home
RSS
Study: Flame retardant found in small butter sample
December 7th, 2010
12:01 AM ET

Study: Flame retardant found in small butter sample

A stick of butter purchased at a Dallas grocery story contained high levels of a flame retardant used in electronics, according to environmental scientists at the University of Texas School of Public Health.

The butter was contaminated with a chemical called polybrominated diphenyl ether, or PBDE.

"To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of U.S. butter contaminated with PBDEs," said lead research Arnold Schecter, whose study was published Tuesday in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

The butter was purchased last year as part of a small research project to test for contaminates. The butter stick's wrapper contained even higher amounts of PBDEs. The source of the contamination remains a mystery.

"Flame retardants were not made to be eaten. They're made to slow down the smoke in fires. They're not a food component. They don't belong there," said Schecter. "Either the paper was contaminated before it reached the butter factory, or somehow it managed to get contaminated at the factory itself."

95 percent of Americans have flame retardant chemicals in their body, according to Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst with the Environmental Working Group. Lunder, who was not affiliated with the study, found the researcher's revelation baffling.

"There is a bulk of fire retardants out there in our environment, and that is generally yucky," she said. "These are much higher than you would expect compared to what you find in fish and other products."

The health effects of PBDEs on humans, especially developing children, are not fully known. In animal studies, PBDEs are associated with liver cancer and neurobehavioral alterations.

By Lunder's calculation, a 40-pound child would need to eat only 3 percent of a stick of contaminated butter to exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's daily safe exposure level for PBDE-209, the main component in PBDE.

According to Schecter, the contaminated butter was produced by a large, well-known Midwestern company. The study authors declined to identify the company, citing the small scope of their investigation.

"It can happen, and it did happen, but we don't know how frequent or infrequent it is," Schecter said. "We did not want to point the finger at any one company."

In a statement the National Milk Producers Federation said, "This would appear to be an isolated incident not representative of the product category, but based on the facts presented, further investigation is warranted.”


« Previous entry
soundoff (157 Responses)
  1. Pat

    Yet another reason why there should be universal/single payer health care. We're polluting each others environment and food making each other sick.

    December 7, 2010 at 02:02 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Ecologist

      Until the EPA functions similarly to the FDA (whereas a new chemical must be proven safe BEFORE implementation) this will be an ever increasing issue. When we have genome mapping cheaply attainable it will be necessary to test someone "genetic pollution" before they can procreate or marry. Welcome to the precursors to 1984.

      December 7, 2010 at 05:31 | Report abuse |
    • maddawg

      ummmm....how would this explain why i should pay taxes to make sure you're covered in health care?

      the lemming train you're on just keeps on rolling doesn't it.........no need to get off.

      December 7, 2010 at 06:43 | Report abuse |
    • CH

      Bought some butter from Acme a few months back and it tasted like chemicals, so much so that a small little taste was so vile that I had to wash my mouth out. I also find Acme milk yucky, so I don't ever buy their store brand name. Shoprite brand dairy is good. Hopefully they figure out where the chemical is coming from...

      December 7, 2010 at 07:17 | Report abuse |
    • bailoutsos

      Took some photos at a dairy coop several years ago and one of the photos I shot was of a huge vat. Inside the vat were mislabeled sticks of butter. The butter was getting heated to allow it to melt out of the wax paper wrapping. After the butter melted, the wax paper, along with he ink printed on it, was skimmed from the top of the melted butter. They asked me not to take a photo of that, but I already had.

      December 7, 2010 at 08:38 | Report abuse |
    • h3110w0r1d

      @Ecologist.... The FDA is a bunch of bums... Mexico sent back a truckload of meet because it did not meet their Food Requirements. MEXICO has higher food standards than the US. Give me a break dude. The government is sub-par at everything it does.

      December 7, 2010 at 08:38 | Report abuse |
    • Matt

      @maddawg – Because paying insurance premiums is the same concept as paying taxes.... The effect is the same: A pool of people contributing to a larger fund that covers the costs of thousands and thousands. Your individual payments to your insurance company (provided you have insurance) doesn't solely cover you. If you need a $500,000 specialized heart procedure, do you think you've paid in $500,000 in personalized benefits for one-to-one care? Perhaps you should take a short ride on the lemming train an understand simple principles.

      December 7, 2010 at 08:53 | Report abuse |
    • @bailoutsos

      Wow, pretty surprising to hear.
      Do you know the name of the Dairy or which stores they primarily serve?

      December 7, 2010 at 09:01 | Report abuse |
    • Chip

      @Ecologist – you mean the same way the FDA approved Darvocet, which was deemed "safe" for 50 years, and has now been pulled? Yeah, good idea. The FDA, EPA, and every other government 3-letter-agency, are all big jokes only meant to make the sheeple feel safe while they steal their money and freedom.

      December 7, 2010 at 09:16 | Report abuse |
    • Russ

      Hey Maddawg – Universal healthcare in Canada means that no one has to go without lifesaving, quality healthcare. I echo Matt's sentiments. When a large pool works together the results are impressive. We also run healthcare as a public service, not a business. This makes a huge difference. Costs are cheaper and redtape is reduced. Another plus – nobody declares personal bankruptcy because of medical bills.

      December 7, 2010 at 09:50 | Report abuse |
    • Mago0o

      @Chip- Darvocet was approved for use for the past 50 years because the benefit outweighed the risks. Now that there are safer alternatives, there is no longer any use for the drug. Of course, you are welcome to live in the stone age and not utilize any progress that has been made by humans in the last 500 years.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:04 | Report abuse |
    • AceRyder

      Matt, the difference is the insurance "pool" covers only those people part of the plan and making payments, not some random person who has never participated/made a payment.

      December 7, 2010 at 11:14 | Report abuse |
    • Todd A

      @ maddawg. You do know that the federal government is already paying $0.40 of every medical bill in this country. So you are already paying taxes to facilitate the healthcare of other individuals. The eldery have healthcare(Medicare), child have healthcare through programs that all 50 states have which is supported with federal money, the poor have healthcare the same way as children.

      Why not the working class?

      December 7, 2010 at 11:50 | Report abuse |
    • babaelf

      Yeah, but just think how neat this would be for those who like to slightly butter their bread before toasting it.....

      December 7, 2010 at 12:17 | Report abuse |
    • adj

      No thank you, I don't want a government "babysitter".
      Then the government would eventually be telilng us what we can and can't eat. (In some ways, they are already starting this, such as trying to get extra taxes on certain foods.)

      And what does the government tell us to eat? The infamous "food pyramid", which is actually a horrible diet based on bussines, politics, and outdated information!

      December 7, 2010 at 12:44 | Report abuse |
    • Ron

      You are absolutely correct.

      December 7, 2010 at 14:36 | Report abuse |
    • Ron

      Not according to the Canadians I have spoken to, they love it..

      December 7, 2010 at 14:39 | Report abuse |
    • pp

      PBB in 1970's contaminated the milk, also butter. Farm Bureau mix the fire retardent in the cow's feed. Accidently.Rolled the feed into Molasses and fed it to the cattle. Google PBB, Lansing Miching. There have been long term studies of the effects, especially in Breast feeding babies. Mother's milk was contaminated.Check it out.

      December 7, 2010 at 16:35 | Report abuse |
    • livandlaff18

      Do they know what brand of butter it is??
      And has anyone gotten sick from it?

      December 7, 2010 at 19:38 | Report abuse |
    • evoc

      Well, on the up side it cuts down on that spontaneous human combustion problem...

      December 7, 2010 at 20:47 | Report abuse |
    • S

      Most outrageous thing I heard. They should name the company and recall all that butter. Whats going on here now? Are we trying to protect the manufacturer or do we want to protect our innocent children here. Next thing you know they will say is tainted butter is good for your children. Not going to happen to any of my children........

      December 7, 2010 at 21:06 | Report abuse |
  2. Onebadcapri

    I cant believe its not butter!

    December 7, 2010 at 02:10 | Report abuse | Reply
    • j

      hahaha! best comment of the day!

      December 7, 2010 at 03:03 | Report abuse |
  3. Lala

    Hey, thanks for not mentioning the company, I wouldn't want you to do me any favors or anything. I'm sure that company's butter is all great, just this one stick, right? Great study. Let me know when you aren't afraid to hold people accountable. Excuse me, but isn't that what journalists and scientists are for? Land O Lakes...er, I mean, for goodness sakes!

    December 7, 2010 at 02:19 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Ryan

      It clearly says, "According to Schecter, the contaminated butter was produced by a large, well-known Midwestern company. The study authors declined to identify the company, citing the small scope of their investigation.

      "It can happen, and it did happen, but we don't know how frequent or infrequent it is," Schecter said. "We did not want to point the finger at any one company."

      There is reason to such madness; should someone accuse a company of contaminating their product, an extremely long legal procedure must happen. Since they don't have enough evidence to prove it was the certain "company", it would honestly just be a waste of time.

      December 7, 2010 at 05:53 | Report abuse |
  4. PsiCop2000

    This is the reason why each company need to test their products more often, or give it to trusted/certified labs, that make independant quality controls.

    December 7, 2010 at 02:22 | Report abuse | Reply
    • TheMaskedCommenter

      Are you suggesting that foods should be tested for every possible contaminant, however remote the possibility of finding it? That stick of butter will then cost thousands of dollars.

      December 7, 2010 at 07:44 | Report abuse |
  5. wann2know

    Housewives in a hurry will love this new product. No more burned butter in the fried eggs. Did they say it works like a laxative also?

    December 7, 2010 at 02:28 | Report abuse | Reply
  6. j

    breathing causes cancer, food causes cancer, water causes cancer, the sun causes caner... we're screwed.

    December 7, 2010 at 03:04 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Ecologist

      screwing causes cancer.

      December 7, 2010 at 05:32 | Report abuse |
    • Dani

      Damn! now what?

      December 7, 2010 at 09:12 | Report abuse |
    • Mok

      CNN causes cancer...or IS a cancer, not sure which yet

      December 7, 2010 at 12:54 | Report abuse |
  7. silvereagle

    Now we all know why we are dying of weird diseases.Lets see here.Harmones in chickens,steriods in beef.Whats in pork??????.Breathing can kill you!

    December 7, 2010 at 05:34 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Taylor

      I do wish it was easier to eat all true organic products. I feel like all the horomones and chemicals in foods are causing alot of our illnesses. I say true organic because some products listed as organic aren't even completely chemical free.

      December 7, 2010 at 08:31 | Report abuse |
    • Andrew

      Neither one of you spelled hormones correctly....good points though!

      December 7, 2010 at 09:18 | Report abuse |
    • ok. my turm

      lemme see if i can spell it right.... whormoans?

      December 7, 2010 at 10:03 | Report abuse |
  8. Kristi Gilleland

    What are these neurobehavioral alterations specifically? Does it make us more docile? Because I just noticed it seems a lot of us are pretty docile these days.

    December 7, 2010 at 05:37 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Buckup

      docile? Besides this article what other news do you read? Try world, crime or just the headlines.

      December 7, 2010 at 06:40 | Report abuse |
    • RH of WI

      No, doesn't really make you more docile. But if you want to be cremated when you die, you can forget about that!

      December 7, 2010 at 16:59 | Report abuse |
  9. Catharsis

    Who is the company!?!?! People need to know this. They are supposed to be protecting the people, not the company.

    December 7, 2010 at 05:40 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Sprout

      Being as it was a very small sample, it means it wasn't a truly viable study. With a larger sample, it might be possible to make conclusions as to overall safety.

      Now, I understand that someone not educated in statistics might make the false assumption that this means that they are "protecting" the company, but that simply is not true.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:08 | Report abuse |
  10. Bill

    LOLOL "works like the FDA"! You've got to be kidding. The FDA doesn't do its own research, it lets the manufacturer of the drug do the studies and submit them the FDA. Since when is that "independent" testing? God only knows what ills are being papered over at FDA. Besides, EPA and FDA have nothing to do with butter regulation. That would be a famously even less consumer-oriented federal agengy, Dept of Agriculture, which has always been "owned" by agribusiness. Its a wonder more people aren't ill or dead iwth this trio of regulators. Note that it wasn't EPA, FDA or DOA that found this contamination, it was the University of Texas School of Public Health.

    December 7, 2010 at 05:43 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Ecologist

      I'm not referring to regulating the butter, I am referring to the flame retardant. Flame retardants are an endocrine disruptor and since there widespread use in the 70s can now be found in every organism on earth. Inuits have especially high levels though they are the furthest from its use. I agree with you that the FDA doesn't function perfectly. However the FDA needs peer reviewed proof that a medicine is statistically more beneficial than it is harmless. The EPA waits until something is proven harmful until it may be banned.

      December 7, 2010 at 06:27 | Report abuse |
    • Ecologist

      *their widespread* sorry, little early.

      December 7, 2010 at 07:08 | Report abuse |
    • Ecologist

      Oof, I'm full of typos. No use trying to fix them now. I need peer reviewing.

      December 7, 2010 at 07:11 | Report abuse |
  11. Badonkadonk!

    hey cnn, finish your article and tell the people the name of the company

    December 7, 2010 at 05:46 | Report abuse | Reply
  12. dale

    so what are you sayin IAM FLAME RETARDANT ?? HOW DARE YOU !!!!!

    December 7, 2010 at 06:14 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Dirk

      I don't feel retardant.

      December 7, 2010 at 08:46 | Report abuse |
    • Crissy

      You are not flame retardant, you are flame disabled. Let's be PC.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:48 | Report abuse |
  13. BGale

    According to the research paper itself, only one butter sample of the ten tested was contaminated with the BDE-209 component of PBDEs, and that contamination was exceedingly high (scientists call this an "outlier" because it lies so far outside the rest of the group of samples). Lunder's calculation that a 40lb child would need to eat only 3 percent of a stick of contaminated butter to exceed the EPA daily safe exposure level for BDE-209 must have been based on the amount of BDE-209 in that one sample. So, given what the scientists actually report in their paper, it's incorrect to imply that eating 3 percent of *any given* stick of butter will cause a 40lb child to take in too much BDE-209. That doesn't mean there's nothing to be concerned about, just that it's too early to make blanket statements about all butter. Can the blogger clarify how this calculation was done?

    December 7, 2010 at 06:14 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Hummus

      " According to the research paper itself " You have read the entire report from UT ? The number of samples was not in this release. The story does say Lunder has no association with the study so one step at a time, please.

      December 7, 2010 at 09:15 | Report abuse |
    • BGale

      Hummus, a pdf of the whole report is available at http://ehponline.org/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.1002604.

      December 7, 2010 at 09:34 | Report abuse |
    • Tracey

      Now BGale, don't be confusin' anyone with those pesky facts.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:24 | Report abuse |
    • Hummus

      Thanks for the link BGale and hush up Tracey. The study does give contamination figures for the other nine samples though at much lower pg/g. The stated conclusion that a larger sampling would be useful to look for frequency of high contamination seems reasonable. Lunder's comments were not necessary, someone just wanted to shout "Fire". The minefield of processed food is not a new issue but I for one would not have thought of butter being contaminated in this way.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:52 | Report abuse |
  14. just me

    Why do they not want to tell us where this butter came from.? I think we need to know to protect ourselfs from it. But not telling us people could get sick or worse..

    December 7, 2010 at 06:45 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Fallguy

      They haven't mentioned the name of the company becuase as previously mentioned, the particular sample this article is about was a statistical outlier, that means the test may or may not be valid, which in turn means that they can't prove anything. Thus, if they mention the companies name both the paper's author and the author of this article suddenly become open to a libel suit (or is it slander?).

      December 7, 2010 at 07:24 | Report abuse |
  15. SDA

    Even though this might be a isolated incident (sure it is) we should still be made aware of what company made the mistake. Wheres Assange when we need him,

    December 7, 2010 at 07:23 | Report abuse | Reply
  16. Monkeymind

    The butter is made of soylent green. That has to be it-given the high concentration of this chemical in all of us.

    December 7, 2010 at 07:31 | Report abuse | Reply
    • E.Ham

      Charlton Heston is now soylent green. Mmmmmm, yummy.

      December 7, 2010 at 14:14 | Report abuse |
  17. SLG

    "95 percent of Americans have flame retardant chemicals in their body, according to Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst with the Environmental Working Group."

    and after all these years and billions spent no one has found a cure for cancer

    what other contaminates has corporate America infected us with

    December 7, 2010 at 07:37 | Report abuse | Reply
    • MrsFizzy

      As FDA is in charge of food & drugs.... you eat the food, you get sick, you have to take the drugs... win-win for the FDA.

      December 7, 2010 at 09:07 | Report abuse |
    • Anony

      I agree with fizzy, it's just the way to keep us feeding off the corporate, pharmaceutical and political cow. They keep you sick and tell you that you must only go to them to be "healed" by their snake oil and then tell you that your diet or pollution has NOTHING to do with your problems, it's all in your "head" so go get more drugs for that after you get diagnosed by their psychotherapist who conveniently just made up a diagnosis and treatment just for you. Makes you Feel special eh?!?!

      December 7, 2010 at 18:02 | Report abuse |
  18. bailoutsos

    Took some photos at a dairy coop several years ago and one of the photos I shot was of a huge vat. Inside the vat were mislabeled sticks of butter. The butter was getting heated to allow it to melt of the wax paper wrapping. After the butter melted the wax paper, along with he ink printed on it, was skimmed from the top of the melted butter. They asked me not to take a photo of that, but I already had.

    December 7, 2010 at 08:36 | Report abuse | Reply
  19. MrsFizzy

    "To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of U.S. butter contaminated with PBDEs," – that's comforting...and how many samples did this "small research project" take?? ...who knows what they are feeding us...!

    December 7, 2010 at 09:05 | Report abuse | Reply
  20. Barbara

    The word is "contaminants". You do not have "contaminates" in the butter, you have 'contaminants". The contaminant contaminates the butter, but the words are not the same.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:09 | Report abuse | Reply
  21. r

    And it's there so your farts don't ignite.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:13 | Report abuse | Reply
    • palintwit

      ...LOL...good one.

      December 7, 2010 at 09:27 | Report abuse |
  22. Padmanabham

    Which is the next food product that will be revealed to contain contaminants?

    December 7, 2010 at 09:16 | Report abuse | Reply
  23. RG

    But no, big business millionaires should not be forced to pay higher taxes, even after poisoning their customers with their products. Perhaps we should start importing dairy products too, let's put everyone out of work.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:17 | Report abuse | Reply
  24. c5babe

    It might be nice to know the name of the company that put this poison on the shelves......just saying.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:17 | Report abuse | Reply
  25. RG

    If you think it's butter, but it's not, it's flame retardant

    December 7, 2010 at 09:18 | Report abuse | Reply
  26. Alex

    guess it's a good thing that i rarely use stick butter.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:32 | Report abuse | Reply
  27. Andrew

    Headline: "Study: Flame retardant found in small butter sample"

    How about doing a large butter sample (more than 1 stick from various sources) and then publishing data that we can actually learn something from?? By not naming the company you are basically saying you have no confidence in your research and therefore alarming people on the testing of a single stick of butter.

    If you ask me, these scientists should have their pocket TI-83's confiscated and impounded...

    December 7, 2010 at 09:34 | Report abuse | Reply
  28. Stacey

    So now I'm flame retardant? That's just fabulous!

    December 7, 2010 at 09:43 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Mok

      Yes, the gays will not run from you

      December 7, 2010 at 12:41 | Report abuse |
    • Mok

      will NOW run from you even

      December 7, 2010 at 12:42 | Report abuse |
  29. Rick McDaniel

    Humans are polluting ourselves to death.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:43 | Report abuse | Reply
  30. dewlapski

    Probably contaminated by a worker in the testing lab to generate more business.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:46 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Lioness

      Probably not.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:06 | Report abuse |
    • Crissy

      I remember seeing an investigative report on tv many years ago (in the 1980's) about truckers that haul chemicals in their tanks on one trip, then haul milk on their next trip without cleaning out the tanks. Could this still be happening?

      December 7, 2010 at 10:53 | Report abuse |
  31. Jack

    It's convenient that this comes out just as the Food Modernization Act has been halted in the House and comes under scrutiny...

    December 7, 2010 at 09:47 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Anony

      Ah! BINGO! I think you just hit the JACKPOT!!!!

      Kinda like how Obama faked a ups bomb scare a few months ago right when they realeased new protocols for enhanced pat downs/molestation and elections too.

      December 7, 2010 at 18:08 | Report abuse |
  32. JR

    Of course there are chemicals in butter. Contaminants in all animals, including people are going to be concentrated in fat, and that's exactly what butter is. Concentrated milk fat. This doesn't just include flame retardents but pesticides and whatever else you can be exposed to. They should have tested it for 'everything', that would be far more interesting.

    I'm no holy roller organic food eater, but even if broke, I buy organic dairy (butter and milk) for my family. No, it's not a panacea, but it certainly can decrease exposure, which these days is the best that you can do. And conversations about how this could be packaging contamination is just a joke.

    JR, who is also an RN

    December 7, 2010 at 09:47 | Report abuse | Reply
  33. Linda

    Think about what is being written. The government of our United States wants to take over. Each time there is an occurance it leaves us (we the people) vulnerable to allow the government to take over because we need better care, better food, too much contamination, etc. This is a ploy to allow the government to take over as in socialism.

    They are already trying to tell (we the people) we cannot drink milk from a cow that is not pasturized, I cannot understand what heating the milk to take out the vitamins then inserting those vitamins back in artificallt, can be good for a person. I grew up on milk from our own cows and it never hurt me. Food we grow ourselves is getting so we cannot sell it to outsiders. We will not be allowed to grow our own food because the government will not tolerate it.

    I am amazed how sly our governement really is. While we sit and talk about the illegals, we have the muslims here in our country on welfare, illigels here on welfare and our own lazy people on welfare. No jobs, yes that is correct. However these people were on welfare long before the recession hit.

    We need GOD back in our United States of America, before we all become regulated and owned by foreigners. BRING BACK GOD.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:49 | Report abuse | Reply
    • knucklehead61

      Do you know anything about science, or do you get all your vast knowledge from "The View?" Better get that paranoia looked at...

      The government can't "take you over" if you're dead from eating flame retardant.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:05 | Report abuse |
    • Russ

      Hey Linda – God says "tone it down there in your trailer park".

      December 7, 2010 at 10:21 | Report abuse |
    • Tracey

      You're right, there are no Christians on welfare. And God didn't say nothin' about helping the sick and the poor . . . oh wait. Oops.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:25 | Report abuse |
    • MrsFizzy

      Yes, because God will protect us from contaminated food – we don't need no regulations!

      December 7, 2010 at 13:35 | Report abuse |
    • GiveMeABreak

      Hey Linda, where's your outrage over this sort of socialism?

      http://www.kentucky.com/2010/12/02/1548034/creation-museum-to-get-wooden.html

      Oh, I guess you're only against the kind of socialism that doesn't fit into your world view / religious beliefs... Your tax dollars being used to protect the general public from known carcinogens, teratogens, & mutagens is socialism, but using my tax dollars for the shameless promotion of your religion is acceptable? PURE IDIOCY & HYPOCRISY!!!

      GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

      December 7, 2010 at 14:49 | Report abuse |
  34. dewlapski

    Without all these chemicals, average human lifespan would be about 20 years - look at the good old days before chemicals. No antibiotics, no good nutrition, no jobs except hunting and berry picking. No large weapons with which to kill lions and tigers.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:50 | Report abuse | Reply
  35. Paul

    Flame retardent in butter is a GOOD thing. Cooks will tell you not to burn butter when cooking with it, now the problem is solved.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:52 | Report abuse | Reply
  36. tony

    The highly popular (with doctors) antibiotic CIPRO crippled my healthy wife (and a heck of a lot of under-reported others). Thanks to Reagan, the de-regulated FDA doesn't test drugs, it lets the drug companies do their own "testing", and PROFITS ARE KING. We have a quiet 9/11 every week for US medical patients.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:54 | Report abuse | Reply
  37. thomas

    It's not made in China. Unbelievable.

    December 7, 2010 at 09:56 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. David

    I am going to stand a limb and ask the question... Did the wrappers come from China? I honestly feel the Chinese are trying to poison the entire US population...

    December 7, 2010 at 10:02 | Report abuse | Reply
    • knucklehead61

      But then they'll never get their money back...

      December 7, 2010 at 10:07 | Report abuse |
    • Besserwisser

      Hey, I so agree!! I've been thinking the same thing. The Chinese manufacturers most likely know which country their product is going to, so what ta heck: adding little lead, formaldehyde and other poisons is pure fun. What do they care? In fact, they want to beat us anyway. And we are stupid that we buy more and more Chinese products! Boykott.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:26 | Report abuse |
    • MrsFizzy

      What are you going to say when it turns out both the butter and the labels were made in the USA? "Oh it must have been Muslims or illegals working in the factory, they put that in there..."??

      December 7, 2010 at 13:37 | Report abuse |
    • David

      Dear MrsFizzy, with all due respect to your lack of knowledge and insite, read a news paper or better yet take a long hard look in your own house and I will bet you there are produces which were made in China and contain Heavy metals (radiactive) lead, or some other toxin and I also bet the product was targeting for your kids... Wake up smart ass and understand they do not like, want or need us. But, they do need our land. .

      December 7, 2010 at 13:44 | Report abuse |
    • MrsFizzy

      I know exactly what you mean and there are many good reasons to boycott Chinese goods! But unfortunately, all the poor quality, defective or dangerous products in the world do not necessarily come from China.

      December 7, 2010 at 13:50 | Report abuse |
  39. knucklehead61

    This is Free Enterprise at work, people. Quit taxing me just because you're all so nit-picky about such a little thing like food. Freaking Socialists...

    December 7, 2010 at 10:04 | Report abuse | Reply
  40. Phil

    That's good to know that 95% of Americans have flame retardants in them. Only 5% of the population will spontaneously combust.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:05 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Mok

      It IS good to know and it explaines why there are so many FLAMERS out there now and why another large groups are ret@rds

      December 7, 2010 at 12:40 | Report abuse |
  41. knucklehead61

    I like that butter, and to date, I have yet to burst into flames.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:07 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Besserwisser

      It's designed to keep you burning slower and smoking less when you meet your maker.

      December 7, 2010 at 10:29 | Report abuse |
    • chronoslinger

      sounds logical to me :p

      December 7, 2010 at 10:38 | Report abuse |
  42. Cieje Valentine

    So if I eat food with this butter on it, my farts won't ignite anymore? Darn, there goes my transportation.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:07 | Report abuse | Reply
  43. resloan

    Well, it seems that "fart-free" foods may be the next big food fad.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:40 | Report abuse | Reply
  44. Crissy

    It makes you wonder how smart is it to require childrens pajamas to be flame retardant. How much of this poison is absorbed through a childs skin & affecting their development? Our nation is seeing higher rates of ADD & asthma in our children, could this be one of the causes? It should certainly be investigated, IMHO.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:41 | Report abuse | Reply
    • MrsFizzy

      NO idea why my first reply to you failed! Anyway this is just one of many factors I'm sure. We can only try to reduce our and our children's exposure – in modern America it is impossible to avoid chemical exposure altogether!

      December 7, 2010 at 13:44 | Report abuse |
  45. Besserwisser

    Do you seriously buy pajamas with flame retardants? Look for snug fitting 100% cotton or flannel pajamas that say "Does NOT meet flammability...something". I buy mine at garnethill or hannaandersson for exactly that reason. EVERYTHING goes through skin.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:47 | Report abuse | Reply
  46. Andrewaslfgdgs

    "a 40-pound child would need to eat only 3 percent of a stick of contaminated butter to exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's daily safe exposure level for PBDE-209, the main component in PBDE."

    American children are screwed. Most American kids eat that much butter before lunch.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:49 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Silver

      It said "butter", not margarine!!! Well over 95% of the product(s) consumed under this heading are MARGARINE! If the article is correct in saying it is butter, then no, most kids don't even have butter directly in their diet at all.

      December 8, 2010 at 06:56 | Report abuse |
  47. George

    They found the chemical in the butter a year ago, but there was no public notification or recall, which says, another government department failed to do what the taxpayers spend billions of dollars on every year to have them do. Fire the lot of them ! Who runs the FDA? Bring him before a congressional panel and lets get to the bottom of this. How can they keep the brand name of the butter from the public? Just to protect the company's interest? How about our children who are being poisoned by this? Forget about them.

    December 7, 2010 at 10:51 | Report abuse | Reply
    • David

      They stated the highest concetration of the flame retardant was in the wrapper. Again where did the wrappers come from. I trust my fellow American a whole lot more than a Communist counrty that would love to retard and kill all our kids so they can get a really nice country without a war, they need some breathing room...no?! I think the current US population is going to share the same fate as the original occupats (Native Americas)? People it is as simple as this Boycott all made in China products and it solves 1) more jobs here in the US 2) a better quality 3) pay off the Chinese debt and tell them to go packing with there useless trinkets. Nover foget they are a communist government. They will steal, lie, cheat and kill to get what they want......

      December 7, 2010 at 11:00 | Report abuse |
    • Bailey

      Not quite billionS; the Food Safety Inspection Service budget is right around $1 billion. If that were my personal budget, it would go far. But for a service trying to keep up with what's in the food produced to feed all 310,000,000 of us, it's called "making ends meet." See http://www.ombwatch.org/node/10472

      December 9, 2010 at 05:23 | Report abuse |
  48. George

    The FDA allowed the flame retardant saying "This will dramatically reduce the number of spontaneous combustion deaths".

    December 7, 2010 at 10:53 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Anony

      Thank goodness for that. You don't know how many babies I have lost due to them spontaneously combusting in their beds. Or when I left my cigarettes in their crib. These new jammies kept our last 12 kids so safe!

      December 7, 2010 at 18:13 | Report abuse |
  49. Besserwisser

    FDA is a criminal organization. I do not trust them at all. More regulation please!

    December 7, 2010 at 11:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  50. newt

    Shown to reduce the incidence of kitchen fires. FLAMEPROOF BUTTER SAVES LIVES!

    December 7, 2010 at 11:08 | Report abuse | Reply
1 2

Leave a Reply to jamr


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

« Previous entry
Advertisement
About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.