Posts Tagged ‘ Health Canada ’

Incandescent vs. Fluorescent: Just Where is all that Mercury Going?

April 13th, 2011. By Hunter West

Okay, we all know that those fluorescent bulbs are more efficient than incandescent bulbs. They last longer, and reduce greenhouse gasses.

And everyone is on the bandwagon. Canada starts phasing out incandescent bulbs starting next year. In the US, it’s 2014. Australia led the way in 2007, and the European Union came soon after. 

Here’s the thing. Incandescent light bulbs, as inefficient as they are, don’t contain mercury.

But fluorescents do. 

Okay fine, the mercury is in the bulb and as long as they don’t break… 

Indeed. 

Yes, mercury is a naturally occurring element, just as the inert gas used in the incandescent bulb is also naturally occurring. The difference with mercury is that it’s a neurotoxin that can damage the brain, spinal cord, kidneys and liver through chronic exposure. 

Health Canada says, “Mercury can impair the ability to feel, see, move and taste and can cause numbness and tunnel vision. Long-term exposure can lead to progressively worse symptoms and ultimately personality changes, stupor and in extreme cases, coma or death,” according to Health Canada. 

The regulator goes on to say that recent research suggests even at low levels, mercury can have adverse health impacts on the cardiovascular and immune system. 

Here’s the question. What happens to all these bulbs when they are spent? And what happens if they break en route to a disposal facility? 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that three per cent of the total mercury in Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: environment, Evironmental Protection Agency, fluorescent bulbs, fluorescent light bulbs, green house gasses, Health Canada, incandescent bulb
Posted in Defective Products, Emerging Issues, Environment | No Comments »

Perfect Valentine’s Day Gift? Go for Glee with Phthalate Free

February 11th, 2011. By Hunter West

Can we talk? 

Okay, Valentine’s Day is coming up on Monday and much as we like to think that the Big Red Day is all about flowers and chocolates, gushy Hallmark cards and little else, sex toy and adult novelty shops do a booming business leading up to Valentine’s Day. 

No, you don’t have to close your eyes. It’s not like we have samples. But face it, for some people nothing says ‘I love you’ like a big piece of rubber…even better if it glows in the dark. 

Which brings us to health issues. In January the National Post up in Canada carried a story about the Canadian sex toy retail industry crying foul over the fact that Health Canada does not regulate phthalates in adult sex toys in the same fashion as children’s toys. 

(We believe the same is true in this country, but of course Canadians are much more randy this time of year than we are—what else is there to do up there when the snow banks are higher than your Honda and it’s ten below zero outside? Ya know why they won all those medals in the Olympics last year, don’t you? All those indoor sports…). 

Health Canada, the Canadian health regulator akin to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in this country, announced last month that it was putting new restrictions in place that would lower concentrations of six phthalates by June of this year. Lest you think ‘phthalate’ is a new position you haven’t tried yet, in reality it’s a chemical that is used to make rubber compounds soft and squishy—which is the last thing you want to have happen in the real experience but quite acceptable in sex toys. 

All kidding aside, the gurus at Health Canada have a point. Phthalates have been voluntarily removed from pacifiers and baby bottle nipples for some time due to personal injury concerns about the risks associated with phthalates and reproduction and development of children less than four years of age. 

To that end, it has been determined, according to the National Post, that objects do not release phthalates merely through touch. However, they can release the vilified chemical into saliva when a child sucks on a pacifier. 

Or, for that matter, anything the child is playing with. To that end, a rubber duckie is not designed to go into a child’s mouth. However, putting things in their mouths is what children do—including rubber duckies and anything made of soft rubber into which phthalates are injected to make then soft. (By the way, according to Big Teaze Toys (tagline, “Toys that Play with You”), I Rub My Duckie (shown) is not only phthalate free, but has appeared on The View. And no, this isn’t an endorsement).

Manufacturers thought they were doing the kids a favor by taking out the rigidity of rubber, so Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: birth defects, FDA, Health Canada, Phthalates, Sex Toys
Posted in Defective Products, Emerging Issues, Personal Injury | No Comments »

Sex Toys Need to Be Safe

December 31st, 2009. By Hunter West

It’s a titillating subject to be sure and one that would be expected to serve as the butt of many a joke in the locker rooms of the nation. The fact remains, however that sex toys comprise a legitimate product component in the retail industry—and like any product that is used for the purposes to which they were designed, it needs to be safe. 

It may not be. 

Earlier this month in Canada (known affectionately as the Great White North where it gets so cold in the winter that residents alternate between outdoor sports and the indoor variety with their…well…never mind), a Liberal Member of Parliament issued a communiqué to the Canadian Health Minister with regard to sex toys manufactured with the dreaded bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates. 

The latter are chemicals used to make plastic sex toys soft and flexible. 

All playfulness aside, the safety concern for sex toys is not unlike previous health issues that have surfaced over the chemical’s use in things such as baby bottles, the lining of food cans and Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: BPA, Health Canada, Phthalates, Sex Toys
Posted in Personal Injury | 3 Comments »