Toxic / endocrine disrupting chemicals in outdoor equipment & clothes.

[RhinoKel]

G'day Ladies and Gents,

Not wanting to open up too great of a can of worms here, but I just wanted to see if anyone shares the same concerns I have.

Background: I had cancer a few years back and am now 'in remission' as they would say. I was unlucky enough to find a tumour in my right testicle, which ended up being removed pretty quickly after discovery. I was 'lucky' in that it's one of the easiest cancers to deal with and have a full recovery.

Noting I'm down to 1 now so 'full' isn't the word I'd use - ...and yes it's probably a missed opportunity to not use the handle "Half-Sack".

Anyway, I've spent a long time pondering what could have been the cause of this cancer - chemical or RF exposure during my time in the military being up there in my mind. In any case, since that time I've endeavoured to eat and live as clean as possible, being pretty discerning on what products I put on and in my body. Having lost a testicle, I've also been pretty concerned about what chemicals could effect my fertility and endocrine system, and so what I wear has also come into the mix. I'm trying to wear 100% or as close to 100% natural fabrics to reduce exposure to the endocrine disruptors and forever chemicals increasingly found in Polyester, Nylon and other synthetic materials, as well as some of the 'water repellent' treatments so many of our garments are treated in.

Which leads me to my point - the hunting and outdoors industry is awash with synthetic garments for their lightness, or moisture wicking or insulation abilities and garments treated with all manner of water repellent chemicals to keep us dry. Speaking generally, many of these chemicals have been found to be toxic, endocrine disrupting and even carcinogenic - though that is going to depend on the specific product. I've spent a lot of time looking for natural / organic fabric alternatives, but it has proven difficult. (I've now been looking into making some products of my own as a non-synthetic alternative).

I understand that many of us take these garments and equipment into some pretty extreme circumstances where all of the features of these synthetic products can mean the difference between comfort and misery, or even survival in some cases - but, is it something we should be talking about? Does anyone else share my concerns? Moreover is there anyone in the industry tackling this or any companies offering alternatives?

Or am I just too paranoid?

Would love to hear your thoughts.

 

[matthewmt]

Definitely something I've thought about. I believe a lot of clothing when manufactured/new has been treated with something like a formaldehyde (wrinkle free). I have been concerned about soaps and detergents for some time.

Following,



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[TSAMP]

I ran Into a skin issue a few years back that wound up tracing back to mixed dialyikal thourieas. Some chemical used in the production of rubber/spandex/neoprene. I was told I developed an allergy to it.

I have noticed that higher end brands don't seem to use this product in manufacturing and cause me no issues. However cheaper ones like Costco or Eddie bauer will create a rash and extreme itching.

I always wash new clothes now.

 

[Desk Jockey]

I think cumulative incidental exposure to a lot of industrial chemicals is going to be one of those things that will be understand much better at a point in the future. Our future selves will look at us and some of the stuff we exposed ourselves to the way we look at a mid 20th century doctors recommendation to smoke cigarettes in order to ”open up the lungs”.

I am sure a lot of hunting gear and clothing is loaded with nasty stuff that is seeping through your skin and off gassing constantly.

For my part, I think you have to figure out what you want to try and change. went down a rabbit hole around bedding and drink wear. I haven’t yet, but I will be replacing my matress with soemthing “green“ along with pillows and sheets. Still looking for a drinkware solution but in the meantime I try to use non BPA steel when I can. I am trying to get rid nastys in laundry detergent and soaps and shampoos and tooth paste.

 

[ozyclint]

Think yourself lucky not unlucky. You could be dead!
Any chance your military clothing was treated with permethrin?
I have a bottle of it to treat my hunting clothes against ticks and mozzies. It is registered for treatment of ADF clothing

 

[goathunter]

I remember reading this from the gulch gear guy about dwr years ago - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/gulch-gear-clothing.62448/post-2362288

 

[Formidilosus]

I understand that many of us take these garments and equipment into some pretty extreme circumstances where all of the features of these synthetic products can mean the difference between comfort and misery, or even survival in some cases - but, is it something we should be talking about? Does anyone else share my concerns? Moreover is there anyone in the industry tackling this or any companies offering alternatives?

Or am I just too paranoid?

Would love to hear your thoughts.

You aren’t the only one. There are plenty of natural material options that perform fantastically, in a lot of cases better than synthetics. Netted wool for baselayers, waxed cotton and wool for outer layers, Ventile cotton, etc.

I wrote about some of them here-

My gear/pack layout from base layers to binos

Using the 100% wool or the blend? Both.

rokslide.com

 

[ResearchinStuff]

It's not too late to change your handle here.

 

[Dobermann]

G'day Ladies and Gents,

Not wanting to open up too great of a can of worms here, but I just wanted to see if anyone shares the same concerns I have.

Background: I had cancer a few years back and am now 'in remission' as they would say. I was unlucky enough to find a tumour in my right testicle, which ended up being removed pretty quickly after discovery. I was 'lucky' in that it's one of the easiest cancers to deal with and have a full recovery.

Noting I'm down to 1 now so 'full' isn't the word I'd use - ...and yes it's probably a missed opportunity to not use the handle "Half-Sack".

Anyway, I've spent a long time pondering what could have been the cause of this cancer - chemical or RF exposure during my time in the military being up there in my mind. In any case, since that time I've endeavoured to eat and live as clean as possible, being pretty discerning on what products I put on and in my body. Having lost a testicle, I've also been pretty concerned about what chemicals could effect my fertility and endocrine system, and so what I wear has also come into the mix. I'm trying to wear 100% or as close to 100% natural fabrics to reduce exposure to the endocrine disruptors and forever chemicals increasingly found in Polyester, Nylon and other synthetic materials, as well as some of the 'water repellent' treatments so many of our garments are treated in.

Which leads me to my point - the hunting and outdoors industry is awash with synthetic garments for their lightness, or moisture wicking or insulation abilities and garments treated with all manner of water repellent chemicals to keep us dry. Speaking generally, many of these chemicals have been found to be toxic, endocrine disrupting and even carcinogenic - though that is going to depend on the specific product. I've spent a lot of time looking for natural / organic fabric alternatives, but it has proven difficult. (I've now been looking into making some products of my own as a non-synthetic alternative).

I understand that many of us take these garments and equipment into some pretty extreme circumstances where all of the features of these synthetic products can mean the difference between comfort and misery, or even survival in some cases - but, is it something we should be talking about? Does anyone else share my concerns? Moreover is there anyone in the industry tackling this or any companies offering alternatives?

Or am I just too paranoid?

Would love to hear your thoughts.

I have similar concerns, so thanks for raising this.

Something that disappoints me is when these kinds of issues get taken up in party political / political orientation lenses - as if concern for either the environment, or one's own health, is only a concern of the "left", as opposed to being something that should be available to all, irrespective of their broader politics. That kind of un-think really closes down conversations that could lead to good outcomes. So thanks again for raising these important issues.

 

[Mojave]

G'day, I used to live in Australia.

I am a Safety and Occupational Health Engineer, and I also have a biology degree. Not a Medical Doctor. So what I say is just my heavily researched and proved theory.

Here is my take.

Most things are solved by diet. Consider only consuming red meat, fish, berries and leafy green vegtables. No sugar, no alchohol, and no carbohydrates (beyond the berries). If you really want to fix yourself just eat red meat (beef, roo, venison, lamb) and nothing else for 90 days and see how you feel.

Humans have an incredible ability to deal with chemicals, toxins and biological contributors to our lives (like mold).

At some point, enough is enough. There is a theory in Occupational Health on toxins called the 80-5-15 or some variant of those numbers. 80% of the people will not suffer adverse effects. 5% of the people will die. 15% of thepe people will suffer some adverse effects. This was the standard motion on both medical and occupational health for a long time. The US Medicine Industry switched to a zero defect notion in the 2000's, but in occupational health we

Humid climates contribute to respiratory mold issues. If you live somplace humid, and you don't have a way to regulate that, you need to think about that as an issue.

Dry climates with high rodent populations create issues with Hanta virus.

Then again radon gas can be bled into homes and offices in areas with a lot of granite. So proper ventilation in your home and work site are really important.

 

[doc holiday13]

I think cumulative incidental exposure to a lot of industrial chemicals is going to be one of those things that will be understand much better at a point in the future. Our future selves will look at us and some of the stuff we exposed ourselves to the way we look at a mid 20th century doctors recommendation to smoke cigarettes in order to ”open up the lungs”.

you used a very key word there CUMULATIVE. I can can guarantee that everyone's cell phone/ computer/ tablet ONLY puts out minimal radiation and emf so they are 'safe' for consumer use. multiply the numbers of phones you encounter every day and you'll likely have a recipe for cancer(at least for people in high technology and population areas)

you can insert most any daily use product any is probably not good for you. very few objects in daily life are low processed environmentally minded. soaps and detergents are the worst offenders. most are chocked full of endocrine disruptors.

thus biggest one that nobody talks about is birth control. it messes with pheromone receptors. you could write many pages about that.

so no I don't think the OP is wrong and I agree with him. very valid points

 

[menhaden_man]

 

[TaperPin]

G'day Ladies and Gents,

Not wanting to open up too great of a can of worms here, but I just wanted to see if anyone shares the same concerns I have.

Background: I had cancer a few years back and am now 'in remission' as they would say. I was unlucky enough to find a tumour in my right testicle, which ended up being removed pretty quickly after discovery. I was 'lucky' in that it's one of the easiest cancers to deal with and have a full recovery.

Noting I'm down to 1 now so 'full' isn't the word I'd use - ...and yes it's probably a missed opportunity to not use the handle "Half-Sack".

Anyway, I've spent a long time pondering what could have been the cause of this cancer - chemical or RF exposure during my time in the military being up there in my mind. In any case, since that time I've endeavoured to eat and live as clean as possible, being pretty discerning on what products I put on and in my body. Having lost a testicle, I've also been pretty concerned about what chemicals could effect my fertility and endocrine system, and so what I wear has also come into the mix. I'm trying to wear 100% or as close to 100% natural fabrics to reduce exposure to the endocrine disruptors and forever chemicals increasingly found in Polyester, Nylon and other synthetic materials, as well as some of the 'water repellent' treatments so many of our garments are treated in.

Which leads me to my point - the hunting and outdoors industry is awash with synthetic garments for their lightness, or moisture wicking or insulation abilities and garments treated with all manner of water repellent chemicals to keep us dry. Speaking generally, many of these chemicals have been found to be toxic, endocrine disrupting and even carcinogenic - though that is going to depend on the specific product. I've spent a lot of time looking for natural / organic fabric alternatives, but it has proven difficult. (I've now been looking into making some products of my own as a non-synthetic alternative).

I understand that many of us take these garments and equipment into some pretty extreme circumstances where all of the features of these synthetic products can mean the difference between comfort and misery, or even survival in some cases - but, is it something we should be talking about? Does anyone else share my concerns? Moreover is there anyone in the industry tackling this or any companies offering alternatives?

Or am I just too paranoid?

Would love to hear your thoughts.

In construction we’re exposed to a number of toxins, some I’ve developed a sensitivity to, but more than anything it has made me more aware of chemicals we’re constantly exposed to.

The type of chemical is important, but also concentration, exposure time, and type of exposure.

Hunting clothes are worn a relatively short amount of time each year, don’t come in direct contact with skin other than base layers, are normally used in great ventilation so off gassing harmful stuff is mostly carried away, and surface contaminants are regularly washed away.

I’ve always thought any chemicals in a pair of boots will make it into the bloodstream since we wear them all day (exposure time) and sweat transfers chemicals freely through socks directly onto the skin.

Everything we touch seems to be made of plastic or rubber - guns, binocs, everything. Knowing all the chemical bottles that go into recycled dumpsters, not to mention even worse industrial waste that gets recycled, it’s safe to assume any plastic we touch is releasing a number of bad things directly onto our skin.

I think in our lifetimes the off gassing of automobile interiors and home building materials will come to the forefront - these are the places we spend most of our time, and standards/testing leave a lot to be desired. Something as simple as an expanded foam is pretty safe, unless it wasn’t produced exactly right then it’s quite toxic - relying on knuckleheads to make anything correctly is a big leap of faith.

Radon is well known, but there are a number of naturally occurring gases that a poorly ventilated house can have at elevated levels - Radon mitigation systems built into a house do a great job of taking care of the other chemicals, even if there isn’t radon present. I’ve seen building lots that are permanently off limits to residential construction because the ground releases naturally occuring toxic gasses other than radon.

I personally met the guy who originally was in charge of marketing Teflon - it sounded great at first, but I’ve all but stopped using Teflon pans because ingesting what comes out of it at high temps doesn’t seem like a good risk/benefit choice.

We haven’t even touched on the processed food industry - God help us all. Lol

 

[TaperPin]

you used a very key word there CUMULATIVE. I can can guarantee that everyone's cell phone/ computer/ tablet ONLY puts out minimal radiation and emf so they are 'safe' for consumer use. multiply the numbers of phones you encounter every day and you'll likely have a recipe for cancer(at least for people in high technology and population areas)

you can insert most any daily use product any is probably not good for you. very few objects in daily life are low processed environmentally minded. soaps and detergents are the worst offenders. most are chocked full of endocrine disruptors.

thus biggest one that nobody talks about is birth control. it messes with pheromone receptors. you could write many pages about that.

so no I don't think the OP is wrong and I agree with him. very valid points

You touch on a huge hidden hazard - many water supplies are full of medications from upstream sewer treatment.

 

[5MilesBack]

Something that disappoints me is when these kinds of issues get taken up in party political / political orientation lenses - as if concern for either the environment, or one's own health, is only a concern of the "left", as opposed to being something that should be available to all, irrespective of their broader politics.

Most issues aren't "left/right" issues.....it's how they're handled and whether the government controls the people over it that's the issue. In this case we know the issue, we have the info, we weigh the risks, and we make our own decisions about it.......the way it should be. No politics involved or needed.

 

[Elmer J. Fudd]

I have been moving towards more natural fabric clothing myself for various reasons. I was going to recommend searching Formidilosus but he already chimed in. He lays out how and why the synthetics are not very cost effective. Based on his recommendations I got some fishnets and a Red Kettle jacket. I’m going to make my way to a store to try on some faljraven pants and figure out my size. I sick of getting soaked. I really don’t have a lot of faith in goretex and dwr based on my experiences and others stories. I’m going to give wax a try. Basically it boils down to I trust Mother Nature more than scientists.

 

[Elmer J. Fudd]

you used a very key word there CUMULATIVE. I can can guarantee that everyone's cell phone/ computer/ tablet ONLY puts out minimal radiation and emf so they are 'safe' for consumer use. multiply the numbers of phones you encounter every day and you'll likely have a recipe for cancer(at least for people in high technology and population areas)

you can insert most any daily use product any is probably not good for you. very few objects in daily life are low processed environmentally minded. soaps and detergents are the worst offenders. most are chocked full of endocrine disruptors.

thus biggest one that nobody talks about is birth control. it messes with pheromone receptors. you could write many pages about that.

so no I don't think the OP is wrong and I agree with him. very valid points

I had to sit in a hospital for a stretch with a rare disease and got to bs with a lot of medical professionals. After hearing various stories of infertility and fatal reactions to birth control I think there should be more information on the adverse side effects. Right now it feels like they are glossed over. I have two daughters who are young right now and I would not be comfortable with having them take the risk of birth control when they become teenagers. Once they are adults they can make the choice themselves

 

[TuckTruck]

I have very sensitive skin, I’ve found that basic wool or some wool blends seem to be “clean”, depending on the company.

 

[gbflyer]

We live in a community embroiled in a PFAS / PFOA controversy due to AFFF discharge at our airport. It’s showing up in a lot of groundwater samples at the parts per billion levels. Same stuff modern synthetic outdoor gear is loaded with. Long story short is that it probably isn’t good for your health. Unfortunately it’s a lifetime chemical that isn’t going away and unless you’re a member of a tribe deep in the Amazon that has had no outside contact for the last 75 years, the genie is out of the bottle and won’t be going back in.

Hope you continue to have a clean bill of health.

 

[doc holiday13]

I had to sit in a hospital for a stretch with a rare disease and got to bs with a lot of medical professionals. After hearing various stories of infertility and fatal reactions to birth control I think there should be more information on the adverse side effects. Right now it feels like they are glossed over. I have two daughters who are young right now and I would not be comfortable with having them take the risk of birth control when they become teenagers. Once they are adults they can make the choice themselves

there are a litany of issues that come from BC use. reality of getting pregnant is that there are only a few days a month that a woman can conceive. No BC in our house. we've only conceived when we wanted to.

not to sound conspiracy theory but if you hate giving money to big pharma you'll realize we take a lot of medications that we don't really need and we receive a lot of side effects we don't want. But as humans were lazy and want a magic to allow us to live however we want. No free lunch though.. everything has a cost