Fabric Softener - A Conspiracy?

Personally, I don't use the stuff. I don't like the smell, I don't like the way clothes feel, I don't like the way I ITCH after using it.

When people give me clothes to use in my quilting, they go straight into the washer for a very long scrubbing to get as much of the stuff off as possible.

Today, I did some cleaning in my mom's room while she's in Baltimore awaiting a surgical procedure. She likes her curtains to have fabric softener on them to dry wrinkle free right on the rod - as well as to "smell good". I don't argue that clean curtains smell incredibly better than dusty, stale curtains. But I don't like the fabric softerner smell.

So - I got thinking about the stuff. How safe is it really? You can find all sorts of conspiracy theories about it out there - very extreme discussions. I decided to go for the guts of the information - the MSDS - Material Safety Data Sheets. Everything under the sun has one.

Ya know what? These companies that make both liquid and dryer sheet style fabric softeners aren't required to list the "inert" ingredients - such as the perfumes. So - I can understand folks yelling conspiracy.

The following is unconfirmed - I just can't find accurate ingredient lists for *any* fabric softener out there. So believe at your own risk:
http://shop.sixwise.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=155

Here again is a list of just some of the chemicals found in popular fabric softeners and dryer sheets:

Benzyl Acetate: Linked to pancreatic cancer
Benzyl Alcohol: Upper respiratory tract irritant
Ethanol: On the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Hazardous Waste list and can cause central nervous system disorders
A-Terpineol: Can cause respiratory problems, including fatal edema, and central nervous system damage
Ethyl Acetate: A narcotic on the EPA's Hazardous Waste list
Camphor: Causes central nervous system disorders
Chloroform: Neurotoxic, anesthetic and carcinogenic
Linalool: A narcotic that causes central nervous system disorders
Pentane: A chemical known to be harmful if inhaled

Here is the MSDS for Bounce Dryer Sheets (except their "Free" brand)
http://www.officedepot.com/pdf/msds/302830.pdf

What I found as "active" ingredients are as follows:

Fatty acids, C10-20 and C16-18- unsaturated, reaction products with triethanolamine, dimethyl sulfate-quaternized
Quaternary ammonium compound http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_ammonium_cation

Basically - those fatty acids are ammonia derived - not what you'd call "naturally occurring" substances. Between the fatty aspect blocking or insulating the fabric from static, the "charge" of the molecules help neutralize any static trying to be produced by all the friction.

Isopropyl alcohol = 2-Propanol - I'm assuming to keep the above from forming clumps in liquid, or sticking together between packaged sheets.

All companies state both active and inert ingredients are biodegradable (so is plastic, given enough time), and that are designed with environmental concerns in mind.

Now - given the chemicals that are found in polar bear fat and earthworms - I'm not going to be as confident in their statements as they'd like.

In conclusion

Why use fabric softeners? It's not like a woman wears a wool dress with a silk slip anymore. Why have these products compete with a perfume you actually LIKE?
Why waste the money?
Why make it so your clothes and towels can't absorb water - which is exactly what a fat will make any fabric do - repel water.
Why itch?
Why risk a fire in your dryer?
Why waste the energy to produce, ship, stock, use and then toss?

Dryer balls do the same work without all the negatives. AND they dry your clothes faster. No fabric softener can do that!
The packaging sucks, but at least it can be recycled...
http://www.asseenontv.com/prod-pages/dryer_balls.html

You can also order them in just about any catalog out there and I've seen them at Rite Aid. Can't vouch for any other store.

Theories On The Environment

10/26 Theory On Drought Monitoring
8/28 Desertification
8/20 Wind Turbines Along Highways - updated 8/29
Genetically Engineered Plants Destroying Bees?
Radio Frequencies and Bees
Global Warming

Theory on Drought Monitoring

10/24
I keep mulling this over and just don't know quite how to express it, so here it is anyway. LOL
The articles below point to a term I hadn't heard before, but had been sitting in the back of my mind every time it rained (which it is now).

Impervious Ground Cover. Basically that means anything that keeps water from absorbing into the ground where it falls. This includes roof lines, cement, asphalt. It doesn't even go into the semi impervious of decking, brick walks, etc.

If, as these reports state, most urbanized or urban sprawled areas have 50% of their property - commercial, industrial and private - covered with impervious ground cover, the run off is incredible. At least 40%, right?

The reason I'm saying 40% is that maybe 10% of the water gets absorbed into adjacent ground before it runs off into creeks, storm drains, etc.

However, just as our greenspaces for wildlife are becoming more and more isolated, so is our lands' ability to absorb water for the water tables.

Add the substantial increased use of water by urban sprawl and the earth is in a constant state of drought even when we have "normal" or "average" seasonal rainfall. I understand why meteorologists must report the averages. But I think they need to start taking some additional responsibility in reporting what's needed, how far below normal the water table lies and how people can increase their property's ability to absorb water.

If you think of a bed sheet and you only water in a few spots, it takes a very long time for all of that water to wick throughout the sheet. So goes our property. And, it will dry very quickly, with no reserve to keep it moist, leaving all plants in a constant state of stress.

Ha! I found THE best policy article

It totally substantiates what I'm saying. I've been talking about the great plains aquifer since I lived in Dallas TX 7 years ago. I'm going to try to write a letter to the editor on this subject. If anyone comes up with an eloquent way of saying this in 150 words or less, let me in on it!
Leslie

10/30 Great Blog Post From The Grist.org

Excerpt from article on Shoreland Preservation
Bruce Ferguson, an authority on stormwater management from the University of Georgia,
noted that roads and parking surfaces cover approximately twice the area of their
associated buildings and represent a good 50% of a built up urban area. For this reason
alone, it is important that everyone involved in land development take seriously the
emerging technologies of porous pavement systems.

Study of Salt Lake City area by 'zoning' (V - vegetation, I - Impervious, S - soil and dead vegetation) Figure 5 on Page 5 - very telling.

Study of Atlanta's loss of canopy and gain in impervious cover:
Over the last decade, Metro Atlanta has experienced unprecedented population growth. This change in population has resulted in an increase in impervious surface and a decrease in forest canopy. Overall Metro Atlanta is accumulating 28 acres per day of impervious surface and losing 54 acres of canopy per day, resulting in a ten year loss of 196,921 acres of tree canopy and a gain of 103,273 acres of impervious surface.

Desertification Theory

Work with me here.... (don't EVER let me do math when I'm tired)

The average human weighs 72.5 kg (old stat, but we'll use it anyway).
70% of the human body is water. That makes each human 50.75 kg of potable water.
1 kg = 1 l so that's 50.75 liters of water.
In 1900, only 1.65 billion people roamed the Earth. That's only 8.1 x 10 to the 11 liters of water.

There are currently 6.6 billion people (rounded down) 6.6 x 10 to the 9
That's 330,000,000,000,000 (or 3.3 x 10 to the 11) liters of potable water.

There are roughly 192,000 people added to the Earth every day. (I rounded down).
That makes the amount of potable water taken up by NEW human bodies 9.7 million liters daily. (9.7 x 10 to the 6)

Add the average daily (world, not US) use of water at 83 liters per person per day and you get another 5.5 x 10 to the 11 that the Earth does not have access to on any given day to create weather.

I'm not even going into the estimated liters trapped in trash heaps, landfills, etc., or in "modern" burial of bodies.


The Great Lakes in the US hold 6 quadrillion (6 x 10 to the 18) gallons (or 2.27 x 10 to the 19 liters) of fresh water; one-fifth of the world's fresh surface water (only the polar ice caps and Lake Baikal in Siberia contain more).

Now - when you look at these HUGE numbers, the amount in human bodies doesn't seem like that much.

But when you look at it in terms of an incredibly delicate balance that IS the Earth, the numbers add up. You can't take this much water out of circulation and expect the Earth to continue raining like before.

Looking at the future - 2050 say - predictions of between 9 and 9.4 billion are being bantered about. So, 9.2 x 10 to the 9 people using, both in their little jars of bodies or in their use, 1.2 x 10 to the 12 liters of water.

Am I advocating that every adult human become sterile for, say, a 10 year period? Not really.

What I am saying is that it shows humans, even without global warming, even without burning rain forests, even without poor crop management, are creating a very direct impact on desertification. Even if we did everything perfectly, irrigation, stop burning rain forests, proper crop management (retaining topsoil), we would still see deserts increase, droughts increase and huge swings in the rain cycle pendulum.

What can we do? I don't know. Strive for perfection in irrigation, crop management, rain forest restoration. That will at least slow the process.

If my math is off, PLEASE correct me. I did this on paper and am rusty with my exponents.

I've gone over it again and fixed the numbers. I'm sure I'll keep looking it over....

Go Unscented The Way Nature Intended

Ooo - that rhymed! I'm easily amused.

But really, let's be serious. How many scents does it take before our own noses revolt? Or have they already started? Allergies abound, sinuses drain at the mere mention of perfumes, and headaches are started just by walking past a store with a perfume counter.

Doesn't that tell you something?

Exactly how smelly are you to need all of these scents? I'll guess not very.

Look at everything in your house:
Toilet Paper
Shampoo
Conditioner
Soap - just walk down the aisle at the store for the answer to this one
Make Up
Deoderant/Anti Persperent
Toothpaste!
Mouthwash
Body Powder
Tissues
Clothes Detergent
Dishwashing Detergent
Clothes Stain Remover
Fabric Softener
Dryer Sheets
Furniture Polish
Pet Shampoo
Floor Cleaner/Polish
Shoe Polish!
Cigarettes?!
Toilet Bowl Cleaner
Window Cleaner
All Purpose Cleaners
Air Fresheners
Candles

Obviously the list can go on, and does. Endlessly.

What most people don't realize is these scents are not natural. They are chemicals made in a lab to be mass produced for consistency's sake. By slathering it on our bodies, coating our clothes, spraying it on our furniture, smearing it on our floors and spraying it in the air we breathe, we have no choice but to ingest unknown numbers of chemicals in unknown combinations and unknown quantities for most of our lives.

Officials say we are safe, but why don't we really think about it? Doesn't it sound just a little counter intuitive to say we're safe? Different cancers are on the rise, autism is on the rise, ADD/ADHD is on the rise, depression is on the rise.

Obviously, I'm one for conspiracy theories. I don't truly think all of these things can be attributed to scented 'everything', but doesn't it at least make you wonder just a little?

Plus, what byproducts are made in the production of these fake scents? What is it doing to our planet, between the energy consumed to make them and the disposal of byproducts after the fact as well as any that get into our water supply from disposal or just daily use?

Essential oils found in many products, has been linked to hormone disruption in prepubescent boys.
"The research, conducted by scientists for the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), suggests that a group of toiletry products, including gels, shampoos and lotions, appears to spark off a chemical reaction that causes a number of pre-pubescent boys to grow breasts."

So, why do we use them? What's wrong with smelling like a human for a change?

Do everyone a favor, and I mean *everyone* - stop using scented everything. Even for just one cycle of stuff. Buy one of each of product in its unscented form. I know some don't have that - toothpaste is one, but of as many as you can.

Once you're done with that little clincial trial, tell me honestly that you prefer having scents duke it out on your body.