants in these products.” Tests have shown the BFR exposure in cats is 23 times higher than humans, Gearhart said.

A veterinarian with the nationally-recognized Animal Poison Control Center in Illinois, however, said the levels of lead in the pet products tested do not pose a serious health risk.

That’s the same message ConsumerAffairs.com heard from veterinarians in 2007 after tests we conducted on dog and cat toys revealed two of the products contained lead, chromium, and cadmium.

ConsumerAffairs.com hired ExperTox Analytical Laboratory, a private laboratory in Texas, to analyze four pet toys made in China for heavy metals and other toxins.

Two of those toys tested -- a latex one that looked like a green monster and cloth catnip toy -- contained what the lab’s director, forensic toxicologist Dr. Ernest Lykissa, called “elevated levels” of lead, chromium, and cadmium. The green monster toy, he said, contained elevated levels of lead -- 907.4 micrograms per kilogram.

“That’s almost one part per million,” Dr. Lykissa told us. “With that kind of concentration, if a dog is chewing on it or licking it, he’s getting a good source of lead.”

The green monster toy also contained what Dr. Lykissa considered high levels of the cancer-producing agent chromium -- 334.9 micrograms per kilogram.

“With that kind of chromium in there you have what can be an extremely toxic toy if they (animals) put it in their mouths,” he said. “And dogs put things in their mouths. If a dog puts this in his mouth, he runs a big chance of getting some type of metal toxicity that may shorten his life.”

The cloth catnip toy also tested positive for “a tremendous amount” of the toxic metal cadmium – 236 micrograms per kilograms. “That’s something that somebody out there ought to be worried about,” Dr. Lykissa said.

Pets' toys a hazard for children

HealthyStuff.org’s tests revealed even higher levels of toxins in the pet products it tested.

The group warned that children can be exposed to the chemicals in these products because they play with their pets’ toys and often put them in their mouths.

Healthystuff.org tested more than 400 dog and cat products, including chew toys, tennis balls, collars, leashes, and beds. More than 90 percent of the pet products tested were made in China.

Overall, 45% of the pet products contained detectable levels of one or more hazardous chemicals, the group found. Some of the products contained levels of lead that are higher than the new standard allowed by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) for children’s toys -- 300 parts per million (PPM).

There are, however, no government standards for levels of lead or other toxins in pet products.

Specifically, HealthyStuff.org’s tests on the pet products revealed:

• 25% contained detectable levels of lead;
• 7% contained lead levels greater than 300 ppm;
• Nearly half of the pet collars tested contained detectable levels of lead;
• 27% of pet collars tested contained lead levels higher than 300 ppm;
• 48% of the tennis balls tested contained lead. Tennis balls intended for pets were much more likely to contain lead, the group found. Sports tennis balls, however, contained no lead.

Doggie bed

Which pet products contained some of the highest levels of lead and other hazardous chemicals?

Tests revealed the red exterior of a Coleman Classic rectangular bed for dogs (Small 18"X24") had 1,755 ppm of lead and 9 ppm of BFR. The bedding also contained 9 ppm of BRF. And the fabric exterior contained 1,631 ppm of lead and 182 of BFR.

A Cinopelca brown collar-DC contained 532 ppm of lead, 75 ppm of arsenic, and 8ppm of mercury.

And the mouse on a Play N Squeak "Batting Practice" toy for cats contained 593 ppm of lead and 56 ppm of BFR.

The group, however, found some pet products that did not contain any lead or other chemicals, including:

• The AirKong Squeaker Fetch toy;
• The Langer Wild Ginger pet bed;
• The Booda Tenny Tiny Mites Catnip Toy;
• The MTA Practice Tennis Balls.

“We tested both pet tennis balls and sporting tennis balls and found that 50 percent of the tennis balls tested had lead,” Gearhart said. “And pet tennis balls were exclusively the ones with lead. There was no lead found in the tennis balls made by Wilson and or other sporting goods makers.”

Back-to-school products

Healthystuff.org also used a device called an XRF analyzer to test hundreds of other household and back-to-school products. Those tests revealed the products contained worrisome levels of hazardous chemicals that pose health risks to infants and young children.

Consider the organization’s findings:

• Car seats: Fifty-eight percent of the car seats tested by the group contained one or more hazardous chemicals, including PVC, BFRs, and heavy metals. Thirty-one percent contained BFRs. These chemicals, the group said, can cause adverse health affects on babies and young children. The group, however, found there are healthy car seats on the market, including the Baby Trend Flex-Loc, Graco Nautilus 3-in-1 Car Seat, and Graco Turbo Booster. The group also reminded parents to always use child safety seats because they save lives;

• Back-To-School-Supplies: HealthyStuff.org tested more than 60 common back-to-school supplies, including backpacks, pencil cases, binders, and lunchboxes. Tests on those products revealed 68% contained one or more chemicals of concern. Specifically, 56% were made out of PVC and 22% contained detectable levels of lead. A Dora & Boots Backpack , for example, contained what the group considered medium levels of PVC: 393,976 ppm on the front decal, 72,763 ppm on the blue inside lining, and 186,561 ppm on the white inside.

• Purses: Healthstuff.org tested more than 100 plastic women's handbags and found lead in more than 75% of the purses analyzed. Sixty-four percent of the purses tested contained lead levels of more than 300 ppm. More than half of the purses contained lead levels greater than 1,000 ppm lead. For example, a Candies’ Green Clutch bag contained 732 ppm of lead and 88 ppm of arsenic. And a Guess Orange handbag contained -- on the outer material -- 2,581 ppm of lead, 72,677 ppm of PVC and 155 ppm of arsenic.

• Automobiles: HealthyStuff.org tested nearly 700 new and used vehicles, ranging from the 1980's to 2010 model years. Tests revealed the levels of some chemicals in the vehicles were 5-10 times higher than in homes or offices. That is worrisome, the group said, because the average American spends more than 1.5 hours in their car every day. “This can be a major source of toxic chemical exposure.” The group also found that pre-2004 vehicles tested significantly worse for toxins than 2009 vehicles. The average scores for 2009 vehicle, for example, were 1/3 better then cars made before 2004 -- an improvement the group attributes to the reduced use of heavy metals like lead in vehicles. HealthyStuff.org also noted that the “new car” smell in vehicles is caused by “off-gassing” of toxic chemicals.

Consumers react

Consumers we contacted about HealthyStuff.org’s results applaud the organization for testing the products. But many are shocked by the findings.

“I am appalled to discover that children's car seats contain harmful chemicals,” said Laura P. of Kansas City, Missouri, who has four young children. “Who do they think they are making them for? I expect not only our government, but also our big corporations to take into consideration the safety of our little people before they look at the bottom line. How much profit is necessary and at what expense?”

A Georgia pet owner is just as outraged by the test results on dog and cat products.

“I am very angry and hurt that these companies are so heartless,” said Doris B. of Columbus. “As a pet owner, I feel that these manufacturers do not care how much harm their products cause. The almighty dollar is all that interests them. If pets die as a result of their negligence, the attitude is caveat emptor, ‘let the buyer beware.’”

She added: “With all the recent controversy over healthcare reform, why not eliminate products that make people sick. This would go a long way toward reducing medical costs, resulting in lower health insurance premiums.”

The government, she said, needs to take immediate action to ensure pet products -- and all other consumer goods -- are safe.

Trade ban

“It would help if our government issued a trade ban against all countries shipping substandard goods to the U.S.,” Doris told us. “Any U.S. company deliberately making or selling tainted products should be forced out of business.”

Doris lauds HealthyStuff.org efforts to test -- and expose -- the toxins in these products.

“It sounds like HealthyStuff.org picked up the ball and is running for a touchdown,” she said. “Your original article and those first tests really opened up a keg of snakes. That was two years ago. Too bad the CPSC did not start regulating pet toys and accessories then. The need for regulation was proven and consumers supported it.”

Dog owner Nancy R. of Illinois echoes those sentiments.

“I’m excited because there is some kind of follow up,” she told us today. “The testing you did made a big difference. It’s a good start; at least somebody is now following up.”

As a worried dog owner in the wake of the pet food recall, Nancy hired a laboratory in 2007 to test 24 Chinese-made dog toys for lead.

Those tests -- conducted by the Illinois Department of Agriculture -- revealed all the toys contained lead at levels that, at the time, fell within that state’s and the federal limits for lead paint in children’s toys: 600 parts per million.

But one of the toys tested -- a PetSmart tennis ball -- contained levels of lead that now exceeds the amount allowed in children’s toys: 335.7 ppm. Nancy wonders why -- two years later -- hundreds of pet toys still contain lead and other toxins.

“There have to be some standards set (for toxins in pet toys),” she said. “This has been going on for two years.”

Nancy called on the American Pet Products Association (APPA) to establish “acceptable national levels” for lead and other toxins in dog and cat toys and other products.

“I’d like someone to come up with some standards and stick with them,” she told us. “And I believe it should be the American Pet Products Association that initiates that action. I’d like for them to take the lead and make that happen.

“We need a positive, collaborative plan between the pet manufacturers and the scientific community to develop research protocols on standards for pet toys. And if it takes three to five years then it takes three to five years. It’s already been two years since your story.”

The president of APPA has said its members -- who represent more than 900 pet product makers, importers, and livestock suppliers worldwide -- would welcome standards for lead and other toxins in pet toys.

“They’re looking for a benchmark that everyone can follow,” Bob Vetere, president of the non-profit organization, told us in 2007 in response to the tests we ran on pet toys. “Maybe what we need is to have everyone sit down at a table and talk about what makes sense.”

ConsumerAffairs.com contacted Vetere and his organization about HealthyStuff.org’s test results. No one responded to our inquiries.

In the meantime, Nancy said she’ll continue to use caution when buying toys and other products for her three Shelties. Her first line of defense, she said, is sticking with products made in the USA.

Serious risk?

But do the levels of lead and other toxins found in the pet products HealthyStuff.org tested pose a serious health risk?

A veterinarian with the Animal Poison Control Center -- run by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) -- told us she wasn’t too alarmed by the amounts of lead detected.

Dr. Sharon Gwaltney-Brant confirmed that younger dogs, like children, are at a higher risk for lead poisoning. She also said that lead at the 'proper' dose, can be toxic to dogs and cause problems in the gastrointestinal tract and central nervous system.

But the levels of lead in the pet products tested, she told us, appear to fall far below the amount that would cause acute or chronic lead poisoning in dogs.

“We know that it takes 600-1000 milligrams per kilogram of body weight (mg/kg) to cause acute lead poisoning in dogs and 3-30 mg/kg per day for 90 days to cause chronic lead poisoning in dogs,” said Dr. Gwaltney-Brant, vice-president and medical director of the Animal Poison Control Center. “So, for a 22-pound dog to become acutely poisoned by a product containing 600 parts per million (ppm) of lead, that dog would have to ingest 10 kilograms (22 pounds, i.e. its body weight) of the product acutely (i.e. within a matter of hours); that's one big pet toy.”

What about chronic lead poisoning?

“For chronic poisoning at 600 parts per million (the 'old' CPSC maximum allowable level for children's products), the 22-pound dog would have to ingest a cumulative dose of 4.5 kg (9.9 pounds) over 90 days,” Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said. “That's about 2 ounces per day for 90 days. I'm assuming that the majority of lead is in the paint on the toys (historically this is where it's mostly been found) and it's unlikely that any dog toy would have even an ounce of paint on it, so it is extremely unlikely that a dog is going to develop a chronic toxicosis from chewing on a toy that has 600 ppm of lead in the paint, even if every day he scraped every bit of paint off of a brand new toy.”

Dr. Gwaltney-Brant took her analogy one step further.

“To recap, on a worse case scenario (using the lowest listed toxic dosages for dogs), a dog would have to eat essentially the equivalent of its body weight acutely or a little less than 1/2 its body weight chronically to be at risk for toxicosis when lead was present at 600 ppm.”

The discovery of other toxins in the pet products tested by HealthyStuffy.org didn’t alarm Dr. Gwaltney-Brant, either.

“The fact that they could detect lead and other 'hazardous' chemicals doesn't surprise me as we have great analytical methods these days and can detect down to fractions of parts per billion,” she said. “So just because it's 'detectable' doesn't necessarily make it hazardous. Even oxygen is toxic at the right concentration.”

Might pose a risk

The amounts of lead and other toxins detected in the pet toys ConsumerAffairs.com tested in 2007 were much lower than those found in the dog and cat products HealthyStuff.org recently analyzed. But Dr. Ernest Lykissa, Ph.D., the forensic toxicologist who tested the green monster and catnip toys for us, said the amounts still posed a risk to pets and humans.

In fact, he was so concerned by the levels of toxins in the toys that he said they should be pulled off the market. “Or put a warning label on them that says if you put this (toy) in your mouth you will get poisoned. There is nothing good about the agents (in these toys) that I’m reporting to you.”

Dr. Lykissa also said the heavy metals in the pet toys easily came off during the tests, which was a troubling sign.

“These (toxic) materials came off the toys freely, like with the lick of the tongue from a dog or cat,” he said. “They were readily liberated from these toys. We didn’t take a sledge hammer and pound on them. I just did what a dog or cat would do by licking it. That’s why this is so serious."

He added: “We didn’t dissolve the toys. These materials were leeching off the toys. Whatever leeched off the toys is what I’m reporting to you. The material came right off. Somebody’s saliva or the sweat in their hands would freely pick up these materials. And that’s absorbing it. If you ate the materials, like a dog might, it would be worse.”

Are toxins necessary?

Pet products and other household good, however, can be made without any toxins, according to HealthyStuff.org’s tests. And consumers need to demand that manufacturers start making safe products.

“But hazardous chemicals are still far too commonplace in everyday consumer products,” the group said. “Consumers are faced with these unnecessary hazards in their homes, offices and vehicles.”

To correct this problem, the organization urged consumers to support a bill sponsored by Senator Frank Lautenberg and Representative Bobby Rush that is designed to strengthen what HealthStuff.org calls “the outdated, toothless” Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). That is the federal law that regulates chemicals.

The group also called on Congress to:

• Immediately phase out the most dangerous chemicals;
• Hold industry responsible for the safety of their chemicals and products;
• Require manufacturers to provide information on health hazards associated with their chemicals;
• Use the best science to protect humans and pets and promote safer alternatives.

Consumers who are worried about the toxins in the products around their homes and offices can now find more than 15,000 test results on some 5,000 common items -- from pet products to children’s toys -- on HealthyStuff.org's’s Web site.

HealthyStuff.org said it will continue to test more products -- and post those results on its Web site. Mattresses are expected to the next products tested.

Test results posted on HealthyStuff.org are based on research done by The Ecology Center and other environmental health organizations around the country. For the past several years, the Ecology Center has spearheaded research on toxic chemicals in children’s toys, cars, and car seats. The group said its annual toy testing results will be released in time for this year’s holiday shopping season.

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.

Follow us on Twitter.