Nail Polish: Heralding Warmer Weather or Heralding Health Problems?

April 9, 2012

Spring Fling

Will You Be Painting Your Toenails Toxic Now That Warmer Weather Has Arrived?

As the weather warms up, toes across America will be bared. If you choose to apply conventional nail polish, you are exposing yourself to a vast array of extremely hazardous substances. Conventional nail polish contains industrial solvents and other harmful volatile organic compounds (VOCs). To learn about VOCs and why you should avoid them, check out my prior article regarding toxins in cribs. The issue of chemicals in nail polishes and nail polish removers is so serious that many states have begun regulating VOCs in these products. As usual, however, the few regulations currently in place leave much to be desired in terms of protecting human health. Unfortunately, the market is still flooded with extremely dangerous nail products.


Let’s Take a Look at What Lurks in a Typical Bottle of Conventional Nail Polish

There are far too many brands and formulas of nail polish out there for me to go into great detail regarding which conventional polish has which poison–that could fill an entire website. Suffice it to say that any polish that is not at least making a claim to being “safer” is something you should avoid.

A quick trip to the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG’s) Skin Deep Database for cosmetic safety will allow us to take a look at the toxicity of particular nail polish formulations.  Skin Deep ranks the toxicity of cosmetics based on a scale from 0-10, with 0 being the least harmful and 10 being extremely hazardous.  I never use a cosmetic or personal care product without checking its toxicity via Skin Deep.  I was elated to read recently that the EWG will soon have a database that ranks household cleaners!

Now, let’s take a look at the dangers that lurk in one coventional brand of nail polish.  Follow the preceding link, and scroll down to where it says “ingredients.” You will see that a seemingly innocent bottle of nail polish contains known carcinogens (i.e., substances that cause cancer); reproductive toxins (i.e., things that can lead to sterility or disorders of the reproductive glands or cells); neurotoxins (i.e., things that damage the brain, spinal cord, or nerves); substances that cause organ system toxicity (typically refers to things that inflict damage upon the kidney and liver); endocrine disruptors (i.e., things that cause hormonal disorders, and can thereby lead to infertility and/or predisposition to miscarriage); developmental toxicity (i.e., things that cause mutations and deformities in fetuses and in growing children); irritation (to skin, eyes, and lungs); immunotoxicity (i.e., damage to the immune system that can render a person more susceptible to illness, allergies, autoimmune disease, and/or cancer); bioaccumulation (i.e., the substance can build up in your system with each use and do its damage over the course of many years); and damage to the environment.


If You Thought That Was Bad . . . Don’t Use Any of the Polish You Have Hung Onto For Ten Years

This above example of conventional nail polish is actually one of the more benign formulations of currently manufactured conventional nail polish, others formulations contain even more toxins. Furthermore, if you keep bottles of conventional nail polish for years (like I used to), then you are likely at even higher risk.

A few years ago, when I decided to reduce my toxic exposures, with the help of the EWG’s Skin Deep Database, I found that my nail polish collection was a particularly hazardous one. When I went through my huge bin of nail polish, I had some formulas that were a 10 out of 10 in terms of their toxicity rating (!!!) on Skin Deep. Many of my polishes were manufactured long before particular states had begun regulating formaldehyde (the federal government did not attempt to regulate formaldehyde until 2010).

I used to purposely buy the polishes and top coats that claimed they were “long-lasting.” Skin Deep helped me learn that “long-lasting” was typically industry speak for “chock full of formaldehyde.” Formaldehyde is bad stuff (you can read what OSHA has to say about it here), but so are many of the ingredients in nail polish and nail polish remover that states have not even considered regulating. (For more information on formaldehyde regulatory action, see my article on toxic cribs). That is why you have to protect yourself!


Must Our Toenails Go Naked?

Naked nails are absolutely the way to go if you want to eliminate all chances of toxic exposure via nail polish and nail polish remover. My nails have gone naked for the past five years. I simply never bothered looking for safer nail polish. However, fortunately for those of you who will not bare your toes without toenail polish (I will not leave my house without make-up on, so no judgement!), safer alternatives to conventional nail polish are available. The safer alternatives are typically water based polishes that have managed to cut out many of the extremely dangerous solvents, toxic colorants, and other nasty chemicals. The safer brands can typically boast of being free from such things as FD&C colors, toluene, dibutyl phthalate, xylene, and formaldehyde, which leaves them significantly less harmful than conventional nail polishes. If you are going to polish, please play it “safer.” Read on for some information regarding safer brands of nail polish, including how they rate according to the Skin Deep database. I have not tried any of the safer polishes, so, unfortunately, I cannot rate them based on my personal experience.


Foot Colors

If You Are Going to Polish, Then I Recommend You Use One of These Brands


These Brands Are Probably Somewhat Safer Than Conventional Nail Polish, But I Do Not Recommend Them Over the Brands Above

  • Piggy Paint–Use caution with this brand. This brand was not in the Skin Deep database. When I entered the nail polish manually, I found that one of the ingredients used in the polish, “Neolone 950″ (a.k.a. “Methylisothiazolinone”), has an EWG individual chemical rating of 6!  Not a rating you would expect to see for an ingredient included in a “safer” product. When I researched the ingredient I found this article. I agree with its author that Neolone 950/Methylisothiazolinone, made by DOW, has no place in a cosmetic marketed as safer and geared towards children. Is Piggy Paint safer than drug store nail polish? While this company does seem to be engaging in a bit of “green-washing,” it is still probably safer than most conventional polishes, but with the better options above available, why risk it? Piggy Paint’s nail polish remover was also not currently in the Skin Deep database. When I entered the formulation, it earned a Skin Deep rating of 2 (it might have been lower but for an unspecified embittering agent). Typically, if an ingredient is safe, manufacturers will not hesitate to name it, as it is a selling point.
  • PeaceKeeper Cause-Metics–This brand states that most of their polishes earn a Skin Deep rating of 3, but that there are some exceptions. Their current formulation is not in Skin Deep. When I entered their ingredients manually, I came up with a Skin Deep rating of 4 for their nail polish, with several individual ingredients coming up as 4′s. Shop carefully if considering this brand. PeaceKeeper’s nail polish remover is also not listed in Skin Deep. When I entered it manually, I came up with a Skin Deep rating of 1. Is PeaceKeeper safer than conventional nail polish? Seemingly, but, it is definitely not the safest out there. Why not go with a company who committed to protecting consumer safety by signing the EWG’s Compact for Safe Cosmetics instead?


Do the Safer Brands of Nail Polish Perform as Well as The Toxic, Conventional Brands?

To answer this question you will have to read the hundreds of reviews available on the web. I have not used any kind of nail polish in 5+ years. Judging from the quick research I did to write this article, I can say that the reviews of Acquarella seem favorable, but it is also the most expensive–it costs twice what Honeybee Gardens and Keeki polishes cost. Honeybee Gardens also seemed to have decent reviews, by those who stated they followed the application directions. Keeki seems to be a newer brand, so perhaps that is why I have not seen many reviews of it.


Things to Keep in Mind When Using the Safer Brands of Nail Polishes

When buying and using the safer brands of nail polish, it is important to know that, due to safer brands of nail polish using highly unique formulations, you typically have to buy nail polish remover from the same brand as your nail polish. You also may have to apply the same brand’s “conditioner,” “base coat,” “top coat,” or “clear” nail polish to enhance the performance of the product. It is important to read the manufacturer’s website for application tips–even if you buy the product from a retailer.

Nail Polish
Keep in mind that with safer polishes your color choices will be somewhat limited, compared to what you see among conventional, toxic polishes. This is a result of most of the safer brands using natural substances (mica, mineral oxides, etc.) to color their polish. The conventional brands use toxic FD&C colorants. The conventional brands can give you the rainbow, but it may just cost you your health.

I have read that safer polishes can be hard to get off the nail, but, in my nail-polishing days, I had that issue with toxic, conventional polishes too. The manufacturer websites for the safer polishes include helpful hints and tips for using their products. Many of the manufacturer websites state that difficult removal can be a sign of dry nails, and they offer solutions for this issue.

Additionally, if you buy a safer brand and it does not stay on as long or wear as well as a toxic, conventional brand, please remember that your health is more important than long-wearing nail polish. In my toenail polishing prime, I could get a polish job to last a month or more (!!!) with Mystic Nails’ top coat, but when I learned that it contained high levels of chemicals such as dangerous formaldehyde, I quickly got my priorities straight. I urge you to get yours straight too.

Remember, the safest polish is no polish at all! If you polish your nails all summer, consider taking the winters off to cut down your lifetime exposure. You may just learn to like your naked toenails!


Even if You Are Using a Safer Polish, Remember to Use Appropriate Precautions

When using paints of any kind, it is always best to ensure good ventilation. If you are going to polish, please open the windows! Better yet, polish outdoors.

If you are pregnant or nursing, I strongly suggest that you consider giving up any cosmetics you can do without. Given that infants are now born with 200+ toxic chemicals in their bloodstream, which they absorbed through mom while in utero, one can never be too careful when a baby’s development and future health is concerned (see my article Do We Really Need to Worry So Much About Toxins for links to alarming cord blood chemicals studies, which show just how polluted our newborns are).

As far as nail polish for children goes, conventional nail polish should never be used on a child or in the proximity of a child–even with the windows open. Children are undergoing rapid development and are therefore much more susceptible to the neurotoxins, endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, immunotoxins, and irritants in conventional nail polishes and nail polish removers. Additionally, it takes many less exposures for significant amounts of toxins to build up (i.e., “bioaccumulate”) in a small body. Safer polishes are an absolute must where children are involved . . . and you should always have the windows open!

One last thing: if I ruled the world, Child Protective Services would have the right to force caretakers of children seen in nail salons to participate in mandatory toxics education. There is a nail salon in my local Wal-Mart, and I cannot tell you how furious I get when I see children in the salon waiting for their moms. I will not even push my child past that salon door in a shopping cart due to the fumes I sometimes smell seeping out of the salon. Over my dead body would anyone take her into the salon, let alone allow her to sit up at the polishing table while someone had their nails done! So many of the children I see through the salon windows are in fact sitting right next to mom while she has toxic chemicals applied to her nails.

Conventional polish and remover are dangerous enough to children when used in one’s own home with all of the windows open. It is absolutely irresponsible to bring one’s child, born or unborn, to a nail salon. The toxic exposure levels are much higher when many bottles of polish, remover, glue, etc. are in use, as is the case in a nail salon.

Are there mothers who are simply unaware of the dangers of bringing their children to a nail salon? Perhaps. That is why we all need to discuss the toxic nature of conventional cosmetics with our family, friends, and co-workers. Heck, tell strangers if you think they will listen: you just might save a life.

In-depth toxic analyses aside, here is a quick and dirty general rule: If it stinks like nasty chemicals, children should not be exposed to it . . . and technically neither should adults! Please pass it on!

Have You Tried a Safer Nail Polish?

If you have tried any of the safer nail polishes or nail polish removers on the market, please share your experience by commenting below. What brand did you use? Did you like it? Why or why not? Any tips for folks who want to make the transition to safer nail products?

Conventional polish users: have I totally sapped the joy out of that pedicure you had planned at your local, stinky nail salon? If so, I will sleep better tonight knowing that you might skip it.  Urge your local nail salon to clean up its act!


Photo Credit for Red & White Shoe Photo

Photo Credit for Nail Polish Bottle Photo

Photo Credit for Pastel Shoe Photo

Photo Credit for Nail Polishes on Store Shelf

Photo Credit for Nail Salon Scene Photo


See this article in the Healthy Home Economist’s Monday Mania Blog Carnival!


{ 28 comments… read them below or add one }

Starlene April 9, 2012 at 18:39

I have used Go Natural Non-Toxic nail polish and it works pretty good if you use the primer and top coat and follow the directions that they recommend. Their site is here: I requested a sample of their nail polish and did a review and giveaway at my blog here:

I don’t find their company in the Skin Deep Database. They say this about their polish: “Our Go Natural Nail Polish contains none of the harsh and dangerous chemicals that other polishes have: no toluene, no formaldehyde, no dibutylphthalate (DBP), no bisphenol A (BPA). Just water, a milk-like film-former and FDA-approved colorants. If the chemical isn’t listed on our label, it isn’t in the polish. Our nail polish is also hypoallergenic since there is nothing in the formula that could cause allergic reactions or that would harm sensitive nails or skin.”

And from the FAQs: “Is there anything toxic in the nail polish?
No. There are no toxic chemicals. The resin is a perfectly harmless acrylic latex with residual monomers well below 100 parts per million. The only co-solvent is butyl diglycol ether – a glycol ether that has been proven safe to use in nail polish. All colorants are FDA-certified for cosmetic use. There is nothing in the polish that isn’t listed on the label: there is no formaldehyde, toluene, dibutylphthalate (DBP), bisphenol A (BPA) dangerous acetate solvents, acetone, nothing.”

Nicole, I don’t know how to tell if they are good or bad. What do you think?


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse April 9, 2012 at 21:36

Starlene: I had not heard of that brand before. I visited their site. On the bottom of this page it states that the polish contains Neolone 950/Methylisothiazolinone, just like the “Piggy Paint” brand I discuss above. Neolone 950 is a preservative. Since Neolone 950 itself would have a Skin Deep toxicity rating of 6 (with 10 being extremely toxic), I knew that I would probably end up placing this brand in my “better than conventional, but not among the best” category, prior to even entering all the ingredients into Skin Deep.

The overall toxicity rating for the Go Natural polish, which I got by manually entering it into my own Skin Deep account, was a 3–so it does end up being less desirable than Keeki, Honeybee Gardens, and Acquarella, according to Skin Deep. In our house, we aim to use nothing over a 2 on Skin Deep (we also avoid any products that have individual ingredients that are a high number–since the overall rating for a product is a weighted average).

I suspected Go Natural might be trying to hide something when it took me more than a couple of minutes to find their ingredient list. Companies who strive to be among the safest tend to post their ingredients first and foremost on their web pages. That is not to say Go Natural should not be applauded for trying to make a product that is safer than most nail polishes–they should. However, the fact that they did not sign EWG’s Compact for Safe Cosmetics (which you can see on Skin Deep when you enter their whole name “Go Natural Cosmetics”), suggests to me that they were not putting health completely before profits.

Anyone can sign up for a free account on Skin Deep that will allow them to manually enter each ingredient in a product that does not come up in the database. It gives the scores immediately and will save the product and scores to your account for future reference. When a consumer enters a product, it is only visible to that user. The results in the official Skin Deep database are verified by EWG staff, and are not ones entered by users. It can be tricky to enter your own ingredient lists, because manufacturers will often try to disguise their less-than-desirable ingredients. One way they do this is by using less common brand names for them (e.g., using “Neolone 950,” rather than the more widely accepted generic chemical name “Methylisothiazolinone”). Sometimes you have to Google ingredients that Skin Deep does not recognize in order to get their generic names. That is what I had to do when I was investigating the Piggy Polish brand. Since I have been using Skin Deep for at least 4 or 5 years, I have gotten pretty good with outsmarting companies who are trying to be deceptive or engage in “green-washing.” Any of the brands I recommend in my Nurse’s E-Shoppe have passed the criteria for crossing my doorstep and are products I have used and loved. That is part of why I started this blog: it is easy to go broke trying safer products if one doesn’t know where to start. My friends and relatives urged me to post my favorite products somewhere online and to try and teach folks how to critically evaluate products.

Go Natural’s comment that there is nothing in the polish that could cause allergic reactions is curious to me since it contains Neolone 950/Methylisothiazolinone. Check out Skin Deep’s listing for Methylisothiazolinone, and you will see that the whole reason Skin Deep rates the chemical as a 6 is because there is good evidence of allergenicity and immunotoxicity. Scroll down and you will see that Skin Deep always cites its sources when it states a substance is harmful for a particular reason. I believe the National Library of Medicine, and Skin Deep’s other sources, over Go Natural.

The fact that you thought the Go Natural worked pretty well gives me hope that other readers may have good experiences with some of the lower toxicity polishes. Thanks for sharing your experience!


Lorraine Williams February 17, 2013 at 17:31

Go Natural is very slow to respond to inquiries, and if they do at all, they are less than forth coming with information.

I used their products of and on for a couple of years, but the colors were very hit or miss and the customer service is practically non-existent. So I was already looking for a replacement when I read this. Thanks for this information.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse February 19, 2013 at 10:55

You are welcome, Lorraine:-) Thanks for writing about your experience with Go Natural!


Starlene April 9, 2012 at 23:55

Ohhhhh!! Thank you Nicole for looking into this. I was just not sure what to look for and you found it. Thanks again.


S May 4, 2012 at 16:13

I have tried Keeki and it’s very difficult to remove with their remover and with the toxic remover which I tried just to see if anything would get that stuff off my nails! I used their basecoat and topcoat along with the polish. I contacted them via email and their answer was that the natural products harden the longer you wear them and it’s best to remove the polish every 4 days or so! Too much trouble. Rather have colorless nails!


Ann September 15, 2012 at 00:00

I had the same experience. Spent $50 on products and I can’t use them.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse September 15, 2012 at 01:29

Thank you for sharing your experience, Ann!


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse May 4, 2012 at 20:30

Thank you for sharing your experience, S!


PattyLA May 6, 2012 at 18:53

I’m so disappointed to learn that Piggy Paint is not all that great! I have a few colors that I got for the girls and was planning to use a gift certificate to get some more colors. I was just thinking today that I would paint their nails since they have been begging for it. Now I’ve got to invest in a new system. Humph.
Thanks for the information. I do appreciate it even if it doesn’t make me happy right now.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse May 6, 2012 at 21:08

Sorry to rain on your parade, Patty. It is a bummer that a company that presents itself as producing a safe product is choosing to use such a toxic ingredient at this time. Hopefully they will clean it up.


Cathy May 7, 2012 at 06:35

Has anyone tried Jamberry nail shields? Nontoxic.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse May 8, 2012 at 21:18

Jamberry nails do not appear in the Skin Deep Database, nor does the manufacturer’s website reveal what they are made of. If they were truly non-toxic this would be a major selling point, so why is their composition not specified on the manufacturer’s website? Many companies call their products “non-toxic” simply because they meet government regulations. However, this means nothing as the government does not regulate cosmetics. Readers, please proceed with caution regarding Jamberry nail shields.


Meredith May 25, 2014 at 21:48

Jamberry is made with PVC, whic releases dioxins as you heat it to apply the wrap. Dioxins are an endocrine disruptor.


Bethany Gonzalez Moreno September 11, 2012 at 16:44

I did some research into Jamberry nail shields, and they are made with PVC. PVC is only flexible if plasticizers are added. So they are definitely *not* non-toxic and I would never want to heat them up or put them on my hands for weeks on end.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse September 13, 2012 at 15:45

Thanks for sharing your research into the Jamberry Nail Shields, Bethany! PVC is absolutely not something we should have around us, let alone on us!


Crystal November 4, 2013 at 15:35

I know this is an old thread, but I have been doing some research with Jamberry as I have invested a lot of time and money into it and have not gotten a satisfactory response from the company. I do have the MSDS sheet, but it is VERY vague and yes they are made from PVC. And everything that I have read about PVC is not good, especially when heated. I have urged the company to add their info to Skin Deep, which I doubt they will. And now I am at a loss at what to do next. Is there a way to have Skin Deep rate their products if I send them the MSDS info? I feel like the “non-toxic” claim that is being made is not correct.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse November 4, 2013 at 15:40

Hi Crystal. Thanks for stopping by. One used to be able to enter an entire list of ingredients for a currently unlisted product into Skin Deep, under one’s own user account; however, the score would only be visible to you, not to the public. You could e-mail EWG and ask them if they take suggestions regarding products to be added. Yes, PVC is toxic and should be avoided. I do not think a “non-toxic” claim is appropriate for PVC either.


Crystal November 4, 2013 at 21:01

The only ingredient listed is PVC and laminate, and when I searched it on the database nothing popped up. They do have a new lacquer that I wonder how it measures up. It is 5-Free.


Carrie August 14, 2014 at 09:26

Hi all – Also doing some research into Jamberry. They changed their materials and now the single ingredient acrylates copolymer is listed on each product page (for the nail shields, not the 5-free polish, though those ingredients are also listed). I’m still trying to get some information on when the change happened (looks like sometime in 2012) and a confirmation that there’s nothing else in the nails. EWG gives that ingredient a 2, so not too bad — if that’s truly all that’s in there. (Seems a little odd, since it’s listed as a hardener or adhesive, not as a plastic on its own…)


Belfor Pittsburgh March 8, 2013 at 13:59

I had no idea nail polish was so toxic… I have friends that put the stuff on all the time but I can’t stand the smell so I never put it on.


a g July 20, 2014 at 02:39

so…Back to Jamberry….the company its self has never advertised as ” non toxic” that is something that consultants( people that sell jamberry) tend to say, which is 100% false. the material data safety sheet for jamberry nail shields clearly states that they are only not” hazardous” at room temperature. if someone has told you that jamberry is ” non toxic” you can report them to the company for false advertisement and they will lose their contract to sell.


Lacey @ KV Organics July 30, 2014 at 00:20

I have been having the same questions/doubts about Jamberry, since they are made from PVC. The consultant I know tells me that they are BPA-free, but she hasn’t been able (yet) to get a straight answer about phthalates. From what I understand it’s usually BPA or phthalates that are added to PVC to make it flexible, so I can’t imagine they are also phthalate-free.

So the company does not advertise as non-toxic officially? Can consultants really loose their accounts if they promote it as such? I have a number of friends selling this product now and hadn’t heard that. If that’s true, they need to know.

PS – For the little we do use nail polish, we love Keeki in our house. :)
Lacey @ KV Organics recently posted..Moving OutMy Profile


Tori Bryant September 15, 2014 at 19:24

Actually, Jamberry DOES advertise non-toxic and when you call the customer service line, the recorded speaker says Jamberry is the only made in the US non-toxic choice.


Tori Bryant September 15, 2014 at 19:28

I too have been doing a lot of research because I am invested in Jamberry. Here is something that was posted on MotherEarthNews about PVC in an article about anti and pro arguments. “While PVC does contain harmful carcinogens, VCM is merely a part of the production of vinyl. Once PVC is produced, VCM is no longer emitted, so it doesn’t pose a threat to anybody who uses vinyl. Dioxin can only be released from PVC when it is burned at low or extremely high temperatures. In the case of a building fire, dioxin may be released into the air, but firefighters are prepared for dangerous fumes, which is why most of them wear oxygen masks. Many other building materials release harmful toxins when burned, so PVC shouldn’t be pinpointed. Finally, research involving plasticizers (such as phthalates) has never been done on humans. Lab rats that developed cancer after exposure to plasticizers were exposed to the equivalent of a human ingesting 500 grams of plasticizer every day for 100 days, which is highly unlikely.

Read more:


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse September 16, 2014 at 16:13

Tori, I think the fact that you are invested in Jamberry has clouded your vision. The article that you reference , expresses views on both sides of the vinyl debate. You are cherry-picking the pro-vinyl stance’s arguments from the article and stating them on my Web site as if they were unopposed facts. They are not. There are many legitimate concerns around PVC in the scientific literature–look at the scientific literature and see for yourself. Plastic by its very nature is not chemically stable. In fact, the word, “plastic,” means “changeable.” If you feel comfortable heating up PVC on your fingernails, then that is your choice. However, it is not a fact that PVC is safe, and I will not let you present it as such on my site. The very article you cite states VALID concerns about the safety of PVC–for that reason, I think it wise for safety-minded readers to check it out–it is not at all what you are presenting it as.


Ang D September 17, 2014 at 11:56

While I understand the dangers of PVC production and incineration, I think that you are dismissing Tori’s point that once vinyl is produced it no longer contains the threat of VCM.
I read the article, and yes, there are arguments on both sides of whether to use PVC or not, but it seems clear to me that there is no hazard in using vinyl once the VCM is no longer present.


Nicole, The Non-Toxic Nurse September 17, 2014 at 16:53

Ang, really? I realize that you are an industry plant or private peddler of Jamberry, but for your and your possible children’s sake, I am going to try to educate you a bit.

Let’s pretend that VCM were in fact the only issue with PVC? Are you okay with polluting the environment and endangering humans and wild-life, during the manufacturing process, just to have pretty PVC nail decorations?

Pretending aside, VCM is not the only issue with PVC. PVC itself, once finished, is a major health concern. I repeat, PVC is a health concern throughout the product’s life cycle.

Here are just a few of the many readily available lay-friendly documents on the Web explaining why. I am not even listing peer reviewed toxicity studies meant for a scientific audience or getting in to the nitty-gritty of the fact that hospitals seek out DEHP free IV bags and infusion sets, because of the toxicity of PVC’s plasticizers.

Next time you want to cherry pick facts from a secondary source and post them on my Web site, please state your educational credentials. Mine are stated on my site.


Cancel reply

Leave a Comment

CommentLuv badge

Previous post:

Next post: