Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Toyland
The 27th Annual Survey of Toy Safety
November 2012
Trouble in Toyland
The 27th Annual Survey of Toy Safety
November 2012
Acknowledgements
Written by Nasima Hossain, Public Health Advocate with U.S. PIRG Education Fund.
Trouble In Toyland by CALPIRG Education Fund is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribu-
tion-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Permissions beyond the scope of this li-
cense may be available at www.calpirgedfund.org
The authors would like to thank our U.S. PIRG and State PIRG colleagues, Ed Mierzwinski, Celeste Meiffren,
and James Dubick for their help in research and production of the report. Special thanks to the Colston Warne
program of Consumer Reports for supporting our work on consumer protection issues. Additional thanks to the
Bauman Family Foundation and individual contributors for their generous support of our work on public health
and toxics issues.
With public debate around important issues often dominated by special interests pursuing their own narrow agen-
das, CALPIRG Education Fund offers an independent voice that works on behalf of the public interest. CALPIRG
Education Fund, a 501(c)(3) organization, works to protect consumers and promote good government. We in-
vestigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public, and offer meaningful opportunities for civic participation.
Executive Summary..................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction.................................................................................................................................. 4
Toxins in Toys and Children’s Products.................................................................................... 5
Lead in Children’s Products......................................................................................................................................... 5
Findings: Lead................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Recommendations: Lead.............................................................................................................................................. 6
Findings: Phthalates...................................................................................................................................................... 7
Recommendations: Cadmium..................................................................................................................................... 8
Choking Hazards........................................................................................................................ 11
Recommendations: Choking Hazards...................................................................................................................... 15
Strangulation Hazards............................................................................................................... 18
Drawstring Clothing................................................................................................................................................... 18
Methodology............................................................................................................................... 19
Attachment A. 2010 Summary of Toy Hazards ..................................................................... 20
End Notes.................................................................................................................................... 28
Executive Summary
for Policy Makers ■■ The CPSC should vigorously enforce lead and
■■ Policymakers must ensure that the Consumer phthalate limits in toys. The CPSC should also
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is given the move to using the lead standard of 40 ppm recom-
resources it needs to effectively protect consumers. mended by the American Academy of Pediatrics.
■■ Policymakers must also continue vigorous oversight ■■ The CPSC must ensure that new third-party test-
of implementation and enforcement of the new law. ing programs meet CPSIA standards. As the CPSC
continues to implement its new publicly accessible
toy and other product incident database at www.
■■ Policymakers should require manufacturers to pro-
saferproducts.gov, it must ensure that it provides
vide all hazard and health-impact information to the
the information consumers need to make in-
state and federal government so agencies can begin
formed choices in the marketplace.
to assess the thousands of chemicals currently on the
market for which little or inadequate data are available.
Phthalate Exposure Linked The interim ban on DINP, DIDP and DNOP contin-
to Health Effects ues while a scientific review is completed by a Chronic
EPA studies show the cumulative impact of different Hazard Advisory Panel. We are currently awaiting the
phthalates leads to an exponential increase in associ- Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel’s decision, which is ex-
ated harm. According to data from the CDC, levels pected to be made shortly.
of phthalates found in humans are higher than levels
shown to cause adverse health effects. The data also The same six phthalates have been banned in European
show phthalate levels are highest in children. Research toys for nearly 10 years, and other countries, including
has documented the potential health effects of expo- Argentina, Japan, Israel and Mexico have also banned
sure to phthalates in the womb or at crucial stages of phthalates from children’s toys. In addition, states have
development, including (but not limited to): enacted stronger regulations. Washington, Vermont
and California have more broadly restricted phthalate
■■ Reproductive Defects. Scientists have demon- use in toys and childcare products.27 As of January 1,
strated links between exposure to phthalates in the 2012 all manufacturers, importers, and private labelers
womb and abnormal genital development in baby of children’s toys and certain child care articles are re-
boys and disruption in sexual development.23 quired by law to be subjected to third party testing for
phthalates under CPSIA.
■■ Premature Delivery. A study published in No-
vember 2003 suggests a link between exposure to
phthalates and pre-term birth.24 Finding: Phthalates
This year we did not find any toys that exceeded the fed-
■■ Early Onset Puberty. One study found levels eral phthalates limits. We did find one children’s prod-
of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)—one of uct with 320 ppm of Di-n-butyl phthalate (DBP) and
three phthalates permanently banned by the 2008 a keychain with measurable levels of Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
CPSIA—were seven times higher in girls that had phthalate (DEHP). These levels do not exceed the fed-
signs of early onset puberty.25 eral limits. However, these toys do meet disclosure re-
quirements under Washington State law which necessi-
■■ Lower Sperm Counts. A 2003 study showed men tates disclosure of any measurable phthalate levels.
who had monobutyl or monobenzyl phthalate in
their urine tended to have lower sperm counts,
with the highest concentrations leading to the low- Recommendations: Phthalates
est sperm counts.26
The CPSC should vigorously enforce the CPSIA’s ban
on the use of phthalates in all toys and children’s prod-
Federal Standards for Phthalates ucts that are “physically exposed” to a child and con-
Effective February 10, 2009, Section 108 of CPSIA
tinue to monitor use of phthalates in components of
banned three phthalates (called DEHP, DBP and BBP)
children’s toys and products. The interim ban on DINP,
at levels greater than 1,000 ppm. The law also estab-
DNOP, and DIDP should also be made permanent.
lished an interim ban on three other phthalates, DINP,
DIDP and DNOP, in toys and children’s articles. In
There is no doubt that these magnets are dangerous. The ASTM F-963 toy standard bans hazardous magnet toys
Since 2009, at least a dozen magnet ingestion cases for children under 14 if they fit in the small parts cylinder.
have involved Buckyballs and some required surgery, There is an exception for magnets included in certain “hobby,
including a 4-year-old boy who ingested three Bucky- craft, and science kit-type items” intended for children 8 and
balls that he thought were chocolate candy. Maria up, provided the products comply with special magnet haz-
Oliva-Hemker, M.D., Chief of the Division of Pediat- ard disclosures. The snake eggs are marketed for “4 and up.”
ric Gastroenterology and Nutrition at Johns Hopkins
University School of Medicine, said some children
have lost substantial parts of their small bowel by swal- Recommendation for
lowing Buckyballs-type magnets. “We know of cases
where you can have an entire string of these magnets
Magnets in Toys
hooking together in the intestines,” she said. It is important for the CPSC to continue rulemak-
ing on magnets so that safer versions of these toys are
available for consumers.
Size and Weight: Small and lightweight, easy to Noisemaking: Not loud or frightening.
handle.
Action and Movement: May be silly, should be
Theme: Represents a common object found around easy for child to cause movement.
the home, farm, or neighborhood.
Type and level of skill: Lets child begin to learn
Degree of Realism: Silly or cute, some realistic skills or practice skills such as walking, stacking,
details. and sorting; should be slightly beyond child’s capa-
bilities to maintain interest.
Colors: Bright, contrasting colors covering large
areas of the toy. Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission
We also found a small bowling set with an obscured Round objects are more likely to choke children be-
choke hazard warning label, a ball and launcher with cause they can completely block a child’s airway. Any
a tiny warning label, and a golfing game with no small ball intended for children over the age of three
warning label. must include the following warning:50
Small Balls
The 1994 CSPA established a new test for small balls
from the previous 1.25 inches in diameter small parts
test. Since 1994’s law, balls with a diameter smaller than Any toy or game containing a small ball and intended
1.75 inches are banned for children under three years for children between ages three and eight must include
old.48 The law defines a ball as “any spherical, ovoid, or the following warning:
ellipsoidal object designed or intended to be thrown,
hit, kicked, rolled, dropped, or bounced.” In addition,
the term “ball” includes any multisided object formed
by connecting planes into a generally spherical ovoid,
or ellipsoidal shape that is designated or intended to be
used as a ball.49 According to this definition, other toys This year we found rounded toy foods that pass the small
that are spherical or have spherical parts but are not parts test but would fail the small ball test if classified as
intended for use as a ball do not have to meet this test. balls. These toys also pose a special hazard because they
We have repeatedly urged the CPSC to interpret the look to children like something that should be eaten.
Recommendations
We call on the CPSC to: ■■ Change the small-ball rule to include small round
or semi-round objects, not just “balls” in the strict-
■■ Enlarge the small parts test tube to be more protec- est definition. A rounded toy apple poses similar
tive of children under three. hazards to a round ball.
■■ Consider extending the standard for toys with ■■ Discourage manufacturers from over-labeling
spherical ends to apply to toys intended for chil- their products with choke hazard warnings, as
dren under six years old instead of under 48 this could reduce the effectiveness of labels on
months. Also, consider special labeling for toys products that pose a serious choking hazard.
shaped like the toy nails that caused two children
to suffocate. ■■ Discourage marketing of balloons to children un-
der eight years of age.
induced hearing loss, which often happens gradually Continuous dB Permissible Exposure Time
and without pain from over-exposure to loud noises.58
85 dB 8 hours
Almost 15 percent of children ages 6 to 17 show signs
of hearing loss.59 Noise-induced hearing loss can be 88 dB 4 hours
caused by a one-time exposure to loud sound as well 91 dB 2 hours
as by repeated exposure to sounds at various loudness 94 dB 1 hour
levels over an extended period of time.60 97 dB 30 minutes
100 dB 15 minutes
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration re-
103 dB 7.5 minutes
ports prolonged exposure to sounds at 85 decibels (dB)
or higher can result in hearing damage. The American 106 dB < 4 minutes
Academy of Pediatrics and the National Campaign for 109 dB < 2 minutes
Hearing Health use 85 decibels as a threshold for dan- 112 dB 1 minute
gerous levels of noise.61 115 dB 30 seconds
■■ Toys intended for children under 3 are banned if ■■ Marbles or toy with marbles must include an ex-
they contain small parts or easily break into pieces plicit choke hazard warning.
that are small parts.
■■ All balloons must include a warning about
■■ Toys intended for children between the ages of the dangers of uninflated or broken bal-
three and six years old that contain small parts loons to children younger than 8 years of age.
must include an explicit choke hazard warning
with precise statutory language.
Dragster cars
Label on toy: Statutory Small Parts Warning
Label is too small to read, contains small parts
Type of hazard:
(rubber traction band on wheels)
Why toy is a problem: Small parts/label violation
Manufactured by http://www.zwindups.com/
Toy store: Toys-R-Us Location: DC area
Item#: 20452 Price paid: $4.99
Bowling game
Label on toy: Statutory Small Parts Warning
Label is completely obscured by additional
Type of hazard:
label listing manufacturer.
Why toy is a problem: Small parts/label violation
Manufactured by www.coolnoveltyproducts.com
Toy store: Dollar Plus Store Location: Virginia
Item#: 1614827058 Price paid: N/A
Play Food
Label on toy: Statutory Small Parts Warning
CATEGORY: CHOKING
Golfing game
Label on toy: Statutory Small Parts Warning
Toy contains small balls, subject to more
Type of hazard:
stringent test and a different warning
Why toy is a problem: Small balls/label violation
Dora backpack
Label on toy: None
Morphobot
Label on toy: None
Violates current 100 ppm lead standard, although toys manufactured before
August 2011 can still be sold if less than 300ppm
Snake Eggs
Label on toy: Age > 4
Ingestion Hazard, especially due to ellipsoid
Type of hazard:
shape.
Near Small Part, shaped for easy
Why toy is a problem:
swallowing
None. If magnets actually were small parts (fit in choke tube, just a little
smaller) (see photo) would be banned for children <14 (unless part of
hobby toy, then banned <8 years old). But labeled 4+.
CATEGORY: NOISE
Guitar
Label on toy: None Required By Law
Tests at >85dB+ but should be less than 80db
Type of hazard:
according to hearing experts
Prolonged exposure to loud noises
Why toy is a problem:
harms small children’s hearing
May violate F-963 loudness standard enforceable by CPSC
Manufactured by Fisher-Price
Toy store: Target Location: Alexandria, VA
Item#: R4591 Price paid: $22.39
CATEGORY: NOISE
Car Wheel/Horn
Label on toy: None Required By Law
Tests at 85 dB+ but should be less than 80db
Type of hazard:
according to hearing experts
Prolonged exposure to loud noises
Why toy is a problem:
harms small children’s hearing
May violate F-963 loudness standard enforceable by CPSC
Manufactured by Toystate.com
Toy store: Toys-R-Us Location: Alexandria, VA
Item#: 80225 Price paid: $18.49
1 Kids in Danger, September 2011. “Straight from the zine website. See http://news.consumerreports.org/ 21 BC Blount et al, “Urinary Levels of Seven Phthal-
Source: An Analysis of Reports on Children’s Prod- safety/2012/10/federal-judge-lets-company-stay- ate Metabolites in a Human Reference Population,”
ucts on saferproducts.gov, http://www.kidsindan- anonymous-in-suit-over-cpsc-complaint-data.html Environmental Health Perspectives 108:979-982,
ger.org/docs/reports/Straight_From_The_Source_ 2000. http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchAr-
Report.pdf. Accessed November 9 2011. ticle.action;jsessionid=740583436903BACD59A
10 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Feb-
DEBA8C0157901?articleURI=info%3Adoi%2F1
ruary 2011. National Report on Human Exposure
0.1289%2Fehp.00108979. Accessed November 9
2 NDP Group, “Toy Markets in the World”, April 7 to Environmental Chemicals, http://www.cdc.gov/
2011.
2010. http://www.toyassociation.org/AM/PDFs/ exposurereport/. Accessed on October 19 2011
Trends/ToyMarkets10.pdf. Accessed November 9
2011. 22 Manori J Silva et al, “Urinary Levels of Seven
11 Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Lead
Phthalate Metabolites in the U.S. Population from
Prevention Tips, http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/
the National Health and Nutrition Examination
3 The CPSC staff has noted that “some of ” the large tips.htm Accessed Nov 1, 2011.
Survey 1999-2000” Environmental Health Per-
ellipsoid magnets fit inside the choke cylinder.
spectives, March 2004.
Our samples narrowly did not. See “Staff Respons-
12 American Academy of Child and Adolescent
es to Questions about the Notice of Proposed
Psychiatry, November 2004. Lead Exposure in
Rulemaking for Hazardous Magnet Sets,” Memo 23 Shanna H. Swan et al, “Decrease in anogenital dis-
Children affects Brain and Behavior. http://www.
to the Commission, dated 20 August 2012, avail- tance among male infants with prenatal phthalate
aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/lead_expo-
able at http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia12/ exposure,” Environmental Health Perspectives 113:
sure_in_children_affects_brain_and_behavior.
brief/nordmagnet.pdf . 1056-1061, August 2005; LE Gray et al, “Prenatal
Accessed October 19 2011.
Exposure to the Phthalates DEHP, BBP, and DINP,
but not DEP, DMP, or DOTP, Alters Sexual Dif-
4 Dangerous Decibels, A Project of Oregon Hearing
13 CBS NEWS, Healthy Food Program’s Lunch Bags ferentiation of the Male Rat,” Toxicological Science
Research Center at Oregon Health and Science
Recalled, February 2011. http://www.cbsnews. 58: 350-365, December 2000; Vickie Wilson et al,
University. http://www.dangerousdecibels.org/ed-
com/stories/2007/11/03/health/main3448939. “Phthalate Ester-Induced Gubernacular Lesions
ucation/information-center/noise-induced-hear-
shtml. Accessed October 24 2011. are Associated with Reduced Insl3 Gene Expres-
ing-loss/; National Institute on Deafness and other
sion in the Fetal Rat Testis,” Toxicology Letters
Communication Disorders, National Institutes of
146: 207-215, 2 February 2004; JS Fisher et al,
Health, Noise Induced Hearing loss, http://www. 14 Consumer Protection Safety Commission, “Recalls
“Human ‘Testicular Dysgenesis Syndrome’: A Pos-
nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/noise.aspx. and Product Safety News.” http://www.cpsc.gov/
sible Model Using in-utero Exposure of the Rat to
Accessed November 9 2011. cpscpub/prerel/prerelnov11.html?tab=recalls. Ac-
Dibutyl Phthalate,” Human Reproduction 18: 1383-
cessed October 19 2011.
1394, 2003.
5 Josef Shargorodsky MD, MPH, Sharon G. Curhan
MD, ScM, Gary C. Curhan MD, ScD, Roland 15 CPSC Recalls database, accessed at: http://
24 G Latini et al. 2003. In-Utero Exposure to Di-(2-
Eavey, MD, SM. Change in Prevalence of Hearing www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prerelnov12.
ethylhexyl)- phthalate and Human Pregnancy
Loss in US Adolescents. JAMA. 2010; 304,(7): 772- html?tab=recalls
Duration, Environmental Health Perspectives
778)
111:1783-1785.
16 16 CFR 1303
6 National Institute on Deafness and other Commu-
25 I. Colon, D Caro, CJ Bourdony and O Rosario.
nications Disorders, Interactive Sound Ruler How
17 15 U.S.C. 1261(f)(1) 2000. Identification of Phthalate Esters in the
Loud is too Loud? http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/
serum of Young Puerto Rican Girls with Prema-
health/hearing/pages/sound-ruler.aspx. Accessed
ture Breast Development” Environmental Health
November 2, 2011. 18 Dana Best, September 20 2007. American Acad-
Perspectives 108: 895-9000. http://ehp03.niehs.
emy of Pediatrics, Protecting Children From Lead
nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fe
Paint Imports, http://www.aap.org/advocacy/
7 Kids in Danger, February 2008. The Year of the hp.00108895. Accessed November 10 2011.
washing/Testimonies-Statements-Petitions/09-
Recall http://www.kidsindanger.org/docs/re-
20-07-Lead-Tainted-Imports-Testimony.pdf . Ac-
ports/2008_year_of_the_recall.pdf. Accessed No-
cessed October 24 2011. 26 SM Duty et al. 2003. Phthalate Exposure and
vember 9 2011.
Human Semen Parameters, Epidemiology 14:
269-277, 2003; SM Duty et al, The Relationship
19 Dana Best, September 20 2007. American Acad-
8 Dini El Boghdady, The Washington Post, “CPSC Between Environmental Health Perspectives
emy of Pediatrics, Protecting Children from Lead
database faces first legal challenge”, October 18th 111:1164-1169.
Pain Imports, http://www.aap.org/advocacy/
2011. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/
washing/Testimonies-Statements-Petitions/09-
economy/cpsc-database-faces-first-legal-chal-
20-07-Lead-Tainted-Imports-Testimony.pdf. Ac- 27 Lisa Stiffler, March 16 2008. Seattle Pi, Toy-safety
lenge/2011/10/18/gIQAtpKivL_story.html. Ac-
cessed November 1 2011. measure may trigger a lawsuit. http://www.seat-
cessed October 18 2011.
tlepi.com/local/article/Toy-safety-measure-may-
trigger-a-lawsuit-1267348.php. Accessed Novem-
20 Phthalate Esters Panel of the American Chemistry
9 News release,” Federal judge lets company stay ber 10 2011.
Council, “What are Phthalates”, April 2004, www.
anonymous in suit over CPSC complaint data,”
phthalates.org. Accessed October 24 2011.
October, 23, 2012 on the Consumer Reports maga-