It is not just flame retardant chemicals that are getting around and climbing up the food chain. There are many extremely hazardous chemicals that are prevalent in our environment due to pollution from numerous sources. Mercury is a good example. Some others that come to mind are lead, DDT – illeagle to use in the US, but I understand that it is still manufactured here –chemical fertilizers and herbicides and nuclear fallout from nuclear weapons testing. I’ll bet it would be pretty surprising what else could be found if the tests were done. Anyone wonder what is killing the bees? This is a developing issue, but there is plenty of information out there that may show that they are not dying of natural occurrences. And of course these chemicals are in our systems. If they are in the environment, they we are eating it. That’s the way the Earth works. When we pollute the environment, we pollute ourselves.

You heard wrong, Tim, DDT is not manufactured in America.

Does anyone remember the dire predictions that DDT would kill off entire species of birds and fish and deform countless others? It didn't happen. Their claims and predictions were wrong. While 20 million people die of malaria, which could be eradicated with DDT, we all feel good about having "saved" sea ducks from a chemical which may or may not have harm them in any way.

When was the last time the human race allowed a genocide in order to protect a non-human species?

Oh yes, feed DDT, or in this case a flame retardant, to a mouse and watch it curl up and die. This does NOT mean that it is toxic. Too much water will kill a mouse, too. Shall we then claim the toxic threat from pure ground water?

How do they get away with these nonsensical conclusions? It is all in the presentation, like Al Gore's slide show complete with cartoons showing drowning polar bears and graphic depictions of cities under water. Good grief! It is no coincidence that Al Gores prescription to save the planet will also result in the deaths of millions of people.

Something ain't right here. Nobody is in favor of dumping pollutants into our rivers, which is what I'll be accused of advocating, but let's keep human beings in the loop when it comes to species survival, shall we? Maybe it's easier in this age, where millions of aborted babies are needed to make a long-life elixer for the aged, to justify massive killing off of humans. But it does not make it right.

Geez Dick up late fretting about EVERYTHING.

Just curious where did you get your degree and what is it in?

Going after Gore while giving Junior a pass is an interesting call.

Dick's, eyes are getting brown, he is so full of it. It really is fascinating, he can write sentences and spells ok, yet all his conclusions are completely insane. I think he is joking.

You will all notice that the last three comments could only make personally insulting remarks about me, but could not utter a word in disagreement, nor offer a shred of differing opinion.

They are also not too upset about 20 million black people dying every year from a disease that was eradicated here in America. It kinda illustrates their racism and cruelty, but hey, they're entitled to their opinion....of me, that is.

Oh, and are you guys sleeping-in today, or are you at work stealing time from your bosses?

Gosh, writing non-stinging rebuttals in mid-morning! How gauche!

And when the next baby is burned alive because her clothes weren't protected, what do you think will happen to the ban

I don't know what color the eyes are, but the statements are so full of holes it is hard to know where to begin. DDT's toxicity is well documented. It attacks the central nervous system, liver and kidneys in mammals (last I checked, we belong to that order) and kills plenty of other organisms like worms, which any farmer will tell you they would just as soon keep around. As for eradicating malaria, your shallow attempt to politicize that issue matches the only reason malaria is not under control. Plenty of other compounds will reduce mosquito populations without killing off other species as well.

But the column is not about DDT, and (much to your chagrin, Dick) it's not about Al Gore either. It's about flame retardant used in babies' clothes, as a substitute for....god old COMMON SENSE.

Here's a radical idea: how about having people, say, be more careful with stoves, heaters, electricity and other sources of fire. A little personal responsibility is in order here.

Paco, no kidding, the article is not about DDT. It's about a man-made substance being found in raptor eggs. Gee, just like DDT. It's about halting the production of the man-made substance being found in raptor eggs. Gee, just like DDT. Some people disagree with the conclusions that some scientists and non-scientists make about the levels of toxicity and the true damage done by the fire retardant substance found in raptor eggs and wonder about the trade off in human lives for animals. Gee, just like DDT. Analogies and metaphors are acceptable methods of argument. I find it rather funny that many who engage in personal slights usually disregard and discount it altogether. In other words, Paco, this has everything to do with DDT since we'd like to go down the same wrongly established path in banning other substances.

I agree with you paco..Good old common sense. Get rid of all of this crap that we are putting into the food and the air..my god now wonder people are dying left and right from every cancer you can think of...Maybe..Just Maybe if we stopped putting so many chemicals into our body's we might just live a little longer..more common sense!!