http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch?query=Styrene&srchst=cse

How does one ingest styrene from building products?  Especially the average end user.

You know something that has been ignored recently is the high levels of the carcinogen acrylamide that is found in baked, fried, and microwaved carbohydrate rich (starchy) foods like potatoes and breads.  This issue was first discovered in 2002 but has largely been ignored since then.

I wonder when the FDA will take some type of action on these types of foods?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programm...183386.stm

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fy578

My out-of-the-gate response to this kind of thing is to ask the following question: can you point to a single person who has been harmed by this substance? The answer always seems to be no.

That's not how it works, Peter. From all kinds of population studies, as well as from experimental science, we know that the burden of carcinogens we face on a daily basis, does have an effect , but you can rarely point to any one person and say "Styrene or...caused that person's cancer". Being aware of the risks and being able to integrate them with the realities of life is important, but to deny that they exist is just plain foolish.

Here we go again.... I remember being told that coffee and celery seeds were carcinogens. Since we can now measure really minuscule amounts of substances, you can bet that someone will find a carcinogen in just about everything. I am really tired of these crackpots.

here in florida i'm surrounded by plenty of Qtips... i'm one myself....
despite all the DANGERS all around us our bodies seem to be outlasting our cpu's, or visa versa...
gimme some EPS please... just make it "blue" bead... ;-)))))

I don't disagree ICFHybrid. But the question is does the risk rise to the level requiring government intervention. We tolerate all sorts of things that identifiably harm and even kill thousands of people every year. My point is that if we can't even identify a single victim, it's probably not worth the time to even discuss a ban, much less implement one.

I think we should ban cars. Think of all the lives we could save if we didn't have those pesky automobiles running around killing people everyday.

Second page of Singapore Straits Times
How to increase your chances if getting cancer four fold-- immigrate to the US

Very subtle immigration policy --- porous borders then kill them slow with you cracker jack houses
I line it

What kind of government intervention? I guess I'm not as afraid of the labeling as some people who make their living selling products that now have warnings on them. But where is the government intervention on obesity and heart disease which both kill many times more people than styrene? Or how about some intervention to prevent the growing cycle of poor parenting and the resulting sociopathy? All of those issues represent huge costs to society, but I don't think we will see any banning soon. The risks are small enough that, for now, notification (labelling) is probably sufficient such that the predictable subgroups (who always seem to be mathematically and statistically challenged) can get all riled up and feel good about it.

I think we should ban cars. Think of all the lives we could save if we didn't have those pesky automobiles running around killing people everyday.

Not to mention the pollution decrease and how much healthier so many people would be by having to walk to the bus and light rail terminals.

Styrene has been used since the early fifties, by now there must be a something to prove this theory or is it more junk science

There is some limited evidence for it's potential as a cancer causing agent in animals and in humans. That is why it has the classification as "likely" and that is why it is under further study.