Jump to content

Talk:Decabromodiphenyl ether

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BSEF is a very, very bad source for this article

[edit]

Given that a very large portion of this article is dedicated to the supposed safety of this compound, emerging regulations against it, and its effects in the environment, the use of the Bromine Science and Environmental Forum as a source is laughable at best. BSEF is run by Burson-Marsteller - a PR group - and rather than a source, any material from BSEF about this compound other than sales data ought to be viewed with extreme skepticism.

Given the nature of Burson-Marsteller's business (public relations, AKA advertising), any material taken from them on this subject almost definitely violates WP:COI and / or WP:SPAM. Zaphraud (talk) 22:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, there is no problem citing statements by BSEF, as long as they are clearly marked as such. The scientific discussion always has different viewpoints from several groups: environmental chemists and toxicologists, authorities and the industry. BSEF members joined several scientific conferences (e.g. DIOXIN200x) and is in dialog with scientists and authorities. Where exactly do you see NPOV? --Leyo 00:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The part where by its very nature, a PR firm cannot provide a neutral source of information. The sole reason for the existence of a PR firm - and its subsidiaries - is to promote one particular point of view. My primary concern with the views echoed from the BSEF regarding the safety of this compound (and others like it) is that the BSEF rather aggressively voices the absolute safety of the compound while simultaneously touting the lives saved; what really needs to be addressed is under what conditions the compound is still able to be considered safe and if the potential life-saving benefits always outweigh the potential loss of human life.
Consider: If the stuff is used in the hard plastic of a child's car seat it might be safe to assume that it poses relatively little threat to a child, however if it is used in the synthetic fabric of the car seat, the compound is much more likely to be exposed to conditions that will cause its breakdown, such as sunlight, bacteria, sweat/moisture, dust, etc. Even if the lower BDE's remain well-bound to the fibers of the fabric, what effect will the breakdown products (bromide ion, hypobromide ion, etc?) have, such as contact dermatitis? If a rash is the risk, and the risk can be dealt with by making sure clothing prevents direct contact and washing that clothing after any long trips, then maybe the potential benefit of the compound - a saved life after a car crash prevents easy removal of a child from a burning vehicle - is worth it. On the other hand, stuff like this used to be used in childrens pajamas, and it seems quite likely that the risk/benefit would often not be worth it, particularly in a non-smoking household.
To summarize my objection, the BSEF's published viewpoint is only that which most benefits the bromine industry, and can be summed up as "Oh its totally safe, buy and use as much as possible", which is a viewpoint that does not really belong in a text that is striving to be encyclopedic in content.Zaphraud (talk) 07:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Decabromodiphenyl ether. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:25, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Decabromodiphenyl ether. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Decabromodiphenyl ether. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note

[edit]

Note for future edits. Decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE) CAS 84852-53-9, is still available Project Osprey (talk) 15:36, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article on this chemical in three other languages, see d:Q3410491. --Leyo 15:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how auto-translating pages works now. I had heard that it was prohibited? --Project Osprey (talk) 15:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I guess that the auto-translated text would need to be copy-edited before publishing. The original article would need to be imported. --Leyo 19:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a start at Decabromodiphenyl ethane. --Project Osprey (talk) 02:12, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Decabromodiphenyl_ether&oldid=1198320818"