Jerome Nriagu is no grinch -- but he has kind of put a damper on the Christmas holidays.
Nriagu is that toxicologist at the University of Michigan who studied the content of your average household candle and concluded that "some candles on the market today are made with wicks that have either lead or lead cores that emit potentially dangerous levels of lead into the air."Actually nobody paid too much attention to Nriagu's study back in October. But then in mid-November the American Lung Association's Health House Project sent out a press release quoting the study and also listing other apparent health hazards related to candles -- including toxic emissions of 16 chemicals, from acetone to xylene.
"Although candles create a warm, inviting feeling within the home during the holidays and throughout the year," the Lung Association warned, "there are studies showing that candle usage can create problems for your home's interior as well as for you and your loved ones."
Candles, suddenly, were the home decorating equivalent of bacon. Maybe even cigarettes.
As with many studies and reports, however, the truth is more complicated than that. As usual, the consumer is left to try to sort through the allegations and the soundbites, with little hope of figuring out how dangerous candles may or may not be.
In the meantime, the $2.3 billion U.S. candle industry -- including Utah's 30 candle manufacturers -- has been in an uproar over Nriagu's study and the American Lung Association's warnings.
"This is the candle season, and it seems like they're doing what they can to kill it," sighs Melanie Christensen, owner of the Wind River Scents of Nature candle company in Bountiful.
"I need to know where some of these claims are coming from because they're wild," says Marianne McDermott, executive vice president of the National Candle Association in Washington, D.C. "All of a sudden these scare stories have come out. . . . It's just boomeranging. Everyone's picking up and running with it."
As is often the case in stories of this kind, various facts about candle safety have been condensed, then quoted and requoted, until it is hard to figure out what the sources were and what they said. The American Lung Association's Health House press release, for example, lists acetone, benzene, creosol and 13 other toxins that can be emitted when candles are burned but gives no details about their specific health effects and quotes no source for the claims.
A call to Health House headquarters gets you Traci Anderson, who refers you to Nriagu's study -- which turns out to have studied only lead emissions.
Calls to representatives of the candle industry, predictably, get you assurances that their products are safe.
"We don't know of any test results that indicate that there are toxins coming off candles when they're burned," says Jim Becker of the candle division of American Greeting Cards.
"We get safety data sheets from every one of our suppliers, and they're very detailed," says Merlin Larsen, president of the Crystal Springs candle manufacturing company in Salt Lake City, which makes candles for retailers such as The Gap. In addition, he says, "all of our candles have to be tested by a laboratory back East. And it's hard to pass one of their tests." There are no traces of lead in Crystal Springs' candles, he says.
Larsen thinks that the anti-candle publicity actually began with a recent class-action lawsuit in California against the candle industry, brought by a lawyer who hopes that candles can be covered under the state's Proposition 65, the California Safe Drinking and Toxic Enforcement Act.
According to Steven Crooks, wax market planner at Exxon Petroleum Specialities, the levels of benzene and other chemicals in U.S. paraffin wax are "way, way, way below the regulatory thresholds." Even the quality of imported wax, especially Chinese wax, he says, "has been getting a lot better."
The Nriagu study about the lead content of candles and wicks studied 15 different brands of candles made in the United States, Mexico and China. Nriagu examined their lead emissions as well as the concentration levels of lead that lingered in the air in a closed space (the equivalent of a 12-by-12-by-10-foot room) after one hour and after five hours.
After five hours, the lead levels in an enclosed space ranged from an estimated 0.21 to 65.3 micrograms per cubic meter, the study found. This compares to the Environmental Protection Agency's recommendation of 1.5 micrograms.
The lead emissions, wrote Nriagu, add to the "lead burden in the house dust." And house dust, he wrote, is widely recognized as a primary route of childhood exposure to lead.
Nriagu noted that lead wicks were found primarily in Chinese candles, while candles made in the United States and Mexico had wicks made of zinc- or lead-containing alloys. "Lead was detected in small quantities in emissions from zinc-based wicks, suggesting that the lead may be a common contaminant in the zinc, wick or wax. The levels of lead were small but still may represent a health risk over a long period of time."
According to Atkins & Pearce, the country's largest wick manufacturer, most U.S. candle manufacturers phased out lead wicks in 1974. Lead "is a four-letter word" in the candle industry, says Jeb Head, Atkins & Pearce, president. He takes issue with Nriagu's contention that zinc wicks can be harmful. "A zinc wick has 50,000 times less lead than a leadcore wick," he says. "It's less than nominal. It's almost non-existent."
He adds, however, that imported wicks may use a zinc alloy, which "could easily be 30 percent zinc, 70 percent lead."
As Nriagu points out, however, it is impossible to tell just by looking at a metal core wick whether it contains lead, zinc or other metals. If the candle was made in the United States, the chances are nine out of 10 that the wick is not lead, says the National Candle Association's McDermott.
As for the safety of the fragrances in scented candles, a check with Glenn Roberts of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials gets you an assurance that, in general, fragrances are deemed safe in one of two ways. Either there is a "history of safe use" over many years, or, if the fragrance is a new material, it must go through "an extensive series of tests." In addition , he says, "the bulk of fragrances" have been reviewed by the Research Institute, which he says is an independent testing group.
All of which makes you feel pretty confident -- until you stumble upon a Web site called realmacaw.com. "Scented candles can be fatal to birds," reads a contribution from bird owners Beth Sherry and Monica Sudds. The story details the deaths of two lovebirds and a Quaker, which Sudds and Sherry attribute to the fragrances in Glade candles manufactured by SC Johnson Wax.
"Johnson and Johnson threatened to sue me over the article," says Sudds, who lives in Iowa. But after the publication of the article in 1996, she says, she received "50 to 60 people a week" with similar stories about birds dying because of scented candles. Even now, she says, she gets one or two calls a day.
At the National Candle Association, Marianne McDermott has never heard of Sudds or of bird deaths. But she does suggest that humans should remember that anytime you burn anything you need to be sure there is adequate ventilation. "Some people are burning a lot of candles for a long time," she says. "You need to make sure you have natural air flow. That's common sense."
The American Lung Association also recommends that, to avoid excessive soot, remember to cut down candlewicks to one-quarter inch or shorter and avoid a candle container that is so small, or whose chimney is so small, that the candle does not get enough oxygen. The ALA also suggests avoiding candles that are "greasy to the touch" because they may contain "too many oils that alter the way the wax burns."
As for University of Michigan's Nriagu, who helped ignite the candle controversy, he says his intention was just "to protect public health, not to upset people."