Make it illegal to sell and hang automatic air fragrance sprays in public spaces such as hotels, medical offices, ferries, gyms, etc. that spray toxic chemicals known to disrupt hormones and promote disease.
7 Likes
Why not make those toxic chemicals illegal in the first place
5 Likes
Because true freedom means you are free to use toxic chemicals if you want,
1 Like
I would agree with you in this case. We should not be in the business of forcing the government to ban an entire product line from a free market economy simply because some of those products employ dangerous and/or damaging chemicals. The proper approach seems to be the researching and banning of chemicals used in gradual disbursal products positioned in public spaces (ie: air fresheners). Thus, these products remain on the market, and remain in compliance as soon as they leave the factory floor, and before they hit the store shelves. As such, one person should have the right to hang air fresheners in their family eatery for the comfort of their customers; while customers who do not care for said smell, can avoid patronizing that business. And everyone can remain healthy and happy, knowing that illegal and harmful chemicals are not being disbursed into public spaces. How doe sthat work?
I’m a huge advocate for the free market but in this case people are only buying air fresheners with toxic chemicals because they don’t know they are toxic or there aren’t alternatives, companies can make products that don’t harm people as long as the right incentives are in place.
If you believe it’s necessary to keep these chemicals legal than we should have the FDA test air fresheners for them and add labels exposing the potential damage these products can cause
1 Like
on the other hand, freedom means, too, to ve confident that objects that are sold are safe, or at least the dangers clearly communicated.
2 Likes
A brilliant suggestion you made! After all, we could consider “breathing in of particles generated by a company-manufactured product” as a form of “public consumption” even though it is being “consumed” through our nostrils. It should follow the same scrutiny as would other consumable products, I would think. Maybe this can be done without “growing the govt” too much, huh? This would keep dangerous hormone-disrupting chemicals out of public air spaces, and also keep the product line open to the public, who wishes to enjoy regulatory-approved healthy fragrances as well – I still like my occasional apple spice and vanilla air fresheners, especially during the holidays. 
1 Like
I’m interested in knowing who you believe these products are in compliance with? The Consumer Products Safety Commission does not require safety testing prier to a chemically ladens products release rather most are Grandfathered in by the EPA and accepted as generally safe. So many are only pulled off the market after many decades of use and harm presents itself in the human population. When the EPA started it GRAS over 80,000 chemicals to begin with for testing. Fragrance Emitting Devices along with fragrance products are not testing or regulated outside of after the fact. Not singularly now synergistic across all exposures. Major deficiencies in the safety of humans from the onslaught of chemical exposures across the board.
Kim S, Hong SH, Bong CK, Cho MH. Characterization of air freshener emission: the potential health effects. J Toxicol Sci.2015;40(5):535-50. doi: 10.2131/jts.40.535. PMID: 26354370.Article Link: Characterization of air freshener emission: the potential health effects - PubMed - PDF
“The use of these products (air fresheners) may be associated with an increase in the measured level of terpene, such as xylene and other volatile air freshener components, including aldehydes, and esters. Air freshener is usually used indoors, and thus some compounds emitted from air freshener may have potentially
harmful health impacts, including sensory irritation, respiratory symptoms, and dysfunction of the lungs.”
“The constituents of air fresheners can react with ozone to produce secondary pollutants such as formaldehyde, secondary organic aerosol (SOA), oxidative product, and ultrafine particles. These pollutants then adversely affect human health, in many ways such as damage to the central nervous system, alteration of hormone levels, etc. In particular, the ultrafine particles may induce severe adverse effects on diverse organs, including the pulmonary and cardiovascular systems.”
“This review suggests that exposure to air freshener compounds, such as VOCs that react with ozone to form secondary pollutants, cause diverse health issues. In addition, several key compounds such as benzene, terpenes, and phthalate etc. of air pollutants are related to air freshener use. We suggest that the use of air fresheners should be avoided, and there is a need to reduce chemical components which are potentially reactive with ozone in air fresheners.”
Farrow A, Taylor H, Northstone K, Golding J. Symptoms of mothers and infants related to total volatile organic compounds in household
products. Arch Environ Health. 2003 Oct;58(10):633-41. doi: 10.3200/AEOH.58.10.633-641. PMID: 15562635.
Article Link: Symptoms of mothers and infants related to total volatile organic compounds in household products - PubMed
“Higher TVOC levels were associated with air freshener and aerosol use. Infant diarrhea and earache were statistically significantly associated with air freshener use, and diarrhea and vomiting were significantly associated with aerosol use. Headache experienced by mothers 8 mo after birth was significantly associated
with the use of air fresheners and aerosols; maternal depression was significantly associated with the use of air fresheners. The results of the study suggest a link between the use of products that raise indoor levels of TVOCs and an increased risk of certain symptoms among infants and their mothers.”
[Note: Fragranced products emit VOC’s that can contribute to higher particulate matter (PM) indoors and out.]