C&EN Promotes Biased Research

A recent article in Chemical & Engineering News (C&EN) makes misleading claims about the effects of vinyl flooring on human health.  What’s more, it’s based on a flawed, agenda-driven study from a researcher with a track record of anti-PVC bias. We pointed this out to C&EN and they asked us to submit a letter to the editor to express our concerns. We did so, but they elected not to publish it. Here’s the letter we submitted, in full: 

When an article makes overbroad claims, cites biased researchers, and misstates basic facts, readers are the ones who lose. 

In “Chemists move indoors to measure the air quality in our homes” Celia Arnaud makes several concerning and misleading claims about vinyl flooring and phthalates. She claims that “understanding exposure and how various compounds affect human health is still a long way off.” This is patently false when it comes to phthalates. As far back as 2007, the European Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) published a detailed opinion on risk assessment of indoor air quality concluding that it “does not find consistent scientific evidence which indicate[s] that phthalates should be high concern chemicals in indoor air.” Similar indoor air assessments have since been published over the years, including by Health Canada in 2015 and in South Korean children from 2011. None of the studies have identified any phthalate-related concern with indoor air.

What’s more, the article bases its criticism of phthalates almost entirely on the work of Dr. Heather Stapleton who has a long record of collaboration with anti-vinyl activist organizations. Furthermore, the research cited in the article contains several flaws. The fact remains, even the greatest possible exposures found within Dr. Stapleton’s research were at least 25 times below the safe level as determined by the U.S. EPA. This alone undercuts the conclusions she makes; not to mention the many other methodological and scientific flaws found in the study. 

We appreciate the editors of C&EN for correcting several erroneous claims in the original version of the article. Still, the questionable source Ms. Arnaud relies upon for her story, and the misguided statements she makes, perpetuate distortions about vinyl flooring that misrepresent the facts and fail the interests of C&EN readers. 

Outlets like C&EN have a duty to evaluate the credibility of the ‘experts’ whose work they promote, so that readers can make informed assessments about the information presented to them. When they abdicate that responsibility, the public has a right to know. 

UPDATED: Environmental Health News Fails Readers on Study Coverage

Everyone, including journalists and news outlets, makes mistakes from time to time. Most of us are eager to correct errors or inaccuracies when they are pointed out to us. 

When an article or op-ed contains a blatant factual inaccuracy, we ask the outlet that published the piece to take action to correct the record, and do so publicly. Many of them do.  But Environmental Health News (EHN) failed to meet even the lowest bar when we pointed out an error in a recent opinion piece. 

Here’s what happened: 

A few months ago, EHN published an op-ed from a chemistry student at Carnegie Mellon University claiming that children were exposed to dangerous levels of phthalates by eating Kraft Mac & Cheese. There was just one problem. The student had overestimated the level exposure by at least 1000%. He claimed that one serving would exceed the EPA’s reference dose. The truth is that a child would have to consume 15 servings, or two family-size boxes, per day over a lifetime of 70 years, to exceed the EPA’s reference dose.

We contacted Professor Linda A Peteanu, Chair of the Department of Chemistry at Carnegie Mellon University with a letter detailing the mistakes. And, after contacting the School, we contacted Brian Bienkowski, the Senior Editor of Environmental Health News to inform him of the errors in both the op-eds published by EHN and in the underlying research. 

Unfortunately, Mr. Bienkowski ignored our letter and shirked his journalistic responsibility to ensure that readers have the facts.

Of course, we understand that students, especially those studying highly technical subjects, can make mistakes or miscalculations. But it’s baffling that a publication like EHN, which claims to be “dedicated to driving science into public discussion,” would print these false claims at face-value without any significant scrutiny, and subsequently dismiss our attempts to ensure the public has the accurate facts. 

It would be a disservice to readers if an agenda-driven bias against phthalates of any kind allowed this piece to go forward and ignore any attempt to correct the record. 

But if EHN won’t act in the interests of its readers, we will.

***

UPDATE: After we published this blog post, Mr. Bienkowski responded to our correction request and refused to make any correction to the op-eds in question. Astonishingly, Mr. Bienkowski seems to believe that he, as editor, doesn’t not have any responsibility to ensure that fundamental facts are correct in “opinion” pieces. The New York Times and the Washington Post both agree that fact-checking standards should apply to opinion pieces. EHN claims to be “dedicated to driving science into public discussion,” but it seems they are really only dedicated to driving their own agenda. Even if it means promoting demonstrably false, junk science.

PVC Yoga Mats: The Healthy, Sustainable Choice

Recently, we’ve noticed a disturbing trend: activists and media outlets are promoting misinformation about PVC in yoga mats. Several publications, including the Los Angeles Times and HuffPost, have attacked PVC yoga mats based on shoddy science and misleading claims. Meanwhile, they have also promoted alternative materials without serious examination of the potential downsides of their durability, safety, effectiveness, and cleanliness. If media outlets are going to continue to ignore the facts on this issue, we have an obligation to set the record straight.

Activists and their media allies wrongly claim that PVC yoga mats can pose a health risk to those who use them. HuffPost claims that PVC is “highly toxic” but the truth is that PVC is an inert material which has been rigorously studied for decades and has been used safely in consumer and commercial products for more than 50 years. 

The LA Times went even further, claiming that PVC was classified as a carcinogen by the World Health Organization. They removed that claim when we pointed out to them that it was false and the source they provided was actually referring to a completely different compound. PVC yoga mats do not pose any risk of harm to human health and this kind of fear mongering is simply irresponsible.

Additionally, both articles make dubious claims about the recyclability of PVC. Approximately 146 million pounds of consumer vinyl products are recycled annually. Since 2014, there has been a 40 percent increase in post-consumer PVC recycling.

And what about those alternative materials touted by these articles? In general, many of the materials they recommend may not be as durable or easy to clean, meaning that there is a very real possibility that they could result in more waste or a buildup of potentially harmful bacteria on the mats. But it gets worse the more you boil down to the specific issues with each material. Cork often contains significant amounts of methylene chloride, a highly toxic extractable, which is a probable human carcinogen. And “biodegradable natural tree rubber” does not decompose easily or quickly. In fact, it can take 50-80 years for rubber to decompose naturally. 

It’s unfortunate when outlets like the LA Times and Huffpost promote unfounded and alarmist activist claims rather than giving their readers a balanced view. The plain truth is that PVC yoga mats are durable, safe, easy to clean, and affordable for users. It’s no wonder PVC yoga mats are widely considered to be one of the most resilient and innovative options available on the market today.

National Geographic’s Advice on PVC in Medical Care is Dangerous

A recent article in National Geographic asks the question, “can medical care exist without plastic?” – but instead of presenting a fact-based analysis of this important topic, author Sarah Gibbens irresponsibly answers her own question by propagating the same false claims that entrenched, agenda-driven opponents of the material have advanced for years. 

Only in this case, if hospitals followed National Geographic’s misguided information and eliminated plastic from medical care settings, there could be serious life or death consequences. Plastic, specifically PVC, is absolutely necessary in medical care, as it has proven itself to be an invaluable material in hospital settings. 

A growing problem in the medical field is healthcare-associated infections, which occur when a patient is being treated for one illness and acquires an additional infection in the process. Making matters more complicated, many bacteria are developing resistance to existing antibiotics. 

PVC, due to its versatile applications, is crucial in helping to reduce and prevent healthcare-associated infections. PVC-based vinyl flooring and wall coverings can be easily washed and withstand strong disinfectants. Because PVC is an effective barrier, it can help minimize the spread of even the most infectious diseases. PVC is a common material used in the upholstery of furniture in waiting rooms and patient rooms as well, since it is more durable and easier to clean than other materials. 

Doctors on the front lines battling some of the most virulent diseases in the world rely on PVC -- because it does the job. It was, and continues to be, critical in helping prevent the spread of Ebola, by protecting the medical professionals and caregivers combating the deadly disease the field. There simply isn’t another material that can deliver the same level of safety, durability, and protection.

Opponents of PVC argue that alternatives should replace PVC in hospitals. But no other material rivals PVC’s capabilities. Do we really want to use unproven materials in these settings, where people’s lives are on the line, simply because agenda-driven constituencies say we should?

PVC opponents have questioned the recyclability of PVC used in healthcare. The fact is, much of the PVC used in medical care can be recycled. Nonetheless, hospitals require single-use materials of all types because they help prevent the spread of disease and infection. Reusable materials are not safe in certain medical applications given the potential risk of contamination, and that’s especially true when it comes to administering blood to patients. When PVC blood bags replaced glass bottles, they revolutionized the way in which blood is given to those who need it because of their safety, durability, portability, and reliability. While not safe for reuse or recycling today, efforts are underway to develop chemical recycling technologies to return these contaminated products to safe use while reducing the overall environmental impact.

It’s concerning that National Geographic chooses to promote an agenda-driven viewpoint instead of presenting a balanced analysis based on sound science on this topic and others. We have been forced to correct the record on inaccurate claims made by National Geographic, including a previous article by this same reporter. 

The simple fact is that PVC is vital to modern healthcare – and alternative materials are unproven, unreliable, too risky – and unnecessary. 

MORE: PVC in Medical Care: Innovation That Saves Lives

MORE: Does it really make sense to develop PVC-free materials in medical care?

Duke Researcher Misleads on Vinyl Flooring

Dr. Heather Stapleton’s recent study on vinyl flooring uses flawed methodology to draw a host of misleading conclusions. Those in the press who reflexively publicize her findings -- and fail to include important facts and context to help the public decide whether her claims are scientifically reliable -- do a disservice to readers everywhere.

Collaboration with Anti-Vinyl Organizations

Dr. Stapleton is not an independent authority on this issue.  She has collaborated with the Environmental Working Group (EWG) -- a group that has been ideologically opposed to vinyl flooring for years. EWG has called vinyl flooring “the worst flooring choice,” and the group’s distortions about vinyl material have been publicly corrected in the past. 

What’s more, Dr. Stapleton’s laboratory, The Stapleton Lab, is housed within Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment -- which partners with other organizations that have engaged in decades-long campaigns to deceive the public about vinyl. Specifically, it runs an affiliated internship program with Greenpeace, which actively campaigns against PVC material. Other internship partners include EWG and Earthjustice, another staunch opponent of the PVC industry.  

Combined, these relationships raise serious questions with respect to Dr. Stapleton’s independence on this important subject. 

Problems With Dr. Stapleton’s Study

Her research focuses on a specific phthalate called benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), which Dr. Stapleton claims causes health issues in children exposed to vinyl flooring in their homes. Here’s the problem: very little vinyl flooring sold in the United States today contains BBP. 

What’s more, her research relies on observational data by individuals who are not trained experts in distinguishing different flooring material types to determine whether, or how much, vinyl flooring was present in the homes of test subjects. And as any respected researcher knows, survey data is widely considered to be an unreliable data source. Notably, it is impossible for Dr. Stapleton to confirm that the vinyl flooring in the homes of the subjects in her study even contained BBP -- and verifying that is essential to the study’s overall credibility.  And Dr. Stapleton’s study failed to consider that the presence of BBP could come from a number of sources. After all, a study is only as good as its methodology. 

She also fails to note that no credible science exists anywhere claiming a connection between phthalate exposure and impacts to human health.  

Even more egregious, Dr. Stapleton’s own study shows that the levels of BBP that the children were exposed to were far too low to be of concern. According to her paper, even the greatest possible exposures were at least 25 times below the safe level as determined by the U.S. EPA. In other words, none of the children profiled in this study were in danger of exposure-related health concerns. There is simply no evidence in this study that children living in homes with vinyl flooring are at any greater risk than children living in homes with no vinyl flooring.

Alarmist findings may be attractive for media outlets to cover. But when the press blindly cover studies that rely on unscientific methods -- and fail to question their conclusions or provide important context regarding the author’s independence or credibility -- the public loses.  Readers can only make informed judgments when they have access to all of the facts. 

And a flawed study by an agenda-driven researcher does not change what years of credible science and real world use has proven -- vinyl flooring remains one of the safest, most reliable products on the market today. 

The Spruce Flip-Flops on Vinyl Flooring

It’s unusual when a writer correctly addresses the benefits of vinyl material -- then publishes a slew of deceptive attacks against vinyl flooring just a few months later. 

But when that same writer runs a business specializing in a competing flooring material, the dots start to connect. 

In a May 2019 article, Joseph Lewitin, a guest writer for the home improvement site “The Spruce,” penned a glowing review of the many qualities that make vinyl flooring an excellent option for homeowners:

“Vinyl flooring is a durable and resilient material that is both stain- and water-resistant, but perhaps the real draw is its versatility. Vinyl comes in tiles, sheets, and planks and can be printed with an almost endless array of colors, patterns, and textures. It can look like natural materials or contain complex geometric patterns with a range of vibrant, eye-catching colors.”

He continued: 

“Vinyl flooring can be manufactured to closely resemble any of a number of natural materials. … The faux wood has a rich golden hue that pairs pleasantly with the white cabinets and the hardwood furnishings in the space. The flooring combines the visual appeal of hardwood with the durability and easy maintenance of vinyl. … Vinyl is ideal for mimicking traditional tile work, such as tessellation or Victorian motifs. The color combinations are almost endless, and the details are as fine as those of hand-laid tiles, all in a material that you can install yourself.”

So we were admittedly confused when he changed his tune a few months later in an August 2019 article in the same outlet titled “The Environmental Impact of Vinyl Flooring.” In it, Mr. Lewitin repeats many of the same irresponsible claims about vinyl flooring that agenda-driven opponents of the material have perpetuated for years. We’ll be specific: 

• He portrays the PVC manufacturing process as a major producer of dioxin -- he’s wrong. Based on the 2017 EPA Toxic Release Inventory Data, chlor-vinyl dioxin emissions to air and water is 5% of all regulated sources of dioxin. Unregulated sources, such as uncontrolled burning like forest fires account for the majority of dioxin emissions in the U.S. In fact, residential wood burning has been estimated to be double the amount of dioxin emissions to air from PVC resin production.

• He incites baseless fear and hysteria over phthalates in vinyl floors -- but neglects to mention no credible science exists that remotely suggests these additives create any negative impact on human health.

• He stokes alarmism by claiming the storage facilities for chlorine used to make PVC could be exploited by terrorists -- but he omits that these plants have dramatically improved their security procedures and work closely with the Department of Homeland Security to prevent such an event. 

• He claims vinyl flooring emits volatile organic compounds (VOC) -- but neglects to mention that vinyl flooring products are low emitters and that manufacturers certify their products to the very stringent California VOC emissions standard.

• He singles out emissions of vinyl flooring in house fires, but he fails to note that all materials -- including wood -- emit harmful chemicals in the event of an accidental fire. 

• He insinuates that asbestos is used in adhesives for vinyl tile installation -- he’s wrong (again). Asbestos formerly used in one type of adhesive has not been used in the last 35 years.

• He misrepresents vinyl flooring tile’s environmental qualities. He makes broad, baseless claims to vinyl flooring’s composition, recyclability and disposal. But the material’s superior durability and longevity minimize energy use by requiring fewer repairs and avoiding frequent replacement when compared to other flooring materials.

This brings us to an important question: Why did Mr. Lewitin make a sudden 180° on vinyl flooring? The Spruce points out that Mr. Lewitin “started his own business specializing in stone flooring,” which is a direct competitor to vinyl flooring. And with vinyl flooring increasing in popularity everywhere, perhaps he realized that scaring the public with deceptive claims about competing materials -- instead of conveying the facts -- is a more effective business strategy. Readers are also right to wonder why the editors at The Spruce didn’t pick up on Mr. Lewitin’s turnabout on vinyl flooring -- and published his piece filled with misleading characterizations about vinyl material despite the possible conflict of interest. 

Vinyl flooring is one of the safest, most durable, resilient and versatile products on the market today. Readers deserve to have the facts on flooring issues -- not competitively-motivated views disguised as independent commentary.

Consumer Reports Misleads Readers on PVC

A recent article in Consumer Reports is riddled with misleading claims about the safety of PVC products. When we brought these errors to the attention of the editors at Consumer Reports, they corrected only the most egregious and indefensible mistake and ignored the rest. In the interest of transparency, it’s important that readers know there are a number of other inaccurate and misleading points in the outlet’s one-sided article -- points Consumer Reports declined to correct. 

Mr. Loria, the author of this article, incorrectly suggests that phthalates used in PVC products are unsafe. The truth is that phthalates have been safely used in consumer and commercial products for more than 50 years. Rigorous risk assessments by government agencies in the U.S., Europe, Canada, and Australia have all concluded that phthalates present low-risks in their intended use. He irresponsible stokes unnecessary fear of perfectly safe products. 

Mr. Loria also bases his story on a study that used contrived conditions with very little applicability to real-world use of plastic products. The study itself notes that “it is important to highlight that [the researchers’] aim was not to draw conclusions regarding the health impacts of plastics” [emphasis added]. 

But that is exactly what Mr. Loria does in his article. Even though he includes a caveat that plastic products “aren't necessarily harmful to human health,” he uses these flawed findings to advocate for the avoidance of plastics whenever possible. He also presents the findings of the study with very little qualification or discussion of their limitations. As a result, readers are misled to believe that the products they use every day are, in fact, harmful. And it doesn’t live up to the high standards of an organization that self-proclaims an adherence to  “truth, transparency, and fairness in the marketplace.”

Quite the opposite.  Mr. Loria ignored journalistic standards of fairness and sourcing by not seeking comments from anyone with a dissenting view. The result is a one-sided article that fails to provide readers with the facts and context they deserve. Had Mr. Loria contacted any organization with a view contrary to his preferred narrative, he would have been informed of his errors and given critical context on the issue to ensure that his readers were not misled. 

We brought this oversight to the attention of Consumer Reports and provided them with the statement below. They elected not to print it and chose, instead, to deny their readers a balanced view of the issue. Here is the statement we asked them to include in the article:

Consumers have a right to the facts — and they indisputably show that PVC is a safe and reliable material. The study at the center of this article offers no evidence to support the claim that PVC or other plastic products pose any human health risk in normal use. Phthalates in flexible PVC have been safely used in consumer and commercial products for more than 50 years and rigorous risk assessments by government agencies in the US, Europe, Canada, and Australia have concluded that they present low-risks during intended use. 

Sadly, this kind of one-sided and misleading treatment is all too common in reporting on PVC products. Publications like Consumer Reports should provide consumers with a complete picture regarding the products they use. The public deserves better than slanted coverage from outlets claiming to look out for their best interest. That’s why we will continue to hold those reporters and outlets accountable when they miss the mark on PVC.

MORE: Getting Smart Around Phthalates

The Facts About Vinyl Gloves in Food Contact

When activist organizations spread misinformation about vinyl products, we set the record straight. Here’s their latest distortion: