Forum home Tools and techniques

Does anyone have info on PFAS in products like fence preservers?

FireFire LondonPosts: 10,944
edited 14 September in Tools and techniques
There is a movement to phase out PFAS (that lasts in the human body). I have just been preserving my wood in the garden with Ronseal and presume it is full of the stuff. I can't find detail on it.

PFAS waterproofing is used in make up, food packaging, water-proofing for clothing and shoe sprays, glues, laquers, Teflon, house building materials and all sorts, usually not labelled. It becomes part of the rain water cycle, so clouds and rain can be full of it.


Any thoughts on avoiding products, esp in preservers and paints? Thanks
(Links are given above)
«1

Posts

  • steephillsteephill Posts: 2,079
    No need to presume, Ronseal safety data sheets will tell you what is in it.
  • FireFire LondonPosts: 10,944
    edited 14 September
    .
  • mac12mac12 Posts: 53
    Personally I wouldn't be to worried about using something like this I'm still using genuine creosote without any problems after 60 years 
  • amancalledgeorgeamancalledgeorge South LondonPosts: 2,256
    Still we hopefully have learned the long-term effects of such substances and have workable alternatives 🙄 your personal experience doesn't exactly excuse all the harm those products caused. 
    To Plant a Garden is to Believe in Tomorrow
  • FireFire LondonPosts: 10,944
    Thanks @Steephill. I found the datasheet for the specific product and it was an interesting read - basically a fungicide, insecticide and white spirit. I thought there might be a water repellant in there, but seemingly not. Good to know.

    I didn't know if @mac12 was being sanguine about PFS or Ronseal products.

    Someone who has smoked for 60 years and is not dead yet is no reflection on aggregate tobacco mortality stats.


  • Each product tested in the study contained anywhere from four to 13 individual PFAS compounds. Brands tested include L'Oréal, Mac, Cover Girl, Clinique,  Smash box, Estée Lauder, and many other commonly found makeup brands .
  • mac12mac12 Posts: 53
    Still we hopefully have learned the long-term effects of such substances and have workable alternatives 🙄 your personal experience doesn't exactly excuse all the harm those products caused. 
    Perhaps you would be kind enough to include links to show me the harm PFAS has caused to humans as it seems most females have been covering their skin for years 
  • FairygirlFairygirl west central ScotlandPosts: 39,649
    Blimey! They're all out today!   :D
    What exactly have 'we' been covering ourselves with  @mac12 ?
    It's a place where beautiful isn't enough of a word....


  • FireFire LondonPosts: 10,944
    edited 17 September
    mac12 said:
    you would be kind enough to include links to show me the harm PFAS has caused to humans as it seems most females have been covering their skin for years 

    "Most females"? 2.5 billion women? Really?
    You want links? I really can't be bothered and I suspect you are not faintly interested in sources. Google is your friend. Go and find out more.
  • mac12mac12 Posts: 53
    All that make up in the post above mine 
Sign In or Register to comment.