FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Home lead testing kits

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
FuzzyBritchesMama
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:39 pm    Post subject: Home lead testing kits Reply with quote

What is the thought on this? There are a number of affordable home lead testing kits and a lot of talk on WAHM forums that this could/would be considered "reasonable" efforts in lead testing, at least until August. Curious what others think.


Mama to 8 and part time hobby WAHM
www.fuzzybritchesbaby.wordpress.com
Back to top
Eric H
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Feb 2007
Posts: 205
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, a reasonable testing program is something that meets the standards of peer review and a home lead test does not. Sorry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is possible to test with a xrf, and take photos. It will NOT exempt you from certification, but could get you by until the August deadline. You can also rent an xrf from a local dealer. Approx $400 a day so get some neighbors to go in on it.
Back to top
Eric H
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Feb 2007
Posts: 205
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

People keep promoting XRF as a viable alternative. It is an xray machine. You need training to get effective results. It must be calibrated. I'm going to assert here and now that if you are not practiced in performing calibrated laboratory measurements, it will not withstand the peer-review requirement. That's what happened when these knuckleheads began randomly testing toys in stores:
Quote:

Still, some consumer groups tend to use the handheld gun only, a practice that has companies and industry trade groups crying foul.

Jack Schylling was driving to work two weeks ago when he heard a report on the radio that a children's tea set made by his company, Schylling Associates, was tested and contained worrisome levels of lead. The consumer group Healthytoys.org, a project of the Ann Arbor, Mich.-based nonprofit group the Ecology Center, had identified the product along with about 500 others that it said had medium or high levels of "chemicals of concern."

Mr. Schylling said the test, which was conducted only with an XRF gun, was flawed and contradicted results he had from an independent, certified lab showing the product was safe.

"It seemed like it was fear mongering," said the president and founder of the Rowley, Mass., company that makes reproductions of antique toys for stores that include major retailers. "I feel like I've really been treated unfairly."

After Mr. Schylling called Healthytoys.org to complain and sent copies of lab tests, the group removed the test results of that toy from its Web site pending further assessment, said Healthytoys research director Jeff Gearhart. He said the report cited another Schylling product that was just fine.


They were seeing false positive rates of 50%. I haven't seen any data on false negative rates. If you can't quantify your false positive and false negative rates, you are not conducting a reasonable testing program.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Esther
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 1919
Location: ID Spudville

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 8:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not only that, but the gun has safety requirements. Don't they use lead protection in the hospital? Ironic, isn't it.

It's rather dumb that places are renting those guns to average joes who don't know how to use them safely or accurately. The safety problems are one reason I don't like the XRF gun. Besides, it only garners a few months time and you'll have to do the certified testing anyway.

Were these guys doing these tests in a store with customers milling about? That is too scary to even think about!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
J C Sprowls



Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 2004

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just find it ironic that we're irradiating products on shelves in open air and that doesn't offend anyone.

If I were WalMart - with all their clout - I would've had these people forcibly removed and invoiced/pursued them for disrupting my business, then I would've gone to the shelves and moved the suspect mdse into an investigation area.

Quote:
After Mr. Schylling called Healthytoys.org to complain and sent copies of lab tests, the group removed the test results of that toy from its Web site pending further assessment


See... this bothers me, too. Schylling did not have to furnish proof to anyone in order to have slanderous remarks removed from a website - he simply had to ask. If the remarks were not removed, then a lawsuit could have followed - no threats, a *real, live* lawsuit. In that instance, the only entity that was required to receive proof of innocence was the court.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eric H
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Feb 2007
Posts: 205
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not that concerned about irradiating things in the open air in a store. The radiation falls off by the inverse square law., and The Big Yellow Thing in the Sky bathes us in x-rays energy all of the time. I'm a little more concerned about holding it in my hand, though, or, say, in the case of home sewers who want to test their handmade stuff, um, ... HAVING ONE AROUND THE HOUSE WHERE CHILDREN CAN GET AT IT (sorry to shout, but Kathleen says I'm being too subtle). Of course, if you believe the PIRG and Public Citizen hype, the only reason we are complaining about this is because we want to continue to sell lead onesies, so maybe the kids aren't at that much risk from the household x-ray machine after all. Wink

But beside the health concern, it's a big waste of time and money. In order to figure the false positive/false negative ratio, you need to have stable lab test processes, and you probably need to send things off to get tested by a lab anyhow. (1) Most of the people considering the XRF gun don't have stable sewing processes, so I'm a little skeptical of their science lab skills. (2) What does it gain you if you still have to send to a lab? $400/week to rent it, $400/item to confirm the tests? This is not a good solution and is the reason why large manufacturers have rejected the machine as useless for anything but a preliminary survey.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

if you are a small wham business that crafts an assortment of things, it would be more cost effective to pay a one time fee of $400 rather 20 x $400. While the labs are swamped and you want to show that your are being active about testing, test your kid's toys, etc., AND for a little self assurance, it seems like a good idea. I know my neighbors are interested in splitting costs. I don't think you have to be brain surgeon to scan toys.
Back to top
J C Sprowls



Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 2004

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I don't think you have to be brain surgeon to scan toys.

So, for sake of argument:

Let's say you end up getting 12 positives out of the 20 items you want to sell. What do you do? Do you not sell those 12 items and confiscate all materials in inventory that comprise those 12 items?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the XRF is an inaccurate form of lead testing, why is the CSPC suggesting it's use as a way of obtaining compliance? Seems to me the CSPC doesn't know it's arse from a hole in the ground, at this point in time.
Back to top
J C Sprowls



Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 2004

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
CSPC doesn't know it's arse from a hole in the ground, at this point in time

That's what happens when you don't exercise discernment over the source of information.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J C Sprowls wrote:
Quote:
CSPC doesn't know it's arse from a hole in the ground, at this point in time

That's what happens when you don't exercise discernment over the source of information.


seems to me there are too many people making judgement calls on the law, when the CSPC doesn't even know how to read it and give us a clear cut answer. hard to know WHERE to exercise discernment in choosing a source of information in the muddled up mess this is.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group