Summary-line: 3-Feb wilcox@cis.ohio-state.edu #Please Post to Mailing List *** EOOH *** Return-Path: Date: Sun, 3 Feb 91 09:05:45 -0500 From: Patricia P Wilcox To: cnorman@ucsd.edu Subject: Please Post to Mailing List In reply to: 880039a@aucs.acadiau.ca (Katherine Astels) >A while ago you mentioned a type of whiteboard markers that are more >safe than the "Expo" markers but I don't seem to have saved the name. >Could you please send me the brandname again? The only type I've even >seen in this area is the "Expo" but I'm hoping to convince one of the >local stores to order them in for me, if possible. In another 3 months >I'm moving away from this farm community into a city - I can't wait to >be near some real stores! The less-toxic ones are Sanford Expo II (low odor) Dry Erase Markers, which are alcohol-based (ethanol and isopropyl alcohol). Note that they are not totally innocuous. I am sensitive to isopropyl alcohol, too (as I discovered when they took a blood sample without letting the alcohol dry completely after using the alcohol wipe -- arm swelled up and I developed temporary arthritis pains in the elbow joint). But (so far anyhow) it's nowhere near as disastrous as my reaction to methyl isobutyl ketone. Sorry, the real stores in the big cities won't have them in stock, but they can special-order them for you. Our book store finally agreed to stock the low-odor markers after I twisted their arm a whole lot. --Pat Wilcox In reply to: sequent!roseal@cse.ogi.edu (Rose Alford) >I am wondering if there is any action that can be taken against Sanford >Expo (legal action that is) to make it stop selling those whiteboard >markers. I am wondering the same thing. First necessity is to mandate that the manufacturer list the ingredients on things like marking pens and cellophane tape. 3M won't even tell me what is in their package sealing tape (which causes me terrible headaches and neurological symptoms). First thing I need is to get a medical doctor to put down in writing that the solvent in those whiteboard markers is disastrously toxic to some non-negligible part of the population. In many cases, even the victims themselves aren't aware of the cause (a lot of this is because of the time delay between exposure and symptoms). In _Chemical Exposures: Low Levels and High Stakes_ by Ashford and Miller (just published -- required reading for everyone on this mailing list!) they quote an experiment in which Broughton and Thrasher (1988) were able to demonstrate the existence of antibodies to formaldehyde- albumin conjugates in formaldehyde-sensitive people. This is exactly the test that must be done with methyl isobutyl ketone -- an unambiguous laboratory demonstration that people are developing an immune reaction to it. I'm also getting ready to write to Dr. Sidney M. Wolfe, editor of the "Health Letter" from the Public Citizen Health Research Group 2000 P. Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (this is one of Ralph Nader's consumer advocate groups). These people have in the past brought lawsuits against a variety of organizations (private and public) in the hazardous chemical area. In-Reply-To: Diana Gregory >Re - action against manufacturer of whiteboard markers - probably not. They >are CLEARLY labeled 'use in ventilated area' - the small ones, anyway. So >any use that isn't outdoors will be defended by non-compliance with the >label instructions (ummm - that sound legal enough???). Yeah, well, if you send away for the material safety data sheet for Deft Spray Lacquer (which contains the same solvents that are in whiteboard markers) it says to use an OSHA-approved organic solvents mask, or a mask with a self-contained oxygen supply, when you use the stuff. Using in a well-ventilated area just doesn't begin to approach being a solution for people who are hypersensitive to these chemicals in parts per *billion*. I don't honestly think Sanford has any idea of the dimensions of the problem, although they certainly know that their markers make some people sick. One trouble is that there is a large hole in our labeling requirements. *Everything* that the public is exposed to should be required to list every ingredient, as is required for drugs. It's just that the various federal regulatory agencies do not yet realize that any chemical in the environment, no matter how it got there, is acting as a drug, and that many people are suffering drug-intolerance-like reactions to these things. Some of the worst offenders are exempt from labeling requirements. --Pat Wilcox (wilcox@cis.ohio-state.edu)