Login    Sign Up    Forgot Login
Gym Chat

Gymnastics Clubs
Talk about the good things & things that should be improved about your club, club issues and achievements, etc.
Please login/register for access
Subscribe to new posts
Post Icon
air quality in surrounding gym area
How do you get air quality tested for around outside the gym? Gym is right next to a factory emitting strong smelling toxins...
Post Icon
Quote:
Try the Environmental Health Department. Their website is http://www.cdc.gov/Environmental/ .
Post Icon
Quote:
Thanks!
Post Icon
Quote:
That sucks. So then you have to keep the gym doors closed? What does it smell like?
Post Icon
Quote:
I would rather have the gym doors closed than have the smelly toxins come in, but the ones in charge of whether they are open or not say for them to be open even with the smell and toxins - weird. It smells like those model car paints, heavy-duty glue, melting plastics, something like that.
Post Icon
Quote:
Did you find out what chemical the smell was from and if it's carcinogenic?
Post Icon
Quote:
Yeah, it's from a carcinogenic chemical named styrene.
Post Icon
Quote:
Some interesting information (1st article is from a few years ago, 2nd one is from today): "Chemical industry told to get tough Lobbyist's memo advises hardball tactics for fighting tighter California regulations" - http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/11/21/BAG2P380K51.DTL November 21, 2003 [quote]A leaked memo from a chemical industry lobbyist recommended fighting increased regulation in California by hiring an "attack dog" public relations firm to spy on industry opponents, arrange protests and recruit conservative talk show hosts. A copy of the memo was obtained by the Environmental Working Group, an environmental advocacy organization, which said it represents a covert attempt to undermine a growing chemical safety movement in California. But a lobbyist with the American Chemistry Council was unapologetic, saying the tactics they advocate are employed by environmentalists as well as industry supporters and are meant to frame a legitimate debate on the flaws of increased regulation. At issue is the precautionary principle, a policy that maintains chemicals should not be approved for the market unless they are proved safe. In the United States, chemicals are generally allowed unless they're proved unsafe. The precautionary principle holds sway across much of Europe and was recently adopted by the city of San Francisco. Other California municipalities have expressed interest in the concept, and state regulators have begun applying it to some chemicals, most notably flame retardants.[/quote] [quote]The July memo envisioned spending $15,000 a month on the campaign during periods of peak activity, but ultimately the campaign was not funded, Shestek said. While he did not say whether he was the author, Shestek defended the memo. "We stand by the policy of creating a comprehensive effort to ensure that sound scientific principles remain the cornerstone of regulatory policy," Shestek said. "The precautionary principle is based on fear, not science. A zero-risk policy based on mere allegation clearly turns the rule-making procedure on its head." [/quote] Their priniciples on the other hand are based on making money and making money. [quote]Walker said the memo demonstrates the duplicity of the chemical industry, and indicates it will go to great lengths to hobble the legitimate regulation of dangerous chemicals in California. [/quote] Click on the article link to read the rest of it. "Danger feared from chemicals getting into bay" - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/07/11/MNGFVQUHC21.DTL July 11, 2007 [quote]The inspectors found three types of chemicals -- phthalates, bisphenol A and triclosan. All are suspected of interfering with hormone systems of humans and wildlife. Phthalates are banned in some toys in San Francisco, and the state Legislature is considering a bill that would prohibit forms of the chemical in toys intended for children under 3. [/quote] [quote]The utility is asking its customers to stop using antibacterial soaps, which frequently contain triclosan, and other products containing harmful chemicals. The utility supports a ban on chemicals that have been shown to cause cancer, birth defects and reproductive damage to lab animals and have the potential to harm humans, Hardy said. [/quote] [quote]Yet EBMUD and other agencies face a challenge over what to do about the chemicals entering their treatment plants, said board member Doug Linney. "The problem is that they're coming up with new chemicals faster than we can understand what they do to the environment," Linney said. Taking the example of antibacterial soaps, he said: "They're just not necessary. It's a marketing thing. There's no reason to degrade our environment." [/quote] Click on the article link to read the rest of it.
Post Icon
Quote:
Interesting articles. The push to get more money at the cost of anything and everything is horrible. Hooray for California! The Bay Area Quality Management District and inpsectors, info, etc.: http://www.baaqmd.gov Here is some basic information on the chemical Styrene available on the Internet: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styrene: Styrene is classified as a possible human carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). (According to http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/styrene/index.html) from http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/styrene/index.html: [color=red]The principal health effects due to styrene exposure involve the central nervous system. These effects include subjective complaints of headache, fatigue, dizziness, confusion, drowsiness, malaise, difficulty in concentrating, and a feeling of intoxication. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies styrene as a potential human carcinogen. [/color]Styrene is primarily a synthetic chemical that is used extensively in the manufacture of plastics, rubber, and resins... from http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/styrene/solutions.html: Some operations (e.g., certain open molders using manual techniques) have shown that engineering and work practice controls are not practical for limiting exposure below 100 ppm. For situations where engineering controls are not feasible, provide additional protection in the form of respiratory protection and personal protective equipment. from http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/styrene.html: Cancer Risk: [color=red]Several epidemiologic studies suggest that there may be an association between styrene exposure and an increased risk of leukemia and lymphoma. [/color] However, the evidence is inconclusive due to multiple chemical exposures and inadequate information on the levels and duration of exposure. (1,2,7,12) Animal cancer studies have produced variable results and provide limited evidence for carcinogenicity.(7) IARC has classified styrene as a Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans. (12) Styrene oxide is a reactive metabolite of styrene and shows positive carcinogenic results in oral exposure bioassays. Styrene oxide has been detected in workers exposed to styrene. IARC has classified this metabolite as a Group 2A, probable human carcinogen. (7,12) EPA's Office of Research and Development has updated previous assessments on the carcinogenic potential of styrene and concluded that styrene is appropriately classified as a Group C, possible human carcinogen. (7) EPA does not have a carcinogen classification for styrene; the chemical currently is undergoing an EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) review to establish such a classification.(5)
Post Icon
Quote:
Great info. The property/rent next to a factory is probably a lot more inexpensive than if it was in a better area more suitable for kids playing. ...this is starting to sound a lot like Erin Brockovich's case: [quote]The case alleged contamination of drinking water with hexavalent chromium, also known as chromium (VI), in the southern California town of Hinkley. At the center of the case is a facility called the Hinkley Compressor Station, part of a natural gas pipeline connecting to the San Francisco Bay Area and constructed in 1952. The case was settled in 1996 for $333 million, the largest settlement ever paid in a direct action lawsuit in U.S. history.[/quote] more at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Brockovich
Please login/register for access
Report forum post by:
Report a concern
Comments: