June 24, 2025 • 21 mins
We would love to hear what you think?
Welcome to The Exposure Scientist Podcast! In this episode, Dr. Alex LeBeau dives into the growing concerns surrounding consumer product safety. With advancements in technology making it easier than ever to detect even the tiniest traces of chemicals in our everyday products—from baby wipes to watch bands—it’s become a bit of a “wild west” out there for both consumers and manufacturers.
Dr. LeBeau explores why knowing what’s in your products is more important than ever, the challenges of regulatory compliance, and how companies can stay ahead of the curve (and avoid negative headlines) by being transparent and proactive.
If you’ve ever wondered about those alarming social media claims about “toxic” products or what really goes on behind the scenes in product testing, this episode will give you the science, context, and communication strategies you need to separate facts from fear. Tune in for practical insights and expert advice on navigating the evolving world of consumer product safety.
Contact Dr. Alex LeBeau at Exposure Consulting for exposure litigation support or Exposure Science Consulting.
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Dr Alex LeBeau (00:00):
You might not realize it, but we are exposed
to dozens of hazards every day.
Can any of these hazardsnegatively impact your health?
Definitely.
This is the Exposure ScientistPodcast.
My name is Alex LeBeau, andhere we answer your questions
and concerns on what you may beexposed to every day.
(00:20):
Welcome to the ExposureScientist Podcast.
the views expressed in thispodcast may not be those of the
host or management this podcastis for informational purposes
only and should not beconsidered health advice it is
recommended that you consult anexposure scientist to discuss
the particulars of your exposurescenario Hello and welcome to
(00:42):
today's episode of the ExposureScientist podcast.
Slight programming note just toremind and let you know, we
have a new website feature whereyou can go over to our website
for the podcast and leave avoice message or a voice note on
there that we could actuallyplay on the show.
So if you have any questions orcomments, go over there, leave
them.
Test it out.
(01:03):
We'll try it out.
Play it on the show and see ifwe can respond to any concerns
or comments that you do have.
On today's episode of theExposure Scientist podcast,
we're going to be discussing atopic that has been creeping up
more and more that I've noticed,and I've been contacted more
and more about it, and that isrelated a lot to, I'll say,
(01:23):
generally product safety.
Now, I have a history ofperforming product safety
assessments on consumer or othertype of products that people
use, whether it's in theworkplace or in the home setting
or in the office setting.
But there is more and moreconcern that people are looking
(01:44):
for problems when they may ormay not exist.
And I say that as in, you know,there are lots of different
products that are marketed oradvertised as, you know, just
being, you know, Free ofcontaminants.
I'm just making up somethingthat someone says, you know, the
free and clear and good is thewind-driven snow, so to speak.
And what I've noticed and seena trend more and more is that
(02:10):
there's been a push to want totest that idea.
Now, some products, generallyI'll say this, some products
fall under regulatory complianceregulations.
EPA, whether, you know, apesticide or EPA regulatory
paradigm or FDA's regulatoryparadigm for either a food or a
(02:32):
medical device or what have you.
But what about consumerproducts?
What about someone that's goingto be using anything you can
think of, putting new carpet inthere, having towels, doing
just, I wouldn't say normalconsumer stuff.
What about those type ofproducts?
Well, that's a little more ofa...
(02:53):
a Wild West almost kind ofshoot because there are some,
I'll say, brands and brandidentities that know what
they're doing.
They're understanding.
They say, listen, we're goingto have internal standards for
what we are setting up.
There's large electronicmanufacturers that have those
(03:14):
type of things set up.
They have specifications.
There are some brands thathave, I'll say, if you want to
be associated with a brandbrand, that have certain
specifications for meetingrequirements of that brand,
certain tolerances that they setup in these specifications.
Other ones may or may not havethat or may have it at different
(03:36):
levels.
So one of the interestingthings as time goes on, and I'm
speaking more generally herebecause some of the scientific
community may understand this,but some others may not be
totally up to speed on it.
Obviously, as time goes on, alaboratory's ability to quantify
data, quantify data,constituents or what have you of
(04:00):
what something is made of getsbetter and better.
So, you know, it used to bewhere you look at something in
the part per million range andthen, you know, 10 or 20 years
go by, then you can startlooking things in the part per
billion range and another 10, 15years go by.
And now we're looking at thingsin a part per trillion range.
(04:20):
So technology is getting betterand better.
But what is concerning is thatare people paying attention and
aware of what their productshave in them?
And that there's a lot ofdifferent ways to address that
(04:41):
concern.
have they done analysis?
I'll just say, you know, maybeit's a consumer product that is,
I'm just going to throwsomething out there, you know,
toilet paper.
Has anybody evaluated toiletpaper, paper towels, you know,
and seen what the constituentsare, what are they using in
their products to see if there'sanything that maybe should not
(05:06):
be there?
And I say should not be thereis, you know, it depends on how
these products are marketed.
Is it free of contaminants?
Is it pure?
How are products marketed?
I'll tell you why.
I've seen more and more peoplegoing out there and doing
(05:29):
assessments of consumerproducts.
baby wipes, maybe it's diapers,maybe it's pens, maybe it's
mouse pads, what have you.
They're going and identifyingproducts, they're pulling them
off your shelves at stores, andthey're sending them off to labs
(05:49):
for analysis.
And at these laboratories,they're asking these labs,
they're saying, hey, can you doa non-targeted analysis for us?
Saying, hey, what do we thinkWhat can you, I'll say,
semi-quantitatively identify asin this product?
Saying, hey, can you give us ayes, no on this product?
(06:10):
If you're doing it with yourtolerances or your reporting
limits at your laboratory, doyou see heavy metal, PFAS,
something that shouldn't be inthere?
And there have been instanceswhere people are getting
detections of things that may ormay not be need to be in there.
(06:32):
Maybe it's a low-level processcontaminant that's left over.
Maybe it's something thatthere's certain tolerances that
are already established or inthe manufacturing products, and
maybe it falls below thattolerance, but maybe it's a
health concern.
Has anyone done that analysis?
More and more, I'm seeing thatPeople are just grabbing things
(06:55):
off the shelf and sending themin for testing.
And if they're getting hits onthem, they're creating, I'll
say, highlighting them from anotification standpoint.
It says, hey...
Did you know this product hasthis and that?
(07:15):
Did you know this product saysthat it's free of everything,
but it actually has that?
Recently, I think I mentionedon the podcast, there is some
people doing some testing ofsome PFAS and some watch bands,
consumer watch bands from alarge manufacturer, an
electronic manufacturer thatprobably everyone is familiar
(07:35):
with.
And they said, hey, there'sPFAS in these bands.
And then...
That kicks off another analysisof, hey, you know, is it PFAS?
Were there any tolerances forPFAS in that product?
Is a PFAS bioavailable?
What is the amount that's maybecrossing the skin to get into
(07:55):
the body?
What is a harm that potentiallycould be producing?
There's a lot of decision treesthat go on to lower levels.
But it comes back to the higherlevels as well.
Nobody told us PFAS was inthere and nobody told us these
metals were in there.
Nobody told us thesecontaminants, quote-unquote
contaminants, were in there.
(08:16):
And that sometimes can create aproblem for a manufacturer,
especially if they didn't notifysomeone that was in there or
notify what the tolerances wereand say, hey, this product could
contain up to X amount of thismaterial.
And that's important because...
(08:37):
lots of people are more andmore hyper-focused on what's in
their products and what may beharming them.
Now, again, that goes back tothe bioavailability.
What does it actually mean?
But at a higher level, there'sa bigger concern of, hey, people
want to know what's in theirproducts.
And if you're not notifyingthem that these things could be
(08:59):
in their products, it's going tocreate a problem.
I have said time and timeagain, and let me take this
back, and Maybe these peopledon't even know what's in there.
But time and time again, I havesaid it is better for you to
know what is in your productthan for someone else to tell
you what's in your product.
Over and over again, I'veharped on that from a consumer
(09:20):
product safety standpoint.
If you want to do anon-targeted analysis yourself,
great.
It's important for you to dobecause that helps you identify
what may be in there, identifywhat the root cause is, and take
care of it.
But you don't want someoneknocking on your door.
(09:41):
Maybe it's a regulator.
Maybe it's a lawsuit.
And someone says, hey, youdidn't tell us this was in
there.
And then you've got to playcatch up like, well, OK, now it
may be in there.
It's at low levels.
It's not really a concern.
It's not going to cross any,you know, any dermal barriers or
it's not going to beinternalized into the body and
(10:02):
the doses.
You know, it creates more andmore problems.
Exposure Science covers a broadsubject area, including
toxicology, industrial hygiene,and risk assessment.
From occupational, community,or environmental exposure,
exposure scientists applyscientific methodologies to
understand exposure risks andapply controls when necessary.
(10:22):
We at Exposure AssessmentConsulting have this expertise.
Please reach out to us at infoat exposureconsulting.com for a
free 15-minute consultation todiscuss the specifics of your
exposure scenario.
If you know what is in there tobegin with and get ahead of it,
that's great.
(10:42):
Be open and honest.
Be like, hey, this is aspecification we have.
These are the methods that werequire you to use to analyze it
because these are the oneswe've identified that are
relevant for human exposure.
Because sometimes in theselaboratory scenarios, they're
doing this non-targetedanalysis.
(11:03):
They're saying, hey, Maybe weshould do this under the worst
case scenario.
Maybe we should say, hey, howmuch of anything can we get out
of this, whether it'sbiologically relevant or not?
Let's just put it to the maxand see what comes out of it.
Now, is that going to beactually relevant to human
exposure?
Likely not.
(11:24):
But there are people who aredoing that because then it's
like, oh, well, this is inthere.
It's a great tool.
headline to grab and it'simportant to contextualize that
headline but some people are notcontextualizing it some people
are leaving it off some peopleleaving up to more of a
sensational eye grabber becausethat's what generates i'll say
(11:46):
additional thoughts recently andthis is kind of i'll say segues
and there's recently i've madeaware of a few people out there
on youtube or i don't get ontiktok but you know there's a
few i'll say i'll othervideo-based apps where people
are getting on there and they'remaking these videos to say
(12:07):
they're going into stores andpicking up products and holding
up the camera says i would neveruse this because it's toxic or
i would never use this becauseit contains whatever chemical
and they don't give any contextto it they don't say well for
example one of them was i wouldnever use this because it
(12:28):
contains a deadly or a harmfulfragrance and the fragrance they
reference the study theyreference and you look it up and
then our pub med which is i'llsay a general search for
research journal publicationsthere's one article on it and
the one article was from 25years ago.
(12:50):
And it was an animal study, abioassay in animals, where they
exposed them for eight hours aday for weeks at a time.
And this was just likesomething that you may be
exposed to for 10 minutes, theproduct or whatever it was, a
very limited use scenario basedon the conditions.
(13:13):
But they don't contextualizethat.
So then you've got peoplemaking these Big claims of, hey,
this stuff is deadly anddangerous.
I would never use this.
And then it is much more workon the back end to go and refute
that because, A, you'rerefuting something that's
(13:34):
already been claimed againstyou, that you're already at an
uphill battle there.
B, you got to go through allthe process, all the details, do
your risk assessment, somecalculations, and then refute.
Then tell your story after thestory has already been told
about you.
Now, is it difficult to getahead of that?
(13:57):
Could and could not be.
It involves risk communicationand good risk communication.
And I think I mentioned on aprevious podcast, I was supposed
to be actually attending AIHAConnect this year and
unfortunately cannot go to otherschedule obligations, but I was
going to be talking abouteffective risk communication
there.
You know, the importance ofperforming effective risk
(14:21):
communication to your targetaudience.
It involves distilling a verycomplex problem down to a way
that everyone can understand it.
You know, if we want to talkamongst ourselves, that's great.
We could talk in verytechnological terms or very,
I'll say, industry-focusedterms.
But nobody else is going tounderstand that.
(14:43):
I was having a conversationrecently with a client.
You know, I was using...
higher level terminology.
And I just said, Hey, forexample, it could be viewed as
this.
And they're like, that examplemade us understand what you were
talking about.
You are talking about all thisother stuff.
And it sounds like theory tous.
But as soon as you gave us thatexample, it clicked in our
(15:04):
minds.
And that's, what's important.
Use examples, you know, havethose people have the, you know,
if you're having a product,have a dedicated spot on your
webpage to say, listen, youknow, Our product, we set up
these tolerances that maybe havea low level of this.
You would have to be exposed to– I'm just going to throw it out
there.
Maybe it's something in papertowels.
(15:27):
Maybe it's a fragrance in papertowels or trash bags or
whatever it is because trashbags now smell like certain,
I'll say, fragrances.
You would have to give theexample of, hey, you would have
to be locked in a small roomwith– I'm making up numbers, a
thousand of these bags for twoyears to have any potential.
(15:54):
I emphasize potential healtheffects.
Give some context.
Make it simple for people.
That's what I've done a lot inmy career is trying to help
people.
Understand complex problemsusing simple terminology and
examples.
And if you can get ahead ofthat and be like, listen, you
know, if that's on your websitealready and somebody tries to
(16:14):
say, oh, well, it's dangerous,you can just put them on your
website and say, listen, we'vealready evaluated that potential
thought or claim.
Here it is very easily laidout.
And we did it, you know, threeyears ago.
I don't know why this guydidn't or girl didn't go to our
website and just review theinformation.
Because it's easy for someoneto make a claim.
(16:35):
It's harder for someone torefute that claim once that
seed's already been planted.
So again, this is kind oftargeting the idea that product
safety is important.
From a regulatory standpoint,there are regulatory processes
for it.
But for other consumerproducts, there may not be.
(16:55):
Some brands, some manufacturersdo their due diligence, but
others don't.
may not even be aware of it.
And again, it's important foryou to understand what is in
your product, to detail what isin your product before someone
else tells you what's in theirproduct, either from a complaint
or I'll say a recall or evenfrom a lawsuit.
(17:19):
Know what's in there, get aheadof it and address it because
everyone has these concerns andYou know, everyone used to love
a new car smell until they said,whoa, are those VOCs that are
being emitted in theredangerous?
Maybe we shouldn't have thatmany, or they have low VOC
paint.
(17:39):
You know, there's a reason andrationale why we have this stuff
and we're doing this stuff.
Get ahead of the game.
Get ahead of any complaints orthoughts, or you don't want to
be highlighted on these otherpeople's videos that are making
these wild accusations becausethey're you want to make their
accusations baseless.
(18:00):
And if you can, that's great.
Now, if there's something thatis important that you maybe
didn't analyze for or thinkabout, and they say, hey, we
found this, and hopefully theywould do it in a nicer way, they
say, hey, we found this.
I've seen some companies say,nah, we're just going to blow
that off.
We're going to consider it.
Now, maybe internally, theystart freaking out and worry
(18:24):
about it.
But Sometimes people are justdoing things to help.
And you got to say, hey, thankyou.
We appreciate it.
We appreciate you bringing thisto our attention.
We're going to address it rightaway.
We're going to put a newsrelease out there or do
whatever.
Everyone is so scared of badpress or being named in a
(18:47):
lawsuit.
Sometimes things happen.
Sometimes happen with supplychains.
I've seen it where, and seenand heard, where, hey, you know,
we're doing this, we're gettingthese supplies, it's coming
from a foreign country, and we,you know, maybe we analyze, we
have a certificate of analysison one lot.
(19:08):
And they say, hey, this lotlooks great, you did everything
we want to, but they onlyanalyzed the best lot.
They were given the best lot.
And subsequent lots maybearen't the best product.
You're going to have to spotcheck your lots.
You're going to have to keepthis analysis up.
It's just not a one-time thing.
It's a continual improvementprocess or continual evaluation
(19:28):
process.
know what's in your product.
Because I would love to sayeveryone is on the up and up and
pure and true, but sometimesthings happen.
Sometimes maybe people aresaying, this is what we're
always going to give you.
And three years down the road,you're still relying on that COA
that they gave you and is noteven reflective of what they're
(19:50):
giving you right now.
So do some due diligence,continue it, have a process,
have a plan laid out and makethat plan public.
If you go look at some of theselarger electronic
manufacturers, you can go findtheir specifications on their
websites make it public sopeople know what you're doing
get ahead of the game becausewhen they say hey you know we
found this in your product youcan say yeah we have tolerances
(20:11):
for it these are based onthresholds for bio under
bioavailability understandingfrom a toxicological perspective
and exposure assessment we'reahead of this so if you have any
questions comments i'd love youto try the new website out see
if we can get that working seeif we can play your comments
Reach out to me by phone, email.
Happy to have a conversationbecause this is an important
(20:31):
topic.
And it's more and more peopleare going to go in stores, pull
things off shelves, send them toa laboratory.
And if they're not up to snuff,there's going to be a snowball
effect that's going to result inlots of money later on instead
of the little money that youcould spend up front to
(20:52):
understand what's in yourproduct.
Hope you enjoyed today'sepisode of the Exposure
Scientist podcast and hope tosee you again soon.
Thanks so much.
Thank you for listening to theExposure Scientist podcast.
You can connect with us at ourwebsite, ExposureConsulting.com,
where you can book a privateconsultation and send in any
questions regarding any episodesor our guests.
(21:15):
See you in the next episode.
You might not realize it, but we are exposed
to dozens of hazards every day.
Can any of these hazardsnegatively impact your health?
Definitely.
This is the Exposure ScientistPodcast.
My name is Alex LeBeau, andhere we answer your questions
and concerns on what you may beexposed to every day.
(00:20):
Welcome to the ExposureScientist Podcast.
the views expressed in thispodcast may not be those of the
host or management this podcastis for informational purposes
only and should not beconsidered health advice it is
recommended that you consult anexposure scientist to discuss
the particulars of your exposurescenario Hello and welcome to
(00:42):
today's episode of the ExposureScientist podcast.
Slight programming note just toremind and let you know, we
have a new website feature whereyou can go over to our website
for the podcast and leave avoice message or a voice note on
there that we could actuallyplay on the show.
So if you have any questions orcomments, go over there, leave
them.
Test it out.
(01:03):
We'll try it out.
Play it on the show and see ifwe can respond to any concerns
or comments that you do have.
On today's episode of theExposure Scientist podcast,
we're going to be discussing atopic that has been creeping up
more and more that I've noticed,and I've been contacted more
and more about it, and that isrelated a lot to, I'll say,
(01:23):
generally product safety.
Now, I have a history ofperforming product safety
assessments on consumer or othertype of products that people
use, whether it's in theworkplace or in the home setting
or in the office setting.
But there is more and moreconcern that people are looking
(01:44):
for problems when they may ormay not exist.
And I say that as in, you know,there are lots of different
products that are marketed oradvertised as, you know, just
being, you know, Free ofcontaminants.
I'm just making up somethingthat someone says, you know, the
free and clear and good is thewind-driven snow, so to speak.
And what I've noticed and seena trend more and more is that
(02:10):
there's been a push to want totest that idea.
Now, some products, generallyI'll say this, some products
fall under regulatory complianceregulations.
EPA, whether, you know, apesticide or EPA regulatory
paradigm or FDA's regulatoryparadigm for either a food or a
(02:32):
medical device or what have you.
But what about consumerproducts?
What about someone that's goingto be using anything you can
think of, putting new carpet inthere, having towels, doing
just, I wouldn't say normalconsumer stuff.
What about those type ofproducts?
Well, that's a little more ofa...
(02:53):
a Wild West almost kind ofshoot because there are some,
I'll say, brands and brandidentities that know what
they're doing.
They're understanding.
They say, listen, we're goingto have internal standards for
what we are setting up.
There's large electronicmanufacturers that have those
(03:14):
type of things set up.
They have specifications.
There are some brands thathave, I'll say, if you want to
be associated with a brandbrand, that have certain
specifications for meetingrequirements of that brand,
certain tolerances that they setup in these specifications.
Other ones may or may not havethat or may have it at different
(03:36):
levels.
So one of the interestingthings as time goes on, and I'm
speaking more generally herebecause some of the scientific
community may understand this,but some others may not be
totally up to speed on it.
Obviously, as time goes on, alaboratory's ability to quantify
data, quantify data,constituents or what have you of
(04:00):
what something is made of getsbetter and better.
So, you know, it used to bewhere you look at something in
the part per million range andthen, you know, 10 or 20 years
go by, then you can startlooking things in the part per
billion range and another 10, 15years go by.
And now we're looking at thingsin a part per trillion range.
(04:20):
So technology is getting betterand better.
But what is concerning is thatare people paying attention and
aware of what their productshave in them?
And that there's a lot ofdifferent ways to address that
(04:41):
concern.
have they done analysis?
I'll just say, you know, maybeit's a consumer product that is,
I'm just going to throwsomething out there, you know,
toilet paper.
Has anybody evaluated toiletpaper, paper towels, you know,
and seen what the constituentsare, what are they using in
their products to see if there'sanything that maybe should not
(05:06):
be there?
And I say should not be thereis, you know, it depends on how
these products are marketed.
Is it free of contaminants?
Is it pure?
How are products marketed?
I'll tell you why.
I've seen more and more peoplegoing out there and doing
(05:29):
assessments of consumerproducts.
baby wipes, maybe it's diapers,maybe it's pens, maybe it's
mouse pads, what have you.
They're going and identifyingproducts, they're pulling them
off your shelves at stores, andthey're sending them off to labs
(05:49):
for analysis.
And at these laboratories,they're asking these labs,
they're saying, hey, can you doa non-targeted analysis for us?
Saying, hey, what do we thinkWhat can you, I'll say,
semi-quantitatively identify asin this product?
Saying, hey, can you give us ayes, no on this product?
(06:10):
If you're doing it with yourtolerances or your reporting
limits at your laboratory, doyou see heavy metal, PFAS,
something that shouldn't be inthere?
And there have been instanceswhere people are getting
detections of things that may ormay not be need to be in there.
(06:32):
Maybe it's a low-level processcontaminant that's left over.
Maybe it's something thatthere's certain tolerances that
are already established or inthe manufacturing products, and
maybe it falls below thattolerance, but maybe it's a
health concern.
Has anyone done that analysis?
More and more, I'm seeing thatPeople are just grabbing things
(06:55):
off the shelf and sending themin for testing.
And if they're getting hits onthem, they're creating, I'll
say, highlighting them from anotification standpoint.
It says, hey...
Did you know this product hasthis and that?
(07:15):
Did you know this product saysthat it's free of everything,
but it actually has that?
Recently, I think I mentionedon the podcast, there is some
people doing some testing ofsome PFAS and some watch bands,
consumer watch bands from alarge manufacturer, an
electronic manufacturer thatprobably everyone is familiar
(07:35):
with.
And they said, hey, there'sPFAS in these bands.
And then...
That kicks off another analysisof, hey, you know, is it PFAS?
Were there any tolerances forPFAS in that product?
Is a PFAS bioavailable?
What is the amount that's maybecrossing the skin to get into
(07:55):
the body?
What is a harm that potentiallycould be producing?
There's a lot of decision treesthat go on to lower levels.
But it comes back to the higherlevels as well.
Nobody told us PFAS was inthere and nobody told us these
metals were in there.
Nobody told us thesecontaminants, quote-unquote
contaminants, were in there.
(08:16):
And that sometimes can create aproblem for a manufacturer,
especially if they didn't notifysomeone that was in there or
notify what the tolerances wereand say, hey, this product could
contain up to X amount of thismaterial.
And that's important because...
(08:37):
lots of people are more andmore hyper-focused on what's in
their products and what may beharming them.
Now, again, that goes back tothe bioavailability.
What does it actually mean?
But at a higher level, there'sa bigger concern of, hey, people
want to know what's in theirproducts.
And if you're not notifyingthem that these things could be
(08:59):
in their products, it's going tocreate a problem.
I have said time and timeagain, and let me take this
back, and Maybe these peopledon't even know what's in there.
But time and time again, I havesaid it is better for you to
know what is in your productthan for someone else to tell
you what's in your product.
Over and over again, I'veharped on that from a consumer
(09:20):
product safety standpoint.
If you want to do anon-targeted analysis yourself,
great.
It's important for you to dobecause that helps you identify
what may be in there, identifywhat the root cause is, and take
care of it.
But you don't want someoneknocking on your door.
(09:41):
Maybe it's a regulator.
Maybe it's a lawsuit.
And someone says, hey, youdidn't tell us this was in
there.
And then you've got to playcatch up like, well, OK, now it
may be in there.
It's at low levels.
It's not really a concern.
It's not going to cross any,you know, any dermal barriers or
it's not going to beinternalized into the body and
(10:02):
the doses.
You know, it creates more andmore problems.
Exposure Science covers a broadsubject area, including
toxicology, industrial hygiene,and risk assessment.
From occupational, community,or environmental exposure,
exposure scientists applyscientific methodologies to
understand exposure risks andapply controls when necessary.
(10:22):
We at Exposure AssessmentConsulting have this expertise.
Please reach out to us at infoat exposureconsulting.com for a
free 15-minute consultation todiscuss the specifics of your
exposure scenario.
If you know what is in there tobegin with and get ahead of it,
that's great.
(10:42):
Be open and honest.
Be like, hey, this is aspecification we have.
These are the methods that werequire you to use to analyze it
because these are the oneswe've identified that are
relevant for human exposure.
Because sometimes in theselaboratory scenarios, they're
doing this non-targetedanalysis.
(11:03):
They're saying, hey, Maybe weshould do this under the worst
case scenario.
Maybe we should say, hey, howmuch of anything can we get out
of this, whether it'sbiologically relevant or not?
Let's just put it to the maxand see what comes out of it.
Now, is that going to beactually relevant to human
exposure?
Likely not.
(11:24):
But there are people who aredoing that because then it's
like, oh, well, this is inthere.
It's a great tool.
headline to grab and it'simportant to contextualize that
headline but some people are notcontextualizing it some people
are leaving it off some peopleleaving up to more of a
sensational eye grabber becausethat's what generates i'll say
(11:46):
additional thoughts recently andthis is kind of i'll say segues
and there's recently i've madeaware of a few people out there
on youtube or i don't get ontiktok but you know there's a
few i'll say i'll othervideo-based apps where people
are getting on there and they'remaking these videos to say
(12:07):
they're going into stores andpicking up products and holding
up the camera says i would neveruse this because it's toxic or
i would never use this becauseit contains whatever chemical
and they don't give any contextto it they don't say well for
example one of them was i wouldnever use this because it
(12:28):
contains a deadly or a harmfulfragrance and the fragrance they
reference the study theyreference and you look it up and
then our pub med which is i'llsay a general search for
research journal publicationsthere's one article on it and
the one article was from 25years ago.
(12:50):
And it was an animal study, abioassay in animals, where they
exposed them for eight hours aday for weeks at a time.
And this was just likesomething that you may be
exposed to for 10 minutes, theproduct or whatever it was, a
very limited use scenario basedon the conditions.
(13:13):
But they don't contextualizethat.
So then you've got peoplemaking these Big claims of, hey,
this stuff is deadly anddangerous.
I would never use this.
And then it is much more workon the back end to go and refute
that because, A, you'rerefuting something that's
(13:34):
already been claimed againstyou, that you're already at an
uphill battle there.
B, you got to go through allthe process, all the details, do
your risk assessment, somecalculations, and then refute.
Then tell your story after thestory has already been told
about you.
Now, is it difficult to getahead of that?
(13:57):
Could and could not be.
It involves risk communicationand good risk communication.
And I think I mentioned on aprevious podcast, I was supposed
to be actually attending AIHAConnect this year and
unfortunately cannot go to otherschedule obligations, but I was
going to be talking abouteffective risk communication
there.
You know, the importance ofperforming effective risk
(14:21):
communication to your targetaudience.
It involves distilling a verycomplex problem down to a way
that everyone can understand it.
You know, if we want to talkamongst ourselves, that's great.
We could talk in verytechnological terms or very,
I'll say, industry-focusedterms.
But nobody else is going tounderstand that.
(14:43):
I was having a conversationrecently with a client.
You know, I was using...
higher level terminology.
And I just said, Hey, forexample, it could be viewed as
this.
And they're like, that examplemade us understand what you were
talking about.
You are talking about all thisother stuff.
And it sounds like theory tous.
But as soon as you gave us thatexample, it clicked in our
(15:04):
minds.
And that's, what's important.
Use examples, you know, havethose people have the, you know,
if you're having a product,have a dedicated spot on your
webpage to say, listen, youknow, Our product, we set up
these tolerances that maybe havea low level of this.
You would have to be exposed to– I'm just going to throw it out
there.
Maybe it's something in papertowels.
(15:27):
Maybe it's a fragrance in papertowels or trash bags or
whatever it is because trashbags now smell like certain,
I'll say, fragrances.
You would have to give theexample of, hey, you would have
to be locked in a small roomwith– I'm making up numbers, a
thousand of these bags for twoyears to have any potential.
(15:54):
I emphasize potential healtheffects.
Give some context.
Make it simple for people.
That's what I've done a lot inmy career is trying to help
people.
Understand complex problemsusing simple terminology and
examples.
And if you can get ahead ofthat and be like, listen, you
know, if that's on your websitealready and somebody tries to
(16:14):
say, oh, well, it's dangerous,you can just put them on your
website and say, listen, we'vealready evaluated that potential
thought or claim.
Here it is very easily laidout.
And we did it, you know, threeyears ago.
I don't know why this guydidn't or girl didn't go to our
website and just review theinformation.
Because it's easy for someoneto make a claim.
(16:35):
It's harder for someone torefute that claim once that
seed's already been planted.
So again, this is kind oftargeting the idea that product
safety is important.
From a regulatory standpoint,there are regulatory processes
for it.
But for other consumerproducts, there may not be.
(16:55):
Some brands, some manufacturersdo their due diligence, but
others don't.
may not even be aware of it.
And again, it's important foryou to understand what is in
your product, to detail what isin your product before someone
else tells you what's in theirproduct, either from a complaint
or I'll say a recall or evenfrom a lawsuit.
(17:19):
Know what's in there, get aheadof it and address it because
everyone has these concerns andYou know, everyone used to love
a new car smell until they said,whoa, are those VOCs that are
being emitted in theredangerous?
Maybe we shouldn't have thatmany, or they have low VOC
paint.
(17:39):
You know, there's a reason andrationale why we have this stuff
and we're doing this stuff.
Get ahead of the game.
Get ahead of any complaints orthoughts, or you don't want to
be highlighted on these otherpeople's videos that are making
these wild accusations becausethey're you want to make their
accusations baseless.
(18:00):
And if you can, that's great.
Now, if there's something thatis important that you maybe
didn't analyze for or thinkabout, and they say, hey, we
found this, and hopefully theywould do it in a nicer way, they
say, hey, we found this.
I've seen some companies say,nah, we're just going to blow
that off.
We're going to consider it.
Now, maybe internally, theystart freaking out and worry
(18:24):
about it.
But Sometimes people are justdoing things to help.
And you got to say, hey, thankyou.
We appreciate it.
We appreciate you bringing thisto our attention.
We're going to address it rightaway.
We're going to put a newsrelease out there or do
whatever.
Everyone is so scared of badpress or being named in a
(18:47):
lawsuit.
Sometimes things happen.
Sometimes happen with supplychains.
I've seen it where, and seenand heard, where, hey, you know,
we're doing this, we're gettingthese supplies, it's coming
from a foreign country, and we,you know, maybe we analyze, we
have a certificate of analysison one lot.
(19:08):
And they say, hey, this lotlooks great, you did everything
we want to, but they onlyanalyzed the best lot.
They were given the best lot.
And subsequent lots maybearen't the best product.
You're going to have to spotcheck your lots.
You're going to have to keepthis analysis up.
It's just not a one-time thing.
It's a continual improvementprocess or continual evaluation
(19:28):
process.
know what's in your product.
Because I would love to sayeveryone is on the up and up and
pure and true, but sometimesthings happen.
Sometimes maybe people aresaying, this is what we're
always going to give you.
And three years down the road,you're still relying on that COA
that they gave you and is noteven reflective of what they're
(19:50):
giving you right now.
So do some due diligence,continue it, have a process,
have a plan laid out and makethat plan public.
If you go look at some of theselarger electronic
manufacturers, you can go findtheir specifications on their
websites make it public sopeople know what you're doing
get ahead of the game becausewhen they say hey you know we
found this in your product youcan say yeah we have tolerances
(20:11):
for it these are based onthresholds for bio under
bioavailability understandingfrom a toxicological perspective
and exposure assessment we'reahead of this so if you have any
questions comments i'd love youto try the new website out see
if we can get that working seeif we can play your comments
Reach out to me by phone, email.
Happy to have a conversationbecause this is an important
(20:31):
topic.
And it's more and more peopleare going to go in stores, pull
things off shelves, send them toa laboratory.
And if they're not up to snuff,there's going to be a snowball
effect that's going to result inlots of money later on instead
of the little money that youcould spend up front to
(20:52):
understand what's in yourproduct.
Hope you enjoyed today'sepisode of the Exposure
Scientist podcast and hope tosee you again soon.
Thanks so much.
Thank you for listening to theExposure Scientist podcast.
You can connect with us at ourwebsite, ExposureConsulting.com,
where you can book a privateconsultation and send in any
questions regarding any episodesor our guests.
(21:15):
See you in the next episode.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Clifford Show
The Clifford Show with Clifford Taylor IV blends humor, culture, and behind-the-scenes sports talk with real conversations featuring athletes, creators, and personalities—spotlighting the grind, the growth, and the opportunities shaping the next generation of sports and culture.