How to update a session abstract and your speaker profile for a specific event? First go to eventier.com and log in with your registered email. Under your profile name, select My Sessions. Here you find a list of all sessions you submitted to different events. Select the one you want to update. In the View Session window, select Edit Session to update your session details. Or select Edit Speaker to update your speaker profile. Finally, edit your session or speaker details. Then hit the Submit button to save your updates.


What is going on guys? Welcome back to the channel and I appreciate you being here today. I am back with another top 50, 50 people Destiny 1 Clips. Now as you guys know my top 5 email address is absolutely, I got about 30,000 clips in there. So if you like these throwbacks to Destiny 1, seeing how epic this game was in compilations of 50 clips, go ahead and smash that like button, the support really does help me out. Today we have all sorts of epic clips, WTF moments, fails, funny reactions, the lot. So if you do enjoy the video like I said leaving a like really does help me and my channel out and if you want to see more and you're new around here make sure you subscribe. Well thanks as always for stopping by, hope you enjoyed the video and hopefully people will all see you on the next one. Heavy ammo available, 3 is yours. He gets the middle of a beef. Now we're gonna go inside. Now we're... Oh dude, no. I just died from misadventure. What the heck? Heavy ammo available, team eliminated, enemies have been eliminated. Another battle won. On to the next enemy team. Zone C neutralized. Roy, you gotta see this. Zone C neutralized. Heavy ammo on the way. Neutralized. Zone A secure. Enemy team, heavy ammo available. Zone A neutralized. You control all zones. Whoa, he captured zone C. Heavy ammo available.  Oh baby. Jesus Christ. You're the last gun in the fight.


You know it got better every day this year seemingly that would be J.D. Martina Baby, baby, come on Mama bring the whole family. That's what we do here bring the whole family. Oh I love it. What's happening? It's okay Hey, you want to introduce your family it looks like they're leaving you want to introduce your family real quick for us My sister right here and my little nephew Tristan. Oh That you weren't Boston many years ago that both tweeted Yeah, yeah, she's the one from the famous picture J.D. Congratulations Alex starters off go ahead you're a Miami guy I mean, I've been so impressed look you're in Boston in a historic city with great ownership and all of that But you remind me of a guy that's a real icon like this guy in Boston Larry bird It's your work ethic that's been most impressive and how much better you make everybody around you Where did that come from and do you think that obviously worked here? You know honestly that really could that came from my parents. You know, I got to give credit to them I mean other Cuban descent, you know came from Cuba started with nothing my dad used to You know foot pizzas a hundred hours a week at Domino's pizza He was a manager and he was had to raise six kids You know to starting his own business and becoming you know a great businessman like he is now You know my parents always taught me never give up never quit and if you want something hard enough You just got to keep working and you know, believe in yourself because no one else How do you expect other people to believe in you if you're not even believing yourself early? Lady listen, the one street is that you are a psychopath a mania when it comes down to hitting I mean this guy was unbelievable here. This guy was an unbelievable I wasn't okay here But the one is trees that you are crazy about hitting your preparation the guys around you make them better Because I saw my own eyes What would you get that from? Yeah, I don't know. I think it's just the drive to want to be the best, you know I think you know, I think that's why everyone plays this game. You know, you want to be the best You want to be great and you know to me I can't go up to the plate and Go 0 for 4 and Then go home and sleep good at night if I know I didn't do everything I could possibly do to prepare for that game You know, that's the way I look at it because I can't I can't Lay in bed with that thought now if I go up there and I prepare and I done everything I can do Both mentally mentally and physically to get ready for that game. And you know what I go over for with four strikeouts then I Can go to bed saying why did everything I could possibly do today four strikeouts. You're not sleeping. Okay I've watched you for the last few years man. You've been the most impressive hitter in baseball to me I've spoken that all year long. I saw you in Detroit. I saw you go to Arizona I saw what you did in Boston and you're missing a magical moment right here. Oh, man And I want to look at the singles you have earned this you made everybody that clubhouse on offense Oh, yeah, but been that rock in the middle. Dang. I'm missing it. It's all right JD.  Get in there? Go man. Come on. We can't keep him here


What's up everyone? Welcome to a brand new movie review. Today I'm discussing Unfriended Dark Web. This is a brand new horror thriller film from Blumhouse Tilted and of course also the semi-seagull I guess to the first unfriended. Now the first unfriended I actually thought was a cool premise I thought it's very enjoyable. It's a different take on the found footage genre Which I'm actually it's kind of like a guilty pleasure for some of these films Some of them are really good some of them are horrible and some of them are just eh And the first unfriended I thought was very good, you know, at least it was very interesting to me I thought it was interesting how they filmed it. Was it the best execution? Absolutely no, but coming into this, you know You're kind of getting away from that generic paranormal stuff that the first one did and it's landing us in the dark web Which I was like man, that's a cool premise, you know I'm wondering how this is gonna go because the dark web if you look into that that there's some freaky crap on there and If you look up just stories and there's some scary stuff on there I don't want to get into but Unfriended Dark Web had a lot of potential and I will say it executed pretty well in the first Act or so and after that it kind of just fell and became just another generic horror thriller film Which kind of sucks because I was so on board within the first 40 minutes I was so engrossed into these characters engrossed into the concept of this dark web that this kid just finds his laptop and doesn't know Who it is, but I mean that's that's scary to find out like this person's just watching you and It's intriguing to see where the build-up for this story is going in this kind of like Cult in a sense that they're building up as the villains as it continues It's opening up different areas of the dark web and they're going more and more into it And I thought that's where this movie was gonna keep going and just opening up building up this little mythology and having a pretty solid ending And for me, it's like there comes revelation in the second act where stuff just starts happening And once this event happens the whole film just becomes very generic very generic You know exactly what's gonna happen by the end of the film and yes, there is rumored to be two endings for this film I've heard that from multiple people. I didn't like my ending to be honest So I'm curious to see what the other ending is and see what the changes are to that And I'm curious not to go see the film again and watch it Maybe pick up the blue brain see if what the difference is or look it up online or discuss with some friends who saw this But I didn't really like the ending particularly I mean the whole third act for the film kind of just fell apart from me just again Nothing horribly wrong with it. It's just generic. It's predictable and you know where it's gonna go But that first act to the second act was something different And it kind of does what the first film does is it it engrosses you into these characters Nothing super scary or thrilling not relying on jump scares per se There's maybe one or two in here, but nothing like super obvious and annoying But it's just building up this weird crazy premise and the actors do a really solid job in these moments Was engrossed into their stories and wondering what's gonna go no one really stuck out like to sort them like oh my god I just die already.  No each and every one of them did pretty good I thought the direction for what they were doing was great until that third act the third act Just feel it generic and it turns this whole film into what could have been an interesting thriller Using this different type of fan footage premise Into just another generic horror film that I won't remember by tomorrow Kind of sucks because I was really into this premise again And it just let me down by the end where it relies with the first one I think they're pretty much on the same par you know pretty much the ending just kind of takes it downhill for both films So a lot said I'm gonna give unfriended dark web a C You know one of the worst films I've seen this year and definitely just gonna be a very forgettable film for me sitting Now I was like man. I'm gonna look at my phone. Oh god. I still got 35 minutes left of this film and Yeah, just sucks to say that curious to hear you guys thoughts on unfriended dark Web where you guys a fan of the first film are you not a fan of the first one?  That's what we're gonna talk about down below I think if you enjoyed the first one you're intrigued to see the premise Go check it out if you're kind of just I don't know maybe go check out another film this weekend Can't wait to talk with you guys down below as well If you guys want to talk more movie culture go hit up all my social media links Then go check out sports go hit up sandwich on films down below cuz right down there you guys get into advanced movie screens Which are fantastic check out some movie news and also some movie reviews You see guys you guys are all the best and with all that said I'm gonna be doing a giveaway for a pop Funko It's really cool. That's pop. So look out for that video later this weekend I'm probably gonna put it up Sunday. So look out for that also guys trailer reaction weeks San Diego Comic-Con's out tons of trailers some of them will be like some of them won't and I also got one special Over you come in later this weekend. So you guys are seriously all the best Can't wait to talk to you guys soon and of course stay cool


This study found that women who are more autonomous in decision-making are more likely to have children with better growth outcomes. This suggests that empowering women to make decisions about their own and their family's health can be beneficial for child development. This article was authored by Mahama Sakaka.


you at the last hearing to respond to this whole concern about reggae regrettable substitution May ask you again about that because if I recall correctly and I may mischaracterize it if so, I apologize You said well gee, that's a serious problem, but I'm really wondering what is the answer to that Well, I don't remember saying that but but I will say words to that effect. Well, okay I'll update it or reiterate what I said last time It's regrettable if you haven't studied the chemicals well and put a lot of stewardship into that I'm based on my experience So what I see companies do when they talk about ask me to take a look at their procedures or look at individual studies I think companies are I think there won't be regal substitutions I think what you're going to see for new molecules in particular if companies see problems with the molecules Without exception they stop developing the molecules And that's my personal experience. So that is not an issue. I worry about moving forward And I you also in your written testimony said that there are several published risk assessments that demonstrate Quote reasonable certainty of no harm, which is about as close to saying the word safe as the sun just ever would How recent are these risk assessments? And can you tell me which OFRs are mentioned? Sure. Actually, uh, yeah the term actually comes from EPA language That's where I got the reasonable certainty. No harm. There's two in particular that are worth looking at FSA the european food safety Authority, and I think a date is 2013 is the revision on that for TBBPA And their conclusions I happen to have it here a couple of points and I can send you the document if you would please be glad to One of the things they look at is exposure of children exposure of children to TBPA from dust does not raise a health concern That's FSA's opinion and FSA is a pretty conservative organization. I've dealt with a lot of molecules in that group There's also a publication. I can send you to by wickoff And I think she looked at all exposures including dust drinking water Infants older children etc and develop margins of exposures to ways looking at risk For ptBPA as well, and I can send you that. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. You're welcome Thank you commissioner robinson Thank you. Um, dr. Zuckerman. I would like to turn to you for a minute We have other witnesses who have talked about the the core the The causal connection between higher levels of OFRs in blood and urine and children and the resulting effects on the on the child's health Could you give us your thoughts on the staff's position that we cannot grant this petition in part? Because we can't trace the presence of OFRs in house dust Specifically to the four products that are at issue in the petition Uh, I think that was the part that surprised me the most in the report. I couldn't make sense of it. Um, I will say I haven't distinguished between all the studies that they looked at That were that were included in the petition and the studies we have today And perhaps the studies we have today are just so much stronger and better But there's so much evidence as I said the you know, if this is not the product But if this were the product the dust concentration of OFRs here would be higher than here and children um, would be Differentially influenced By being exposed to the ones here than being exposed to ones there So, I mean we know in other words the closer you are to the product the right and the more there are That's the other thing. It's not just close.  Goss, I you I don't want to get sloppy here in terms of talking about how essential flame retardants are in electronics Because generally speaking I don't think you'll find anybody disagreeing with that But we're very specific in this petition that we're not talking about flame retardants inside of electronics that are sealed in But rather in the casings and we had some testimony the last hearing that the only Reason you would need that is if you held a candle up to a television and I was so why do you why do you include Specifically OFRs in the casings of electronics when you have so many of them that are perfectly allowable inside The the use of OFRs Again is is very specifically designed in to meet Safety and consumer protection standards here. I'm not familiar Necessarily with the the example you shared about candles and television Enclosures here. I will note that between the the three associations here that I'm representing here today We make our members make a huge range of electronic components Finish products devices etc here In terms of the use of OFRs and I'd be happy to come back with with specific And specifically I would love to hear why the casings. That's all we're talking about here We're not talking about internally, which doesn't get into the house stuff And I'd like to since I have a little bit of time here. Um, I'd like to turn to Ms. Dr. Rios and to Stephen Taylor You know we've we've you you have presented us with information about mexican americans non-hispanic blacks and lower socioeconomic classes Having of children having higher levels of OFRs in their blood and urine and you mr. Taylor have talked about Products in the dollar store having higher OFRs I'd just be interested in and you can go in any order you want, but I'm interested I mean the implication here is that somehow having OFRs is more expensive So why is it? Um In your opinion, we have these lower socioeconomic classes that are More that the OFRs are higher in the blood and urine of the children You spoke dr. Rios about breastfeeding but aside from that I think that uh, mr. Taylor made the case for You know the the uptake of of meeting the regulations and safety requirements as Part of the issue in our low-income underserved communities where facilities that uh stores or Products that are that are purchased that are sold Are not meeting some of the safety requirements. I think that's part of the problem Mr. Taylor could you could you just comment? I mean if it's more expensive Which is what I heard the implication being from commissioner more heroic to have OFRs Why with the cheaper products are they higher? If you know well, I think you're I mean partly you're asking about the um, you know back up the the supply chain You know and the the decisions made by you know manufacturers, which in some cases are in china and you know by the The sort of plastics manufacturers that sell to them. Um, you know, which is is largely beyond my expertise But you know, I would say that um The even in the discount retail dollar store universe The different chains have different products that they sell and and somewhat different business models So a dollar general for example sells products You know of five 10 15 20 dollars sometimes even higher they sell small microwaves small dvd players Uh, the chain big lots, which is again a a deep discount store They actually sell a lot of low-end furniture. So um, you know, you're largely asking me to speculate But I would speculate that you know, they're sourcing their products in some cases Even though they're lower cost products um from factories or manufacturers that um You know may make similar products, but in some cases for some retailers Using, you know, higher quality somewhat more expensive materials And for discount retailers sometimes using lower cost lower quality materials Mr. Taylor, excuse me. I'm going to manufacturers Are sourcing your tenants the foams the fabrics the plastics From manufacturers. I apologize. Mr. Taylor. I'm going to cut in your time has expired and we've gone on Far beyond the five minutes. It's a commissioner k Thank you, madam chair Mr. Goss earlier today was suggested that one of the reasons why the commission should deny the petition is that These flame retardants are not used in these products anymore or that there's a trend in the direction of them being phased out It sounds like you're presenting testimony here today to the opposite at least when it comes to your industry. Is that correct? We are still using OFRs in in certain discrete uses. That's correct. Is it are they being phased out though? Is there an active campaign to phase them out? Yes, there is OFRs in your industry. Correct and who is leading that? What's sort of the game plan? Uh, who is who is leading that I would say are without naming, you know brands here Uh, we have a number of leading companies in our in our organizations rich writ large here in terms of our membership That are constantly looking to innovate and find More effective ways to meet the same requirements here. I mean we are an industry built on innovation Our products are constantly being updated upgraded And evolving here and this is one of the things that we have a very strong commitment to I'll mention here I've been serving this role for about 13 years the materials content of products is one of the key things I've worked on both here in the us and in europe and this is just part of an evolution From our industry as part of our commitment and you have a ballpark timeline as to when you think that these would be phased out Similar to the the response. I gave to commissioner adler I I don't want to wager a guess right now, but I'm happy to come back If I can get some more clarity from from companies as to what they believe is is a timeline potential You're understanding at least present day is that they continue to exist and continue to be put on the market in your products They continue to be used ofr's continue to be used in discreet uses in our products, correct And when your organization makes a recommendation or makes a decision or you recommend to your members how to handle a certain product Or a chemical or you even decide to come in and to support or not support something like this petition What technical Expertise do you rely on to make that decision not you personally about your organization right no excellent question We have certainly within all of our companies. They have science and technical experts toxicologists epidemiologists Who work on this type of an issue full-time? I also have on my own team at iti a chemist who previously testified at the at the prior hearing on this same topic back in 2015 this is based on the expert judgments of those scientists and technical experts in our companies who are reading the latest Pure reviewed literature and looking at how they can make improvements while still maintaining the same product performance and safety profile And we'll get back to that last little bit you mentioned at the end because I think that's actually a pretty significant clause You added on there Do you do your experts of any reason to disagree with the testimony of dr. Burnbaum earlier about the seriousness of this hazard and the impact on children? I believe they would one of the concerns that that we have with with the petition and some of the prior testimony today Is it is trying to draw very specific conclusions based on broad data that is specific to other types of compounds in the same class And we don't believe that we can make that necessarily Leap from certain studies on other types of compounds to an entire class As the petitioners and as some of the witnesses here are proposing today We would similarly question whether there is sufficient Evidence to demonstrate that while yes, there there certainly are studies that show that there is some level of exposure Whether that exposure actually goes into an actual adverse human health impact here. So I would believe that yes Some of our experts would take some issue with that. So you disagree with dr. Burnbaum's testimony specifically. I I disagree while you asked specifically about dr. Burnbaum's testimony. I would disagree generally With the petitioners conclusions and some of the supporting testimony that says that we can necessarily Make a specific judgment or the commission should make a specific judgment on an entire class of OFRs based on Certain studies on certain members of that class as we've discussed here today There are significant data gaps here and there would be significant unintended consequences should the commission go ahead And carte blanche ban all OFRs But do you disagree with with uh, director burnbaum's testimony that the FRs that OFRs that have been studied to date Are demonstrating an alarming Impact on children. Do you disagree with that? There there are certainly some studies that supporter conclusions I would also point that to commission to EPA studies from 2015. I believe That demonstrated that certain other OFRs had a low risk and I'm happy to share those studies With with the commission is appropriate and but of the ones that dr. Burnbaum talked about are your members using those despite the impact on children My my understanding again from the context of dr. Burnbaum's testimony was that she was uh referring Perhaps not explicit and excuse me not perhaps only but largely to pbd ease As my recollection from her testimony this morning and we are no longer using pbds Those were restricted by the eu ross directive 11 years ago, and we have long since moved past the use of pbds Thank you. My time has expired. Thank you. Thank you commission more over. Thank you, madam chairman I wanted to follow up on the line of questioning. Um, mr. Goss that uh was pursued by commissioner robinson in terms of pointing out very specifically what's identified here in the petition with regards to the casings of the products I was um, I didn't know that there would be so much interest from the rest of my colleagues I was hoping to ask you first. Um, I did my best effort to Paint with a broad brush and looking at the electronics from What I gathered from visiting with by phone with ul experts who helped me better appreciate the evolution of the voluntary standards with regards to the electronics I was hoping to ask you to provide some let me you know to to Let me know where I got that wrong or to talk about how the standard has evolved I think commissioner robinson mentioned Or mentioned that she she remembered the video demonstration of a small open flame being applied to the housing of Of an electronics product. I specifically remember that as well. Can you provide any sort of? Of information for the commission in terms of how the standard has evolved with regards to Where there is a requirement for resistance to flame Yes, I'd be happy happy to provide that especially in follow-up Follow-up submissions here, but if you look at ul and also ic international electric technical commission Standards for product safety. There are certain requirements for again for safety and flammability here that our members need to meet And that includes in the casings are at large here because obviously I'm sure there are probably exceptions here, but practically every product electronic product is going to be carrying A current or a charge that we need to factor in when we're doing our design and protective design Approaches here. So if you're if the question is if you're looking for how have the requirements evolved over the years We're certainly happy to provide additional input on that I am with specific regards to the casing because if I was If I was wrong in my assessment earlier, I apologize to the commission and into the public Are there still Requirements for the casings. Yes. There are still requirements for casings to to be able to withstand a certain flame or or not Be subject to ignition as the current runs through them Again, as I said before there are different ways to meet these requirements But overall and again as I said before there's no perfect outcome on balance Our manufacturers and designers believe that the use of flame retardants including some OFRs Are the most efficacious way to meet those requirements Balancing the use of those compounds with consumer safety. Mm-hmm in the casings. Yes in the casings I'm happy to apologize Thank you very much Thank you all very much that ends this rounds of questions from the commission I would like to thank all of you again for being here for giving us your time and Your expertise sharing it with us. Thank you all very much and to mr. Taylor on the phone Thank you for joining us and Again my appreciation to all of you for being here. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you I'd like to ask the Participants for our next panel to please be seated Thank you all very much We are going to resume our hearing this morning And I want to welcome the participants in our fourth panel Thank you for being here all of you. We do appreciate your presence On this next panel. We're pleased to have mr. Daniel Rosenberg from the national resources defense council While mr. Rosenberg is presenting dr. Jennifer sass from natural resource defense council is also available to answer questions Secondly, we have mizlis hitchcock from the safer chemicals healthy family Ms. Catherine rogers from the silent spring institute Ms. Kathy attar physicians for social responsibility Ms. Raquel seagull international association of fire fighters And miz abigail zebote the league of united latin american citizens Thank you all very much for being here and for taking the time to testify before the commission today With that we will Ask dr. Mr. Rosenberg to proceed My parents wish it was dr. Rosenberg Dr. Vla Thank you. I'll take that. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the commission today My name is daniel rozenberg and i'm a senior attorney with the natural resources defense council nrdc I have two principal messages to deliver to you today First this commission should not rely upon the fact that the toxic substances control act or toska Has recently been reauthorized and may be starting to emerge from its 40 year slumber As a reason not to grant the petition the current petition as i outlined in my written testimony The revised toska will move very slowly and evaluate only a few chemicals at a time and over fairly long timelines EPA has already selected the first 10 chemicals on which it will be focusing its resources for the next several years And only one of those 10 chemicals hbcd is a flame retardant The fact that epa is planning to evaluate hbcd should not dissuade the commission from granting the petition for several reasons In the first place the fact that hbcd excuse me was selected by epa as one of its first 10 chemicals for review In the company of such other notorious substances as asbestos and methylene chloride Indicates the serious seriousness of the agency's concerns about the chemical Second any evaluation and potential restriction of hbcd will take years And there's no reason why the public should continue to be exposed via Via consumer products while epa conducts its review Third the epa's review of hbcd as an individual chemical is not a sufficient substitute for what the petitioners seek A restriction on the use of organohalogen flame retardants as a class Fourth there is precedent for the cpsc taking action on a chemical to protect the public Before epa itself takes any action In in our early 1970s the cpsc banned the use of carbon tetrachloride and consumer products now 47 years later epa has selected carbon tetrachloride as one of the first 10 chemicals other first 10 chemicals for evaluation under the revised tasca After the first 10 chemicals that epa is going to evaluate it will select an additional 20 chemicals for review by the end of 2019 a process that itself could take an additional 5 to 10 years for evaluation restriction, etc There's no guarantee that epa will select any other flame retardants or a class of flame retardants for review as part of that process There's nothing in the structure of the new tasca or its current implementation that justifies any hope that epa will address the health threat posed by organohalogen flame retardants In a manner or a time frame that will provide meaningful protection to the public for years to come if ever Meanwhile, the commission has the authority and the opportunity to protect the public right now And that is my second message to the commission Consumers remain woefully unprotected from exposure to toxic chemicals in their daily lives Particularly from consumer products as evidence has grown about the health threats posed by numerous chemicals including flame retardants And the extent of human exposure No federal regulatory agency has come close to adequately addressing this problem Existing limits on the use of toxic chemicals are remarkable both for how few there are But also for how successful they have been in increasing public health protection The most significant restrictions on the use of toxic chemicals including the ban on pcbs and any new uses of asbestos under tasca PCBs was a class of chemicals not individually regulated, but banned as a class The commission's bans on carbon tetrachloride vinyl chloride and self-pressurized household products And restrictions on lead and paint and children's products The ban on lead and gasoline under the clean air act and fda's recent ban on Fluorinated chemicals and food also banned as a class These are the few but very important examples that should be the lodestar for the commission's decision to protect the public from this class of toxic chemicals Now the chemical manufacturers will tell you that their products are safe the same thing they said for years And in some cases are still saying about lead asbestos pcbs and vinyl chloride The chemical manufacturers will tell you that the economy will be disrupted if you ban specific uses of their products The same thing they said for years and in some cases are still saying about pcbs asbestos lead and vinyl chloride And the chemical manufacturers will tell will urge you not to take action either because more study is needed Or because some other regulatory body epa or fda or osha is the right agency to address the problem The same thing they have said for years and in some cases are still saying about asbestos pcbs vinyl chloride and lead We urge the commission not to join the legion of previous regulators who have been cowed and diverted by the chemical manufacturers As the record makes clear Contrary to the staff report the commission has all the information it needs to act to protect the public And dramatically reduce human exposure to a class of toxic chemicals that currently invade our homes and enter our bodies even prior to birth The commission has before an opportunity to take a step that will be as significant and as beneficial As previous historic decisions to protect the public from exposure to asbestos pcbs lead and other toxic chemicals We urge the commission to take that step and I just also want to thank the staff for all the work They did in putting this hearing together Thank you very much. Mr. Rosenberg Ms. Hitchcock Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. My name is Liz Hitchcock, and I'm the government affairs director for safer chemicals healthy families I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of the petition by earth justice Cfa and several of our coalition partners to adopt these rules and protect consumers and children from the health hazards Caused when toxic flame retardant chemicals are used in household products Safer chemicals healthy families is a nationwide campaign to reduce americans exposure to toxic chemicals Our coalition membership reflects the multiple ways americans are exposed to and harmed by toxic chemicals Where parents health professionals advocates for people with learning and developmental Disabilities scientists environmental groups organize labor and businesses from across the nation And we all share concerns about the increase in negative health outcomes associated with our exposure to toxic chemicals In addition to our policy work safer chemicals healthy families is the organizer of a market campaign called mind the store Which calls on the nation's largest retailers to recognize the growing consumer demand for safer products and to restrict dangerous chemicals Through mind the store we've worked with retail giants like target and walmart to adopt and implement safer chemicals policies In my written testimony, I relayed our concerns about the negative health effects of toxic flame retardant chemicals Because others will ably cover that ground. I'd like to focus today on the movement in the marketplace away from these dangerous chemicals And why that movement should encourage the commission to act favorably on this on this petition In 2014 healthcare giant Kaiser Permanente announced an effective ban on chemical flame retardants in the furniture it buys For its hundreds of facilities across the country Putting 30 million dollars in annual furniture purchasing power behind its health and safety commitments Other healthcare providers have followed suit Big office furniture purchasers like facebook and yahoo have also signed a pledge to buy office furniture without toxic flame retardants Leading furniture manufacturers and retailers are already bringing furniture to market without these chemicals Demonstrating that a ban on their use can be accomplished without major disruption in the marketplace I attached to my written testimony a list of the retailers and manufacturers of residential furniture That have announced that they'll no longer use toxic flame retardants For example, ashley furniture the largest manufacturer And retailer furniture in the country worked with its supply chain To eliminate the chemicals from all upholstered furniture at the beginning of 2015 Other major furniture retailers including walmart macy's pier one ikea. I could go on and on But my time is limited Are have either eliminated or committed to eliminate flame retardants These are positive developments that might even tempt us to say that voluntary measures work that the market's doing a bang up job And should just handle the problem That's a temptation that I hope that the cpsc will not fall prey to I also attached to my written testimony a Recent list of manufacturers who report still using flame retardant chemicals Many of those companies reporting That they're using the chemicals in their products are not commonly known. Many are based in china You heard on the last panel from my colleague from the center for environmental health that they found flame retardants still in use In 25 of children's products We've seen that in other studies by non-governmental groups That flame retardants are still in use in products on the market Voluntary actions are terrific and as a group that does market campaigns We definitely celebrate them, but we also recognize that those commitments are not enforceable And verifiable particularly by individual consumers and we need the consumer product safety commission to act To make them enforceable While it's encouraging declining use and voluntary movement in the marketplace should not be a rallying cry for inaction These chemicals are still being used in products that our children come in daily contact with They're in our living rooms. They're in our children's rooms They're in nap mats in children's furniture with kid friendly images like elsa and elmo They expose our families to unnecessary hazard. They expose first responders to additional danger These chemicals are hazardous. They're hazards that the cpsc can and should do something about Educated consumers have changed the marketplace for a number of household products and in the process They're making us safer companies that have responded to the consumer demand For safer products deserve a great deal of credit But while market victories can seem faster than regulation, the process is chemical by chemical business by business Very slow and not yet enforceable if we're if we are to take the urgency of tackling the chemical problem Seriously, we have to take bigger bites out of the problem as as soon as we can And on behalf of consumers represented by safer chemicals healthy families We urge the commission to take a bite out of this problem and approve this petition Thank you very much. Ms rogers Um Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak here today. My name is catherine rogers I'm a scientist at the silent spring institute an independent research organization. We're based outside boston, massachusetts We research environmental chemical exposures and their impacts on women's health I think it's also relevant to say that I serve on the secondary task group for nfpa 277 Scientists at silent spring institute were the first to measure pbds in us homes in 2003 at that time They were found to be 10 times higher than levels in european homes Since then we've continued to measure pbds as well as other brominated and chlorinated flame retardant chemicals in residences as well as more recently in student dorm rooms on college campuses In every study that we've conducted We have found homes or spaces That have levels of halogenated flame retardant chemicals that exceed risk based Guidelines these are guidelines developed by the EPA that actually applied to soil but since there isn't a risk-based guideline for dust We've been Comparing the levels that we find to that and it's actually a screening level that's used for superfund sites In a study of california homes that we did we found brominated tris the mutagenic chemical that dr. Arlene bloom was talking about earlier this morning That was removed from kids pajamas in 1978 in 75 percent of the homes that we tested And I was recently looking at other studies that have looked at dust and households And for those that are measuring these types of flame retardant chemicals our studies are not an anomaly these levels are commonly found in homes in massachusetts in North carolina and california and other places Several of the organohalogen flame retardants that have been most commonly incorporated into consumer products to reduce flammability Are vivid examples of regrettable choices that have seriously harmed us consumers I know we've heard a lot about pbds, but i'm just going to say a little bit more of them about a class as a class Just because we have a lot of a lot of evidence about them So as you know, they were added in large quantities additively To foam furniture Additively meaning that they weren't chemically bound were able to come out of the product leading to exposures They were added despite their structural similarities to pcb's which were removed From many uses in the 1970s and 80s A recent consensus study report from the national academies of sciences concluded that pbds are presumed to affect iq and humans Based on a systematic systematic reviews of human and animal evidence And what human evidence really means is that there were high enough exposures in the general population In children in the us In order to measure reductions in their iq The nas report found that it found a decrease of 3.7 iq points in a child per tenfold increase in serum pbde concentrations Children in the us have some of the highest pbde exposures in the world And that's a tragedy when we have that kind of evidence A recent analysis of the economic cost of exposures to endocrine disrupting chemicals Estimated that 11 million iq points were lost with an associated $266 billion in medical costs in the year 2010 So halogenated flame retardants can act as mutagens as in the case of brominated and chlorinated tris While pbde's hbcd and tvbpa and others may act as endocrine disruptors So we've heard that pbde's act to impart their neurological effects partly by inhibiting Thyroxine a important thyroid hormone that's necessary for brain development pbde is also exhibit cell proliferation and estrogen sensitive breast cells And they produce changes in mammary gland development in animal studies TBbpa, which we just heard that uh from doctor awesome, it's um was Came close to receiving a pass per safe in 2013 by EFSA Was more recently studied by the national toxicology program and was found to produce uterine tumors and in a rodent study We have yet to see the human outcomes associated with these estrogen related and mammary related biological activities As scientists were well aware that toxicity data available at the time that these chemicals were introduced as flame retardants and consumer goods Could have been used to anticipate these outcomes We encourage the cpsc to adopt a more effective approach to protecting harms from chemical hazards We're tired of discovering these preventable harms when it's too late. Thank you. Thank you very much miss attar Thank you. My name is kathy attar, and I am the toxics program manager at physicians for social responsibility PSR has a long history of educating organizing and advocating around the issue of toxic chemicals and their link to poor health I have over 10 years of experience on issues related to chemical toxics I'm also a mom of two children farah age a and alex age five PSR strongly supports the petition that a broad coalition of health environmental and public interest groups submitted to the consumer product safety commission in 2015 That seeks to ban organi halogen flame retardants from children's products furniture mattresses and household electronics As a parent you are determined to do whatever you can to ensure your Children are safe when my daughter was young she put everything in her mouth as most babies and toddlers do I mean everything toys TV remotes books anything that fit during this time through my work as an environmental health advocate I started to learn about the health dangers related to certain chemicals and consumer products chemicals like harmful flame retardants As many have already stated These flame retardants are linked to an ever increasing number of health concerns such as cancer neurological deficits developmental problems and impaired fertility Many persist in the environment and can bio accumulate As many have also already stated One of the main routes of exposure to these harmful chemicals is believed to be through ingestion and inhalation of contaminated indoor dust As mr. Taylor earlier referenced children of color and low-income kids bear a higher burden from these chemicals than others A fact that raises serious concerns about environmental injustice Not everyone can go to stores in their communities which may sell less toxic products or can afford to purchase safer items One of my son's favorite toys is our couch. It's a flatbed truck or a cargo ship or a castle Unfortunately, the couch was purchased several years before california issued its new safer furniture flammability standards So it undoubtedly has toxic flame retardants in it I'm pretty obsessive about wet mopping our living room But there's little doubt that my kids have been exposed to some level of dust containing these hazardous chemicals The average lifetime of a couch is 15 to 20 years per owner and couches are often passed on to others Purchased at a second hand or thrift store perhaps by a low-income family where they are used for many more years Flame retardants and furniture are a prime example of the hazardous legacy of inadequate chemical regulations Even when chemicals are involuntary withdrawn under pressure from regulators or the public The substitutes often end up being just as worrisome Because they also contain organo halogens or are similar in chemical structures As health professionals and scientists have already stated earlier Organo halogen flame retardants are endocrine disrupting chemicals Exposure cdcs during critical times of growth and development can result In genetic genetic modifications that are passed down to subsequent generations Endocrine related diseases on the rise Neuro behavioral disorders associated with thyroid disruption have increased over the past decade Decades rates of endocrine related cancers breast ovarian prostate and thyroid have been increasing over the past 50 years These environmental health statistics became very real for me in 2015 In august my mom was diagnosed with late stage ovarian cancer And a few days before halloween. I was told I had early stage Invasive ductal carcinoma a form of breast cancer While I will never know what caused our cancers Exposures to environmental pollutants may have played a leading or supporting role in the onset of our disease I worry about my children and particularly my daughter and what her future health risks might be Given my family history of endocrine related cancers in women We need binding regulatory change that by keeping toxic chemicals out of our products and our lives Can reduce the risk of chronic diseases for all families And individuals no matter your race or socioeconomic status Is not enough that use of halogenated halogenated flame retardants is going down We need the cpsc to take steps that will ensure That organohalogen flame retardant chemicals are removed for imported low-cost products and other items in which they are still used Flame retardants are not needed to prevent fire and improve overall safety in the four product categories outlined in the petition So there is no reason to continue exposing children and other consumers to these hazardous substances Parents want and need the government to step in much more robustly to robustly to protect the health of all families. Thank you Thank you very much miss seagull Good afternoon commissioners and thank you for allowing the international association of firefighters To testify today on the petition requesting rulemaking on products containing organohalogen flame retardants I am rachelle seagull the occupational health specialist at the iff And speaking on behalf of matt vincy the director of education who cannot be here because he's assisting with relief efforts in florida The iff is an international union that represents over 309,000 paid professional fire service employees in the united states and canada And have been actively involved in improving the health and safety of firefighters for more than 90 years This is a critical activity for a workforce in which fatalities and early retirement due to work related injuries and illnesses occur regularly Cpsc's jurisdiction clearly covers consumer injury from fires And we know that the primary cause of injury in home fires is from smoke inhalation There is strong evidence Which has been submitted to the commission showing that flame retardants do not in fact protect consumers from fire related injury But given that cpsc is considering fire risk to consumers It should also take into account the hazards to consumers and firefighters from smoke inhalation during a home fire At a minimum the cpsc should look at very high cancer rates experienced by firefighters as strong evidence Of the toxicity faced by our members whose homes catch fire Firefighters dying from occupational related cancers now account for more than half the line of duty deaths each year This is the largest health related issue facing the firefighter profession. We must reduce this number And removing the class of non polymeric organo halogen flame retardants in products is a positive step forward And protecting first responders from the harmful effects of these toxic flame retardants In the vast majority of us workplaces toxic occupational exposure levels have greatly declined in the past two to three decades Improved workplace conditions can be attributed to many factors including governmental agencies legislation training programs and good business practices including The need to keep highly skilled workers healthy and working Unfortunately firefighters have not benefited from this overall improvement They are still entering uncontrolled hazardous environments regularly There are various studies on the complex mixture of chemicals found in smoke combustion That firefighters commonly encounter and the studies have clearly documented reasons for concern about these Exposures recent studies have also shown that firefighters have higher levels of flame retardant chemicals in their body than the general population Firefighters come into contact with toxic flame retardants in their daily lives Just like the rest of the population But they have a much higher risk of suffering the negative effects of carcinogenic flame retardants as those chemicals burn in a fire They're exposed in the air they breathe during the overhaul fires the absorption through their skin During and after working in a fire and after the incident as they're exposed to the toxic soot on the on their turnout gears and equipment It is the ifs position that this exposure contributes to the reason that our members have a significantly higher incident rate of certain types of cancer The national institute of occupational safety and health has recently conducted a landmark study of cancer among us firefighters That included data from over 30 000 career firefighters employed between 1950 and 2010 The research found that firefighters compared to the general us population had statistically significant increases in both diagnosis And death from certain cancers The ifs supports banning the use of organo halogen flame retardants because when burned They're all all carcinogens that contribute to cancer and have additional negative effects on the health of our members The ifs also supports efforts to remove toxic flame retardants from upholstered furniture and other products and supports Efforts requiring manufacturers to support products manufacturers of such products to utilize alternative technologies in lieu of toxic chemicals Even the increasing body of evidence that indicates the persistence biocumulation and potential health concerns of these fire retardants We believe the health risks associated with the use of these chemicals is greater than the fire risk without using these chemicals This is because some flame retardants can retain can remain unchanged in the environment for a long period of time without breaking down And resulting continuous exposures during and after working at a fire There are two key ways to impact the use of toxic flame retardants In products one is through the standard setting process and the other is through regulating the chemicals themselves These strategies can be most effective in combination Since restricting use of one hazardous flame retardant cannot guarantee that future flame retardants will not be safe for human and For human and environmental health In closing the ifs will continue to fight for the elimination of these toxic chemicals I thank the commission for allowing first responders to have a voice in protecting our job environment while still maintaining The highest level of fire protection for the citizens we protect every day Thank you very much. Mrs. Missapoti Thank you. Hi, everyone. My name is Abigail Zapote. I'm here representing the league of united latin american citizens The oldest and largest latino civil rights organization in the united states established in 1929 I sit before you today not just on behalf of lulac But with the tremendous responsibility to more than 50 million latinos Who cannot be here today to take a stand against toxic exposure This time we are dealing with an invisible and insidious assailant that threatens the sanctuary That is our home and hinders our community's ability to defend itself As an organization that advances the economic condition educational attainment political influence housing health and civil rights of hispanic americans We're include increasingly concerned about exposure to toxic chemicals and its impact on the health and quality of life of latinos From the womb to households Workplaces and communities fighting to reduce toxic exposure in our communities is intrinsically tied to our mission The science indicates that the highest human levels of harmful flame retardant chemicals in the general population Have been found in young children from low income communities and communities of color In particular the 2003 national health and nutrition examination survey Conducted by the centers of disease control and prevention found at least one form of organi halogen flame retardants in 97 percent of the study participants This biomonitoring study also showed that Mexican americans and non hispanic blacks had higher levels of flame retardants than the non hispanic white population Teenagers ages 12 to 19 had higher body burdens than adults for all flame retardants retardants measured What we know is that the exposure to organi halogen flame retardant chemicals can lead to serious health problems Such as reduced IQ disruption of hormones cancer and reproductive impairments These exposures threaten the health and educational attainment of our children and in doing so their prospects for future an economic condition Education is key to social mobility yet exposure to flame retardant chemicals is robbing our children of their potential A 2012 study of mexican american children in the state of california found that children who live in areas with limited access to safe outdoor play spaces tend to have higher levels of the toxic flame retardant chemicals in their blood While this information may be new to us What isn't new is the fact that nearly half 45 percent of the nation's latino population Lives in 10 metropolitan areas in the states of california new york new jersey texas illinois florida and arizona When you consider the urban areas where nearly half of our community lives And combine that with findings that show that racial and ethnic minorities and low income people have less access to green spaces Like parks or recreational programs than those who are white or more affluent What that signals to us is that minority and low income children are spending more time indoors And instead of being safe their exposure to flame retardant chemicals is heightened For latino households immigrant and non immigrant alike What good does what good does it do to operate under the assumption that if you work hard and study You will change your circumstances and be able to provide yourself and future generations with more opportunities and improve And an improved quality of life If we continue to allow flame retardant chemicals to invade our home We're diluting latinos and all families into believing that we are safe in our own home And an equal footing as those who afford to live in green spaces and purchase their way out of toxic products This is not an option for latinos Who have a median annual personal income of 21 000 dollars and 41 000 dollars in medium household income Furthermore despite increases in health coverage Latinos continue to have highest the highest uninsured rate of any racial and ethnic group within the united states At 19.9 compared to 11.8 for blocks 9.3 for asians and 7.6 for non hispanic whites When you take into account economic status and health insurance coverage You can begin to imagine how our community is already limited And the in its ability to protect itself from toxic exposure and deal with the health impacts associated with it Our family should not have to know what our gohanology and flame retardants are Or that there are toxic chemicals that do not stay inside the products manufacturers That put them in We shouldn't have to worry about flame retardant chemicals off-gassing from children's products furniture mattresses and the casings around electronics into our homes Entering our bodies and persisting in our systems When you look at our demographics and the range of socio socioeconomic factors Affecting us. I'm hopeful that I've provided you with a deeper understanding of our community and the sense of urgency I feel as I said before you today You have the power to protect our community and the league of united latin american citizens urges you to take swift Action to ban these harmful and pervasive chemicals. Thank you Thank you very much. We will now begin the round of question from the commission. I will begin that time Ms. Siegel I wanted to thank you for coming on Seems like with short notice to fill in for mr. Vinci. He is a A friend of the agency and has been here before to testify I want to please send him our best wishes and that he will be safe and that He's in our thoughts. Absolutely. Thank you. I also wanted to call attention to a couple days ago I think it was tuesday the house passed a bill aimed at improving firefighter health And it will require the cdc if it actually gets passed into law, but it is really a recognition and it's important public health legislation But it will require cdc to develop and maintain a voluntary registry to collect data With regards to the incidence of cancer among firefighters. So There's a recognition that cancer among firefighters is an issue and perhaps this will help in the efforts to decrease that because they As you mentioned they are on the line For all of us and for our safety. So thank you very much. Thanks for being here Ms. Hitchcock. I had a question to ask of you clarification So on page one and in your testimony you talked a little bit about How the market is sort of correcting itself that we're seeing fewer products and certainly all the initiatives that have been taken To have companies manufacturers of furniture We're seeing fewer OFRs in their products Am I portraying that accurately? I would say yes fewer but What I tried to highlight in my testimony is that we are seeing more commitments From retailers and manufacturers who are recognizing and hearing from consumers the the greater consumer demand For safer products commitments are a first step Enforcement and accountability are a next step So the answer to your question is a qualified yes So What what confuses me and maybe just because the date of the study isn't included on page two it talks about A duke study 85 percent of couches tested in a duke university study Contained toxic or untested flame retardants. So maybe you could put that study in some perspective or time frames that When was that done? It says 2012 Okay, so which I mean is the trend that the flame retardants are out of products This is I think and I I say that in the staff's briefing package one of the issues We've talked a lot about it this morning the data gaps that we A lot of these studies are older now. This is already five years old So maybe you could just speak to is the trend certainly with tb 117 california standard No flame retardants in their Products in furniture many of the manufacturers of furniture have already adopted that standard We tried to get the commission to adopt that standard as well But I just want to Be clear on that The trend right now is that the use of flame retardants in furniture is going down and that duke study is older The duke study is older. I wouldn't uh, I I don't have the data to speak to the trend Uh question I I am hearing uh and through our mind the store campaign We do hear commitments from a growing number of major Manufacturers and retailers, which I think is a very positive thing The the reason that I'm here today is to endorse the petition and endorse the the commission taking action Is because as an individual consumer I have no ability to police whether police the Actual action behind the commitment that retailers are making many of them I'm I'm sure are moving forward on those commitments, but I bought a mattress a year ago and I had no ability to to say that the That the that the mattress as I was looking at had flame retardants did not have flame retardant flame retardants I'm sure that the staffer in the showroom wouldn't have appreciated me cutting into the into the mattress and sending it off to a lab Which might have been my only recourse. So we're urging that the commission take action to Level the playing field make it possible for more manufacturers to follow suit But also make it Make it make it enforceable that they all follow suit. Thank you and I would say that Apparently it's lunchtime I would say that My time is up. I'll commission other Thank you, madam chair Ms. Siegel, first of all, let me join in thanking you for all the work that You and your organization do It's wonderful that we have first responders here testifying So we're always trying to balance health risks versus fire risks And I know that you as a group obviously would have to do that and I'm impressed that you're saying to us that You think the greater hazard is the health risk and not the fire risk And so let me ask you if you have a thought If we were to ban organo halogen flame retardants Do you believe that the risk of fire deaths would increase in the united states? No, we do not think that so for us The higher rates of fire deaths are from inhalation. So it's it's inhaling all the Combustion from the fire and it's also the particulates that are remaining on our turnout gear and equipment. So, you know on as I said on here, they're More than half of the line of duty deaths are from cancer So we are not seeing the high rates of you know deaths from just fires It's more from what they're inhaling and what they're taking home with them and what they're constantly being exposed to Well, do you think there would be more fires if we were to ban organo halogen flame retardants? I want to say no, but I do not know enough to answer that Okay. Well, I certainly don't know enough to answer it either I would like to ask the scientists and is dr. Sass here If not, we can ask The other scientists We just heard dr. Osmits testimony about this notion of reasonable certainty of no harm Which I think is a good test and he specifically referenced the tbbpa and one other chemical which I wrote down is tcbp But I bet I got it wrong, but I'm just curious of For those of you who are familiar with these chemicals Can you state that you either agree disagree with this notion that these have been determined to Have this finding of no reasonable of excuse me reasonable certainty of no harm Ms. Robgers, you did express an opinion So I wouldn't want to confuse a lack of data with safety For tcpp. I would say that there is a there's a lack of adequate studies to show that It is in fact safe And for tbbpa as I mentioned earlier There was a recent study from the national toxicology program that showed exposure to rats produced them uterine tumors And keeping in mind the physical and chemical properties of ofrs Is there any reason to believe that we're going to run across an ofr that Carries the same characteristics as the rest of the family or the class that will somehow Produce such a low level of toxicity that we need not worry about it is is I guess the critical question so tcpp Is structurally similar to tcep tcep is listed as a carcinogen in california's prop 65 and tcpp is not So there are certainly our differences even when there are structural similarities tbbpa tetra bromo bisphenol a Is a really large molecule It is endocrine active So yeah, not we're not saying that all or I'm not saying that all of the organo halogen chemicals Um act via the same mechanism as I said some of them act They're mutagenic in more like classical carcinogens whereas others are producing their health effects via endocrine disruption So I would just say no, they're not all they don't all exactly act the same way Um, but there needs to be further study is yeah, and the terrible metaphor I was using is I don't care if I get hit by a sedan or a truck If either one is going to kill me then I worry about it So that even if there are varying levels of toxicity if there is sufficient negative toxicity associated with them inherent toxicity That's what we need to worry about Doctor is it dr. Atar. Okay. Ms. Atar You have to look at a variety of chemical hazards, and I'm wondering as you look at ofr's versus other toxic risks Under our jurisdiction, where would you rank the concern we should have with respect to ofr's versus other toxic risks? I think my organization physicians for social responsibility our belief is that uh, we were looking to prevent harm and We we feel that there is enough evidence Now with these ofr's to take action and and to ban this whole class of chemicals. I mean Dr. Blum earlier stated that since the 1970s we've been Researching looking at these chemicals. So from my perspective And from my organization's perspective There is enough evidence now to take action And I think you all have the ability and right to do that. And so that's that's why i'm here. I really You know really feel like this is is an opportune time for For for action Thank you very much. Thank you commissioner. Robinson. Thank you one of the questions I haven't had time to ask today. I'm mr. Rosenberg. I was glad to hear in your presentation that you addressed at least some of it and that is I I was wondering whether anyone had an example of regulators regulating a class of chemicals and you gave us some and I quickly wrote down the pcb ban on on As a class and f the fda As a class Outlawed fluorinated chemicals in food. Are there other examples where regulators have banned a class of chemicals? I'll have to get back to you on that. Okay, there may be and i'm not sure that I should clarify the pcb ban Am I talking too loud with this microphone or is it okay? Okay, the um The pcb ban was a was enacted by congress. So when tosk was first enacted in 1976 That was the only chemical that was specifically banned. So it didn't come from me. It wasn't a regulator But it was banned as a class treated as a class. Yeah, okay um If you could find any other examples, I would be very interested in hearing that um miss the potty uh Miss lios Testified about the she was talking about the I think she was talking about the anhanes data as well And you also cited a 2012 study of mexican-american children in the state of california not Having access to as many greenspaces. I'm very curious about this with the lower socioeconomic classes and with the latina community That we seem to be finding higher OFR levels in the children's blood neuron and I don't gas don't speculate But do you know of any other studies that have shown us an explanation of why miss lios talked about? Breastfeeding you talked about not having as much access to greenspaces, but do we know why it's higher? Um, I can't cite a specific study. Um, the only thing I can speculate and I do have uh, personal testimony Um, so a lot of latinos in the united states. They do live in mixed families mixed status families. I was uh formerly undocumented for 15 years I know that for my family there was a lot of fear of even stepping out of my home and fear of You know being deported And so for a lot of my childhood I spent it inside my house. I lived in From the time I was six years old to 12 years old I lived in a four bedroom apartment with 12 people living in it So I think that this is something that you know is very prevalent in our communities because it is Our community is still in the state of fear more so now than ever So that is a speculation, but it it is you know, very prevalent in our community. I appreciate that. Thank you Ms. Hitchcock That you talked about the companies that that have decided not to use OFRs. Do you have any idea what they're using as a substitute for flame retardants? I couldn't speak to that now Okay, and have have you in the surveys that you've done of you have you asked people why they were moving OFRs from their products? Is it just because they're good people or it's because of regulations? Or state laws or consumer preferences? I I think that the answer is that again growing consumer demand it's And the the change in the in the california standard is moving Is causing companies to move away from From these chemicals Consumers don't want them. They they don't have to have them so So why use them and so So that's The answer that we've seen. Okay, and and so if you look at the timing, does it look like the california standard was instrumental in bringing this decrease in OFRs It's I think that it is helping the movement away from from these chemicals in the market I have nothing further. Thank you Thank you commissioner k Thank you, madam chair. Uh, miss rogers or dr rogers. Is it dr rogers miss rogers? Uh You've heard testimony from today from toxicologists and others about the varying state Of the science. What is your view in terms of the hazards that these products or these chemicals prevent present? And who to whom do you think is most at risk? Um, so this is kind of similar sounds similar to a question It was asked earlier as far as how concerning are these OFRs compared to other toxic chemicals that were exposed to on a daily basis I think a lot of scientists would say that These would top the list as far as thinking about if you if you were to look at Exposures in the u.s population and you were to look at toxicity and you were to rank them both OFRs are really they're they're merging at the top So they would be a high priority and as far as considering who's vulnerable We've heard a lot about hand-to-mouth activity and there's evidence that children are much highly much more highly exposed than adults There's many studies that pair mother and infants looking at Biomonitoring studies looking at levels and both and see that Infants are up to four times higher than their mothers And then there's also other susceptible or vulnerable populations including people who Of lower socioeconomic status. I think another hypothesis for the reason why Some of these exposures are continuing to persist in these vulnerable populations are Hypothesis called hand-me-down hazard. So even though PBDEs have been phased out of use for Almost a decade more than a decade There's we're still finding them in people's blood and we're still finding them in people's homes. So as furniture Gets passed down through secondhand stores or is given away. It's not like they're They stick around. It's really hard for these chemicals to go away And I think if you were here earlier, you heard the gentleman from cta from the consumer from the The technology group talk about the fact that their scientists or their toxicologists Either have different data or disagree with the data that they've seen. Are you aware of any Peer reviewed published studies legitimate science that would call into question anything that you just said about How scientists would rank these hazards That's a great point I have also met with toxicologists and scientists for flame retardant companies and it's There isn't a lot of transparency with the toxicity data that they're relying on and using So It's not like anyone can just see it. I think that there would be a lot more Um Confidence in What the industry is doing if if people could see even a scientist Could see what they're basing their decisions on and what science they're relying on Would you give us a list of questions of specifically what we should ask for because we're happy to ask for it from them? Yes, I'd be happy to great. Thank you Mr. Rosenberg We've obviously you've been involved in these issues for a long time and As a person you come in here and you hear firefighters and you hear doctors and you hear Specifically pediatricians a type of doctor focusing on children You hear scientific experts a whole range of individuals who presumably don't have any financial gain From what happens with this petition and on the other side You hear some voices in dissent who might have a financial incentive or financial stake involved in it From your perspective, what more Do you think policy makers need to hear? To finally get over the hump and to start taking chemical regulation more seriously when we talk obviously about regrettable substitution I think what I see is regrettable denial and I wonder because there are real effects to this I wonder from your perspective what more can be done to convince policy makers That the harm that our children are experiencing on a daily basis has to end Wow, that's a great open-ended question. Thank you The um, you know, I think well speaking to this petition I think by the end of the day you will you will afford all you need to hear and I would honestly say that the Turnout as you sort of alluded to for this both at this hearing and the previous hearing is absolutely remarkable There are very few instances that I can think of where you've had such a broad diverse Articulate well resourced well documented turnout and I I'm super I mean I'm happy to be here and I'm super impressed by the by all the people Who are speaking have spoken previously and will be speaking later You know, I think the When I think about, you know, TOSCA issues and CPSC issues and other FDA issues The industry frequently has a set of arguments that they make Over and over Some of which I alluded to just kind of in broad brush, but I mean that there are There there are arguments that they make repeatedly that Some of which are very technical and so policy makers Like yourselves have to then delve into a lot of technical stuff, which can be time-consuming and difficult, but Really there's patterns to the arguments that industry is making and I think it's And I think there's a political culture in Washington. I mean most of the regulatory Bodies are in Washington D.C. And I think there's a political culture in Washington D.C. That makes it very hard to overcome the overwhelming presence of industry and lobbyists and scientists for hire that that Certainly in the in the on the toxics front, you know, the industry has those in spades Um, and so I there needs to be a shift. I'm hopeful that this sort of Presentation that's happened on this issue can happen on others, but it's hard because we're over Outmatched and under-resourced relative to the resources of the industry itself, but I I think um I'm not sure what the what the Shift in in sort of a more a greater comfort level in taking that a regulatory step needs to happen Not just at cpsc far from it fda. I said they Took the Responded to a petition and banned use of pfcs But there's a whole set of chemicals that are still being used as food additives that needs to be overcome epa just getting started on tosca It there just needs to be a broader shift among regulators to recognize protecting the public is the primary mission and to Have just greater skepticism and interrogation of the industry arguments as you have all demonstrated during this hearing today Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Commissioner mohorovic. Thank you, madam chairman. Mr. Rosenberg in your testimony. I recognize that You referred to the tosca work epa's work on looking at hexabromo cyclodotocane and that you I'll take yet your word that you that the conclusion is that its primary use Is in building materials so that got me thinking about the other environments where There is a need for Flame resistance that got me thinking about the airline industry automobile industry, etc I I I believe that Car seats because they're not under our jurisdiction are not included in the petition here as well But I understand there's a tremendous amount of flame retardants and car seats to be able to meet the NHTSA regulations FAA if is the concern with OFR's Translate over those other product categories and our similar movements that play to change or restrict the use of OFR's in some of those others where I've talked and we've talked about demand drivers. There's significant demand drivers Of course in those industries as opposed to maybe some of the other Industry segments that are outlined in the petition Here's another open-ended question. Do you know whether OFR's are used generally or? Whatever level of prevalence you can relate Yeah, I think other witnesses particularly some of the on the later panels are going to be more Conversant and sort of the use profile of those chemicals and and And different categories and sectors that they're used in I think Some sectors may have a better case than others for the need for them There might be people who can talk about that later as well. I think the part of what's so To me persuasive about this petition is that we're you know, it is narrowly focused on key product sectors obviously within your jurisdiction that You know really they don't need to be there and so and with the high hazard and high exposure Profiles That's that's and them being you know these indoor products as people have talked about those are just a really prime place to take as Liz said earlier take a bite out of this problem It won't solve the whole problem But it it it would be a significant driver particularly for these home exposures, which are highly significant. Thank you very much That's all I have madam chair. Thank you very much And I again my sincere appreciation to the panel for being here and for sharing your time and your expertise with us Thank you very much And so at this point, um, we are going to take a break for lunch and because I wasn't Uh, real careful about monitoring the time. We're a little bit past what we had planned on So the commissioner offices have agreed that we will just take a 30 minute break We'll resume this hearing and a seat panel number five at 1 30 p.m. Thank you very much


Welcome folks, we have the Dow Industrial Straighten Up 146, NASDAQ Up 116, S&Ps Up 22, Gold. Gold contract up $7.90, straightened at 2055 an ounce, we have silver up flat, $24.64 an ounce, light sweet food down $0.44, $73.78, a barrel, notes and balls, a 10-year note down $3 ticks, $112.21, $30.00 a year down $13.00 at $123.31 and $Kingdoll, $Kingdoll is down $555 ticks, $101.853, that's on its way to $99, Euro is at $109, Yen Straighten 142, the British pound is at $126.00 to $1.00 US. We get over and take a look at the S&Ps folks, bottom line is that, you know, you get a market that's going to grind higher once again. So we'll see how this shakes out, you got the sell down yesterday, I'm going to talk about that as soon as I get on the air today. Bottom line is that we're down fast and furious yesterday, you're pumping up a little today, we'll see what you can do tomorrow and then of course coming into next week. That's on the spy as well as the NDX100 and then, you know, when we talk about one-day options man, because that's what I'm going to be talking about here on that trade, is that January 8th folks, okay, one-day options are going to be coming into the Russell 2000. Now on the S&Ps, they got them expiring every day and the Russell 2000, but this is how they start on the S&Ps, it's going to be Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. So more volatility is going to be coming in the market, that's for sure. Gold, gold contract, we take a look at the gold contract, what you have out here, gold wants higher price, dollars lower, gold wants higher price, you got 110,000 contract and we need more contract volume to break this consolidation of the last six days. Then you go into Kingdoll. Kingdoll is going to, you know, a pricing problem and it can't hold price. You're in the lower range right now and you're coming down with some conviction out here today. You can see this, you know, we're coming down, nothing's stopping this thing, you know. So I suspect when we get back, you know, yeah, I suspect that by the second week of September, man, we're going to be down at the 99 area, it's not that far away, we're at 101.850 right now. So that's where that's looking and notes and bonds, they still want higher price, lower yield. You know, you have the 10-year right now, it's going in between the three point, no, it's there, it's 3.8, 3.892 right now. Stay right there folks, come right back.


Who doesn't love succulent grilled shrimp fajitas? Well that's what we're making today and they are not only delicious but they are very easy to make. We can put this together in about 15 minutes, 20 tops. And for our veggies I'm using the traditional onion and bell pepper. But I'm also adding some zucchini as well, which really is a nice addition.  And then I'm going to finish it off with a homemade avocado cream drizzle that you are going to love. I'm going to be placing my fajitas in some flour tortillas but for those of us that are gluten free, we can use siete, almond flour tortillas which works out just great. I'm going to show you how to make all this right after my chef joke. Stay tuned. I like to start off here before we get into our recipe with my chef joke. I have another one a little bit later so hang in there for that. Okay what do you call a shrimp that always gets injured? Accident prawn. We're going to start off by getting our shrimp ready because I'm using frozen shrimp. You could use fresh if you want but frozen is very convenient. So I'm using the 21 by to 25 count per pound. I'm going to toss these in a strainer and run them under some cold water.  I've got my shrimp laid out here on a paper towel covered plate and we'll take off those shells. We'll start by just peeling off the shell with your fingers and I like to take the tail off too so I don't have to deal with any kind of shell when I'm eating the dish. Luckily my shrimp were labeled as easy peel so it made cleaning these very easy and quick. Once you've got the shrimp all cleaned then pat it dry with some paper towels that way you know the all the spices will stick. In the meantime I'm going to cover these with some plastic wrap and place them in the fridge to keep them cold. Now we want to prep up our veggies. I've got two organic bell peppers here that are red red or sweeter than say the green so I like to use those and they're colorful. So I'm going to go ahead and cut these up into strips about a quarter of an inch thick and we're going to do basically the same thing with a yellow onion. Now here's my non-traditional vegetable in this recipe and you're going to love it. It's zucchini so what I'm going to do here is I'm going to cut off the ends and then we're going to cut it in half.  We'll place everything in a bowl and then we'll make our seasoning. To my measuring cup I'm adding about a quarter of a cup a little bit over of olive oil. Now here's our spices. We've got some ground cumin, smoked paprika, onion powder, oregano, chipotle chili powder, salt, and pepper. Now remember you can get the written recipe below the video in the description area. Just click down there where it says show more. Now we're going to place all these spices into the olive oil. Now I like to mix it up a little bit before I add the rest of the ingredients. Now we're going to take a nice fresh lime and give it a little roll on the cutting board to release those juices. Now I'm going to squeeze the juice of this whole lime into our sauce. Next comes some minced garlic. Four cloves in fact. Once all the garlic's in we'll mix it up again. You'll notice how nice and thick this is getting. We're going to take this sauce give it a stir make sure everything's well mixed and we're going to pour half of it over the veggies. Okay so that looks like about half. Now let's give that a good toss to coat. Now it's time to make our avocado cream sauce. So what I have here in the bowl is some avocado mayo by Primal Kitchen and some organic plain yogurt. And to this I'm going to add some chipotle chili powder and some garlic powder. Next I have some fresh lemon juice, Worcestershire sauce, half of an avocado and a pinch of salt. Now with the avocado here since I'm not using a food processor I decided to cut it up into little chunks and then toss it in and use a masher and it works out just fine. Here's that pinch of salt and then we'll chop up some parsley and add that as well. And then I'll mash it up. Now add a small handful of Italian parsley chopped up and if you're a fan of cilantro you can use that as well. We'll give that a stir and then we'll add our final ingredient. Now who can tell me what this final ingredient is? You can leave your guess down in the in the comments and you can find the answer in the description where the written recipe is. Check it out. Now it's time to marinate the shrimp. I'm going to place it in a bowl and add the rest of that sauce to the shrimp and stir to combine. Here we go with chef joke number two. What a tortilla is saying at birthday parties. Fajita Jolly Good fellow. Okay we're ready to start cooking. I've got a cast iron pan. If you have a cast iron pan please use it. You'll get the best results. All right I've got it over medium-high heat and we're going to be cooking the vegetables first because they take a little bit longer than the shrimp. The shrimp are only going to take like one to two minutes per side so you want to have your veggies done first because you know they take longer and that way your shrimp doesn't get cold sitting around. So I'm putting just a little bit of olive oil in the pan to coat it once it's hot. We give those veggies another little quick stir and we're going to toss those in. We're going to cook these for about eight to ten minutes. Remember on medium-high heat we want these to get a little browned up. Now while the fajitas are cooking you're going to want to heat up some tortillas so they're ready to go when you want to put this together. Now a tortilla oven like I have here is the way to go. They keep the tortillas warm for about 30 minutes so it's great for when you have a good big group and I'll leave a link in the description for you if you want to pick one of those up. Okay after about 10 minutes or so and your veggies start to look like this where they softened up and they have some nice brown color to them it's time to take them off put them into a bowl and keep them warm and you might want to cover the veggies by just laying a piece of foil over the top of it to keep the heat in. Now in this same pan over medium-high heat we're going to place the shrimp right in there and get it going. Now remember you're only cooking this for one minute to two minutes per side.  Okay you want to flip these over kind of quick once you get them all turned then you're going to probably be taking them right off. What you don't want to do is to overcook these because then they'll turn they'll get real rubbery and and it won't be very good. And go ahead and place your shrimp in the same bowl as your veggies. Okay got my flour tortillas they stay nice and warm. First we'll add a scoop of veggies and then I'm going to add three shrimp to each tortilla and then we finish it off with our avocado cream sauce. Now I heated up a siete almond flour tortilla and made my taco with that heating it just the same as a regular flour tortilla and it works out great. Three shrimps for me and some of that beautiful avocado cream sauce. Oh man that is so good I cannot believe it it is just delicious that sauce really makes it you got to try this.  You've got that subtle hint of smoky heat and spices the sweetness from the onions and the bell peppers and the avocado cream sauce ties everything together. If you like tacos then you might be interested in trying my taco casserole check this thing out it is easy to do you can serve a lot of people and it is of course delicious. Click the link to watch that video. I hope you all enjoyed the video if you did let me know by smashing the like button for me okay. Leave me a comment and we'll see you back here next week for another rock n' recipe.