A recent study that recommended toxic chemicals in black plastic products be immediately thrown away included a math error that significantly overstated the risks of contamination, but its authors are standing by their conclusions and warn against using such products. Published in the peer-reviewed journal Chemosphere , experts from the nonprofit Toxic-Free Future said they detected flame retardants and other toxic chemicals in 85% of 203 items made of black plastic including kitchen utensils , take-out containers, children's toys and hair accessories. In a blog post, Joe Schwarcz, director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society in Canada, explained that the Toxin-Free Future scientists miscalculated the lower end of what the EPA considered a health risk through a multiplication error. Instead of humans being potentially exposed to a dose of toxic chemicals in black plastic utensils near the minimum level that the EPA deems a health risk, it's actually about one-tenth of that. (Dreamstime/TNS) Dreamstime/Dreamstime/TNS The study initially said the potential exposure to chemicals found in one of the kitchen utensils approached the minimum levels the Environmental Protection Agency deemed a health risk. People are also reading... But in an update to the study, the authors say they made an error in their calculations and the real levels were "an order of magnitude lower" than the EPA's thresholds. The error was discovered by Joe Schwarcz, director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society in Canada. In a blog post, Schwarcz explained that the Toxin-Free Future scientists miscalculated the lower end of what the EPA considered a health risk through a multiplication error. Instead of humans being potentially exposed to a dose of toxic chemicals in black plastic utensils near the minimum level that the EPA deems a health risk, it's actually about one-tenth of that. Though Schwarcz said the risks outlined in the study aren't enough for him to discard his black plastic kitchen items if he had them, he agreed with the authors that flame retardants shouldn't be in these products in the first place. "The math error does not impact the study's findings, conclusions or recommendations," said Megan Liu, a co-author of the study who is the science and policy manager for Toxic-Free Future . She added that any traces of flame retardants or toxic chemicals in cooking utensils should be concerning for the public. Flame retardants are getting into commonly used items because black-colored products are being made from recycled electronic waste, such as discarded television sets and computers, that frequently contain the additives. When they're heated, the flame retardants and other toxic chemicals can migrate out. If you're wondering whether your old black plastic spoon or other utensils are a part of this group, Liu shared some more guidance. Generally, how do I know a product is harmful? It's nearly impossible to know whether a black plastic product is contaminated. That's because these products that include recycled e-waste don't disclose a detailed list of all ingredients and contaminants in the product. Liu said it's also unclear how many types of flame retardants are in these black plastic products. Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | RSS Feed | SoundStack | All Of Our Podcasts Some of the products that researchers tested in this recent study "had up to nine different harmful chemicals and harmful flame retardants in them," she said. How can I find out if black plastic food trays are made with recycled contaminated plastic? Anytime you're looking for the type of recycled plastic a product is made of you're going to look for a number within the chasing arrows (that form a triangle) logo. Recycling symbols are numbered 1 to 7 and we commonly associate the numbers with what we can toss in our blue recycling bins. The 1 through 7 numbers stand for, respectively, polyethylene terephthalate, high-density polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), low-density polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene or Styrofoam, and miscellaneous plastics (including polycarbonate, polylactide, acrylic, acrylonitrile butadiene, styrene, fiberglass and nylon). The study found higher levels of toxic flame retardants in polystyrene plastic, which is labeled with the number 6, said Liu. Microplastics are everywhere, but are they harming us? When did recycled e-waste begin contaminating black plastic products? There isn't a definitive timeline of when recycled electronic-waste started to be incorporated into black plastic products specifically, but e-waste started to get recycled in the early 2000s, Liu said. The way computers, cellphones, stereos, printers and copiers were being disposed of previously was to simply add them to a landfill without reusing salvageable parts. But as the National Conference of State Legislatures notes, electronics production required a significant amount of resources that could be recovered through recycling. Recovering resources such as metals, plastics and glass through recycling used a fraction of the energy needed to mine new materials. However, the study pointed out that flame retardants and other chemical contaminates have been detected in and near e-waste recycling facilities, in indoor air and dust at formal e-waste recycling facilities in Canada, China, Spain and the U.S. It also noted contamination in soil samples surrounding e-waste recycling sites in China and Vietnam. What are safer alternatives? The safest nontoxic material options for kitchen utensil are wood and stainless steel. Single-use plastics revolutionized the medical industry. Now, they're raising concerns about sustainability. Single-use plastics revolutionized the medical industry. Now, they're raising concerns about sustainability. The 20th century brought airplanes, radio, television, the internet, and plastic. Lots of plastic. That plastic is now showing up on shorelines, forming islands in oceans, and generating mountains of translucent trash on land. Around 700 species of animals in the sea have been found to interact with plastic daily. Companies across every industry face pressure to reduce the amount of plastic they produce. Seventy-two percent of the world's largest have made voluntary commitments to reduce their plastic waste, according to a Duke University analysis. One industry, in particular, has greatly benefited from advancements in single-use plastic technology: the medical industry. Only in recent years have businesses and academics in the field begun to talk about minimizing their impact on our environment like beverage manufacturers and other consumer goods-producing businesses. Medical Technology Schools analyzed academic studies published in the National Library of Medicine , the American Medical Association , and news reports to shed light on the medical community's use of plastics through history, their environmental problems, and proposed solutions to reduce their impact. And the impact can be significant. A single hospital patient generates nearly 34 pounds of waste a day —as much as a quarter of it is plastic. The COVID-19 pandemic only worsened the problem. EleniyaChe // Shutterstock Plastic medical waste booms during COVID-19 The pandemic pushed hospital capacity to the brink and led to a massive increase in personal protective equipment and medical supply usage. Medical-grade masks and other protective equipment like face shields, made mostly of nonrenewable plastics, were in high demand. In 2020, the World Health Organization estimated that the international need for PPE manufacturing would boost 40% to address the public health crisis. Hospitals needed an estimated 89 million masks, 76 million gloves, and 1.6 million goggles every month of the pandemic. To date, nearly 677 million COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered, each requiring their own plastic syringe, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Global consulting firm Frost & Sullivan estimated that the U.S. would produce a year's worth of medical waste in just two months due to the pandemic. The World Economic Forum warned that the COVID-19 crisis threatened to " stall and even reverse progress " to reduce large plastic waste. It's a challenge researchers acknowledge today as they search for solutions. LookerStudio // Shutterstock Convenience gives way to cleanliness Plastics introduced an era of ultraconvenience to the world. It makes our clothes. It's made bike helmets and airbags possible. And it's a cheap material to produce, meaning it's cheap for consumers too. Almost as importantly, it's durable and incredibly easy to make into complex shapes—a trait that helped plastics invented in the mid-20th century quickly replace more expensive metal and wooden goods. That adoption extended to the medical field, where the single-use nature of plastics represented a move toward more hygienic tools for physicians and hospitals. But it wasn't plastic's sanitary qualities that the industry first latched onto. Like so many other technical advancements, convenience and cost were the initial driving factors. That they were more conducive to creating a sterile environment for patients was a benefit that health care began to tout closer to the end of the 20th century. PVC, or polyvinyl chloride, replaced glass bottles previously used to hold IV solution and replaced rubber tubing used throughout hospital settings. Plastic has also become the go-to material for making syringes and catheters. Plastic products are generally made from chemicals derived from the oil and natural gas refining process. Chemists use those byproducts to create synthetic materials with malleable and durable chemical structures. The low cost of these materials has helped medical device-makers support better health outcomes for communities across the U.S. since the 1900s. No longer was health care priced at rates only the elite could afford—it was accessible to a much larger swath of the public. In the last decade, the U.S., in particular, has emerged as a massive market for medical plastics. The country generally accounts for nearly half of the global market for medical devices. Plastic's durability is not only a benefit but a detriment to the environment, as the material can take many years to deteriorate when it enters landfills or trashes oceans. Estimates vary widely, but scientists ballpark that depending on the kind of plastic and the environment in which it decomposes, it could take dozens to thousands of years to break down entirely. InkheartX // Shutterstock Waste could pile higher, faster in the coming years COVID-19, which remains a burden for health care systems, isn't the only force raising the stakes for a health care industry pressured to reduce reliance on plastics or find ways to reuse them. Global annual production of plastic has doubled in the last two decades , according to the Environmental Protection Agency. As the U.S. looks toward the future, its aging population is another factor that could exacerbate the rate at which medical plastics end up in landfills. People require more medical care as they age, and aging baby boomers are expected to place increased demand on the medical device industry. At the same time, governments are under pressure to lower health care costs, which have become unaffordable even for those insured . sirtravelalot // Shutterstock Organizations work to implement environmentally conscious plastic waste management As recently as 2021, researchers lamented a lack of data on efforts to recycle medical plastics. Around 350 hospitals participate in Practice Greenhealth's Environmental Excellence Awards . Practice Greenhealth is an organization working to help hospitals increase their sustainability. It's one of the few sources of hospital sustainability data, and its roster of participating hospitals represents a small fraction of the more than 6,000 hospitals operating in the U.S. To meet the need to reduce plastic waste generation, some hospitals are moving away from using plastic in certain applications. Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center replaced health care workers' disposable plastic isolation gowns with reusable cloth gowns at its hospitals in the last decade, saving money and preventing literal tons of medical waste. It also implemented a process for sterilizing and incinerating the boxes that hold used needles, allowing them to be reassembled and reused in a health care setting. Recycling plastic medical waste is complicated by the potential for contamination and the need to separate contaminated and noncontaminated waste; once separated, they can be broken down with heat or treated with chemicals and reprocessed. However, using chemical methods to break down and dispose of plastics has drawbacks. Over 200 nongovernmental organizations signed a letter in 2023 urging the Biden administration to end federal support for methods like these, arguing they generate toxic pollutants. The Vinyl Council of Australia is working with hospitals to recover used materials made of PVC . The materials are broken down into tiny pieces, washed and heated at high temperatures, and remade into things used outside medical settings. In the U.S. and Europe, there's the Healthcare Plastics Recycling Council, a coalition of companies working in the health care device space that includes DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic. In 2021, the HPRC, advised by professionals at Kaiser Permanente and other health systems, rolled out a medical waste recycling pilot project with hopes of scaling it across more hospitals. Story editing by Ashleigh Graf. Copy editing by Paris Close. Photo selection by Clarese Moller. This story originally appeared on Medical Technology Schools and was produced and distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio. Watchara Chuenchomnoi // Shutterstock Build your health & fitness knowledgeRumble Announces Bitcoin Treasury StrategyJake Auchincloss sells State Street Corporation stock

NoneTHE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Alyssa Naher made two critical saves in her final match for the United States, Lynn Williams scored the go-ahead goal in the 71st minute and the Americans beat the Netherlands 2-1 on Tuesday. The U.S., which won its fifth Olympic gold medal in France this summer , wrapped up the year on a 20-game unbeaten streak. The Americans were coming off a scoreless draw with England on Saturday at Wembley Stadium.

Top 25 College Hoops Picks Against the Spread – Tuesday, November 26Article content For anyone mistakenly believing the latest United Nations global gabfest on climate change in Baku, Azerbaijan, was all about saving the planet, it was in fact, all about money. Recommended Videos This annual 11-day meeting – although it always goes into overtime – formally known as COP 29 or the 29th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, has always been about money, specifically about redistributing money from developed countries like Canada to developing nations. It’s also about hypocrisy, given the number of jet-setting politicians, bureaucrats, celebrities and billionaires who attend these annual orgies to excessive consumption, along with tens of thousands of delegates, creating an obscenely high carbon footprint. The issue of money has to do with how much more money taxpayers in developed nations like Canada are going to pay to developing countries in climate reparations for allegedly ruining the planet by using our fossil fuel resources during the industrial revolution to power ourselves out of the third world into the first. The total price tag to avert climate armageddon, we’re being told by “experts,” is $1.3 trillion annually by 2035 from all government and private sources. The goal of COP 29 was to come up with a new figure – formally called a New Collective Quantified Goal – for the portion to be contributed by 22 designated “wealthy” countries, including Canada, starting after 2025. Developed nations are currently paying $100 billion annually toward this goal, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubling Canada’s contribution to $5.3 billion over five years from 2021 to 2026, compared to the $2.65 billion he committed taxpayers to from 2015 to 2021. The debate in Azerbaijan – a wealthy, corrupt, petro-state bordering Eastern Europe and West Asia, where most of the money ends up in the hands of the ruling family of its authoritarian president – is over how much money Canada and the 21 other “rich” countries should be contributing to the fund post-2026. For that reason, the news coming out of COP 29 has resembled the bargaining that goes on in a Mideast bazaar. RECOMMENDED VIDEO An initial offer of $250 billion a year at was angrily rejected by developing nations, which would receive the funding, as an insult, prompting an offer of $300 billion annually in a bid to reach a deal. Dispute over the final number – developing nations say it should be higher and they’ve been frozen out of the negotiating process by wealthy countries – has resulted in political temper tantrums, staged walk-outs and name-calling over how much more money taxpayers in countries like Canada should be conscripted into paying toward the climate fund. The idea that taxpayers in Canada and other countries are currently facing an affordability crisis with many families struggling to pay the rent and put food on the table for their children holds no sway in the corridors of COP 29. Nor does the fact that the tax-and-spend Trudeau government has already mortgaged the financial future of the children of today’s taxpayers. What COP 29 has underscored is that the debate over how to fight climate change has never been about environmental policy – it’s been about financial policy. The Trudeau government, for example, has already committed $200 billion to the cause through 149 different government programs. This includes the federal carbon tax, clean fuel regulations, clean electricity regulations, methane regulations, a cap on emissions in the oil and gas sector, electric vehicle standards, plus massive subsidies to EV battery makers to establish a supply chain in Canada. RECOMMENDED VIDEO At press time, negotiations at COP 29 were going on and on past its official deadline – which happens at every COP conference – with the standard warning that unless a deal is reached climate catastrophe awaits us all. Negotiators announced Saturday they had agreed to new rules for international carbon credit trading after almost a decade of deliberations, but critics warned the rules are so weak they may invite fraud. And whatever happens, the entire exercise at COP 29 is a house of cards. That’s because U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has said he will pull the United States – the world’s second-largest emitter of industrial greenhouse gases after China and a major contributor to the green climate fund – out of the UN’s Paris climate agreement, which underpins the entire COP process, after he becomes president on Jan. 20, as he did the last time he was president from 2016 to 2020. lgoldstein@postmedia.comMOREHEAD, Ky. (AP) — Isaiah Smith ran for a career-high 205 yards on 31 carries and scored a touchdown and San Diego beat Morehead State 37-14 in a season-ending contest for both teams on Saturday. Grant Sergent threw for 184 yards and two touchdowns for San Diego (8-3, 6-2 Pioneer Football League) which ended the season with a four-game win streak and winners of six of seven. The Toreros finished in sole possession of second place in the PFL behind Drake (7-1), which clinched the league outright with a 49-10 win over Stetson on Saturday. Drake beat San Diego 30-28 on a walk-off field goal on Sept. 28 in Des Moines, Iowa. Bryce Patterson threw for 133 yards and a touchdown and James Louis ran for a touchdown for the Eagles (7-5, 5-3). ___ Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP collegebasketball: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-basketball-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-basketball