Dr. Patricia Dawson gave up a little of her house dust in the name of science.

What she didn't know, but feared, was that her sample, once combined with nine others from around Washington was laced with potentially hazardous chemicals, according to a report released yesterday.

"I was actually kind of appalled by the results," said Dawson, a Seattle breast surgeon. "I think we have an understanding that there are environmental contaminants around us all the time. But this is a very vivid way of looking at it when you realize that your own household dust is full of contaminants."

A coalition of environmental groups touted the report as part of a growing body of evidence that industrial chemicals are finding their way into everyday life, and it called for an overhaul of the way the United States regulates chemicals.

But the study, issued by the environmental advocacy group Clean Production Action, has limitations. It doesn't show how much of the chemicals find their way into the bodies of people living in the homes, and it doesn't show if the amounts found should be considered dangerous. And the hazards of a number of the chemicals are in dispute.

Chemical-industry representatives pointed to these gaps, saying the report showed little that wasn't already known, and didn't prove people were endangered by these chemical levels.

"A study that finds a substance in dust or even measures low levels in our bodies by itself doesn't tell us if there is cause for concern," the American Chemistry Council, a trade association for chemical companies, said in response to the report.

Latest salvo

The report is the latest salvo from environmental groups focused on people's exposure to chemicals from everyday living. A study released last year grabbed headlines by showing flame retardant in women's breast milk. It was followed with reports on those chemicals in house dust.

This time, the tests examined dust collected from the vacuum bags of 10 homes in each of seven states, including Washington. The dust was combined into a single sample for each state, and tested for 44 chemicals.

The study found 25 of the chemicals in all seven states and nine more in some of the states.

Some of the most ubiquitous compounds included phthalates — a class of chemicals used to make vinyl, pesticides such as DDT and permethrin, flame retardant, and perfluorinated chemicals. Perfluorinated chemicals are used to make household products like Teflon-coated pans and industrial products such as insulation for electrical wiring.

Some of the chemicals on the list are widely considered harmful — such as DDT, which is banned in the United States. But the health effects of others are in dispute.

The report claimed phthalates, for example, are associated with respiratory problems, premature breast development in girls and low sperm counts in men. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found the type of phthalate that showed up most often in the house dust is a probable human carcinogen, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Web site.

But the CDC states that chemical, di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, isn't expected to harm people at the levels normally found in the environment.

"Household vinyl products have been used safely and effectively for 50 years. Consumers can continue to rely on those products with confidence," said Allen Blakey, spokesman for the Vinyl Institute, a trade association for manufacturers.

Several kinds of the flame retardant, known as PBDEs, are being voluntarily phased out. But there is a disagreement over whether there is a health hazard posed by one version of the chemical, Deca-BDE, widely used in computers, furniture and the aerospace industry.

In Washington, the state Department of Ecology has called for a ban on all PBDEs, except where no adequate replacement is available. But representatives from the bromine industry, which makes PBDEs, have objected, saying there's no evidence that Deca-BDE poses health risks.

State lawmakers have sponsored legislation banning the chemical in the state, with a few exceptions. But the legislation has stalled this session.

Regulations

While study backers welcomed state-level regulation, they said the federal government needs to more aggressively scrutinize chemicals for possible health risks. And they called on industries to replace potentially harmful chemicals with more benign ones when possible.

The United States should move toward a regulatory system like the one now under consideration by the European Union, said Beverly Thorpe, of Clean Production Action. Under that system, thousands of chemicals in production for decades would have to undergo scrutiny for possible health effects. Chemicals that are considered potentially toxic and long-lived would need to show there is no viable alternative before being allowed on the market.

In the United States, chemicals that existed before the Toxics Substance Control Act was passed in the 1970s don't go through the same level of safety checks as new compounds.

Manufacturers have criticized the proposed European standards as burdensome and costly. The EPA, in a statement, cautioned that the European program would "take an overly expansive approach to the management of chemicals, which is burdensome and may not be workable."

Warren Cornwall: 206-464-2311 or wcornwall@seattletimes.com

Information

To read the report online: www.safer-products.org

To learn about different chemicals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html

To read information from the chemical industry:

www.americanchemistry.com