Paraffin/Soy Air Quality Testing Results from EPA

[Di_in_AZ]

I know there are a million arguments regarding the soy/paraffin debate. I got so tired of it I did some research. Testing has been done. I am copying the conclusion here so people can actually read it and understand it. A test WAS conducted and is supported by the EPA. They burned 30 candles in one room over a three-hour period and measured the concentrations in the air.

Discussed were wicks, chemicals released, and soot. In a nutshell, yes, some carcinogens were found in the air. The ones that were found were under OSHA standards for acceptable air quality. I don't know about you but how many people burn 30 candles in one room for 3 hours? Not many, so you can imagine the air quality for burning ONE candle the amounts would be negligible.

Of the carcinogens found, most were from the scents used in the candles. There is a blurb explaining the fatty contents and how the combustion works and due to the fact that scent is causing the carcinogens, it is in the air whether you are burning paraffin scented OR soy scented candles. The amount of some of the carcinogens they reported were less than what is released from one cigarette.

The third thing is the soot--also in presence due to scenting and softer waxes. They also mention the wicking having a direct relationship to sooting. Soy produces white soot, there is still soot. Bottom line, you are going to get the same result if you use paraffin OR soy if you are using scent and even unscented candles do release some soot.

I copied the conclusion here and the document is called, "Potential Indoor Air Quality Impacts of Candle Burning and Incense". This document can be found at www.epa.gov. I respect the EPA as being a trusted and impartial organization to rely on when you are looking at test results.

****************************************************

Conclusion

Candles with lead wicks have the potential to generate indoor airborne lead concentrations of health concern. It is also possible for consumers to unknowingly purchase candles containing lead wick cores and repeatedly expose themselves to harmful amounts of lead through regular candle-burning.

Lead wicks aside, consumers are also exposed to concentrations of organic chemicals in candle emissions. The European Candle Association (1997) and Schwind and Hosseinpour (1994) conclude that there is no health hazard associated with candle burning even when a worst-case scenario of 30 candles burning for 4 hours in a 50 m3 room is assumed. However, burning several candles exceeded the EPA’s 10-6 increased risk for cancer for acetaldehyde and formaldehyde, and exceeded the RfC for acrolein. Once again, the RfC and EPA’s 10-6 increased cancer risk guidelines are not designed specifically for indoor air quality issues, so these conclusions are subject to interpretation.

Consumers may also not be aware that the regular burning of candles may result in BSD, causing damage to their homes. Sooting can be reduced by keeping candle wicks short, drafts to a minimum, and burning unscented candles.

Additional research may want to focus on gaps in the literature, such as emissions from scented and multi-colored candles, and maximum concentrations of organics in air produced by sooting candles.

[Sweet68cam]

Oh how many ways are there to say thank you for that post...lol :highfive:

[WYJen]

Very interesting! Thanks for sharing that information!

[pinetreecandles]

Excellent post. Thank You

[Candlewitch]

. Nice post, at least comparing it to one cigarette and also 30 candles in one room. But, I do not trust any govt. agency. But I know what one Yankee candle type does, god forbid 30 in a room will blacken it like a metor falling to earth. Mount Saint Helens erupting. I like the white soot better, You dont see it.

[DatCandleMaker]

. Nice post, at least comparing it to one cigarette and also 30 candles in one room. But, I do not trust any govt. agency. But I know what one Yankee candle type does, god forbid 30 in a room will blacken it like a metor falling to earth. Mount Saint Helens erupting. I like the white soot better, You dont see it.

you cannot compare every candle to 1 yankee. And ANY candle will burn like a smoke stack if burned improperly by a moron that can't read the safety instructions.

Just because you cannot see something does not make it better or safe. It makes you a nimrod for ignoring it.

JMHO

Dat

ETA: Great read DI, thanks for "clearing" the air

[lpoitras]

you cannot compare every candle to 1 yankee. And ANY candle will burn like a smoke stack if burned improperly by a moron that can't read the safety instructions.

Just because you cannot see something does not make it better or safe. It makes you a nimrod for ignoring it.

JMHO

Dat

Question: If all that is true, why doesn't Yankme and others go after the soy candle makers claiming no soot, no carcinogens, etc with all their hot shot lawyers? Seems to me they do more damage to Yankme than going after business owners using the word "tart" as was discussed on another forum here. Could it be:

1. they can't prove it's false.

2. they don't care as the soy market isn't hurting them.

I don't get it. I see plenty of soy sites claming no soot and we all know that is false, anything combustable emits soot. I only saw one site in the past 6 months of looking that actually admitted that. And that is what I tell people. I have been verbally tongue lashed at a craft fair by a paraffin maker for using 100% soy (and that's all I use folks) when I had NOTHING on my table stating anything bad about any other waxes. There was someone else there showing pix of a sooted jar (paraffin) and a clean jar (soy) and she gave him hell. Whatever. My point is if the soy press is ALL WRONG why doesn't someone sue over it??

[Janette]

you cannot compare every candle to 1 yankee. And ANY candle will burn like a smoke stack if burned improperly by a moron that can't read the safety instructions.

Just because you cannot see something does not make it better or safe. It makes you a nimrod for ignoring it.

JMHO

Dat

Question: If all that is true, why doesn't Yankme and others go after the soy candle makers claiming no soot, no carcinogens, etc with all their hot shot lawyers? Seems to me they do more damage to Yankme than going after business owners using the word "tart" as was discussed on another forum here. Could it be:

1. they can't prove it's false.

2. they don't care as the soy market isn't hurting them.

I don't get it. I see plenty of soy sites claming no soot and we all know that is false, anything combustable emits soot. I only saw one site in the past 6 months of looking that actually admitted that. And that is what I tell people. I have been verbally tongue lashed at a craft fair by a paraffin maker for using 100% soy (and that's all I use folks) when I had NOTHING on my table stating anything bad about any other waxes. There was someone else there showing pix of a sooted jar (paraffin) and a clean jar (soy) and she gave him hell. Whatever. My point is if the soy press is ALL WRONG why doesn't someone sue over it??

A good deal of "Marketing" is false, and most is never legally challenged. Perhaps the big companies aren't concerned about soy marketing as long as they don't make claims against any particular brand of candles. It is a lot cheaper for the "Big Guys" to defend their copyright than it is to challenge the claims of soy marketers. Also, if a company doesn't defend it's copyright, what is the point in having it? Janette

[lpoitras]

A good deal of "Marketing" is false, and most is never legally challenged. Perhaps the big companies aren't concerned about soy marketing as long as they don't make claims against any particular brand of candles. It is a lot cheaper for the "Big Guys" to defend their copyright than it is to challenge the claims of soy marketers. Also, if a company doesn't defend it's copyright, what is the point in having it? Janette

True, but I was just wondering as you often hear of so many health/beauty products that are taken to task over "false advertising" and wonder why soy makers aren't taken to task over the same thing, if indeed it is false. And we do know the sootless point is false. But I don't think most of those claiming to be sootless are doing it out of spite,I think they are just misinformed as I was in the beginning.

[mystical_angel1219]

Thanks for sharing.

Time out for rest of ya........... :laugh2:

[Tess]

OH DI can you please give the link to the article? I would like to print out flyers for passing customers (especially those who buy into the whole soy is safer thing). I searched the site but nothing came up.

[Vicky_CO]

Please keep this thread on topic.

[BIGCAT]

Where did my post go?

[Di_in_AZ]

It is a report done in Adobe Acrobat at this link (hope it works). The section The first part of the report covers market info regarding candles and where they come from, the dangers of lead wicks and stuff that I know most candlemakers in the US already don't do. The part I am referencing about the air quality impact, is Section 4.

http://www.epa.gov/ORD/NRMRL/Publications/600R-01-001%20Chapter%204.pdf

[Di_in_AZ]

True, but I was just wondering as you often hear of so many health/beauty products that are taken to task over "false advertising" and wonder why soy makers aren't taken to task over the same thing, if indeed it is false. And we do know the sootless point is false. But I don't think most of those claiming to be sootless are doing it out of spite,I think they are just misinformed as I was in the beginning.

When people claim things in advertising, it doesn't necessarily make it true. If that were the case, we would all be able to take one pill to make us slim, another pill to increase our bust size, another one to decrease our arse and guys would be hung like horses No one is suing them because most people acknowledge it just isn't true. They sell to some people who believe them, obviously or they still wouldn't be in business.

To me the soy claims that down paraffin are no different. They try to prey on people by instilling fear. There is more dangerous carcinogens in the air from your heater and your car, don't see people giving those up so easy.

There are tons of websites claiming that aspartame is terrible, yet most diet sodas contain it and hoardes of people drink it. Where are all the lawsuits? Seems to me that if it really did cause all that is claimed, there would be viable lawsuits.

In the same instance that you are asking why don't people sue soy makers over these claims, well where are all the people filing lawsuits for lung cancer for burning a candle? Sure some people have proved that poorly made candles have sooted up their homes, but those people who made those candles deserved to be sued, it they made a candle that did not burn correctly and soot damaged these peoples' homes, the candlemaker should be liable (provided the user can prove it was burned correctly as well).

The bottom line is that outrageous claims are made everyday. Do you have the money to go sue soymakers for their claims? I don't see many who would volunteer to do that and neither are any large candlemakers going to waste their money to do it either. It is a sad fact of marketing.

[stacien]

Can someone find me the article that mentions soy wax tested by the EPA. That whole article I read and it never mentioned Vegetable wax. It only at the most mentioned Paraffin, beeswax and incense. And most of all lead wicks. Just curious because I didn't see or find anything mentioning soy.

[Di_in_AZ]

Try a search on google. I just looked for tests on paraffin because I wanted to know the truth about paraffin. I didn't see mention at the EPA of soy wax.

[Candlewitch]

I couldnt find the white soot part either. LOL. As long as people keep wanting a cleaner burning candle, I will give them soy. Container and votives for sure. I had a customer that worked for one of those fire cleanup companies. He switched to soy too. He figured out where the black was coming from too. I know there are blends that burn clean too. To be fair, since people take what I write and twist it like a pretzel, Colonial,Old Virgina (not-farmgrown) both burn worse then Yankme. I just use them for example. I do not make any stupid claims to my customers either.

[Di_in_AZ]

If you wick a candle properly and the customer burns it properly, there isn't a soot problem period. You are assuming that every paraffin candle burns badly, they don't. I am surprised that being a soymaker Candlewitch that you were not aware that soy candles let off white soot.

The EPA test shows quite clearly that paraffin is a safe wax to burn. I did not come here to show any negatives about soy so I don't exactly understand what your point is. I don't need to scare people into buying my products. I merely showed that the negatives people claim about paraffin are false. Why would I post a soy test?

[sawyer's moon]

I've defintely gotten black soot from soy candles that aren't properly wicked so it's not just paraffin that has black soot!

IMVHO, using the whole soy vs paraffin thing cheapens not only you but your products. C'mon - be a little bit more original than that!

Jen

[Cetacea]

IMVHO' date=' using the whole soy vs paraffin thing cheapens not only you but your products. C'mon - be a little bit more original than that!

Jen[/quote']

Could not have said it better!!!

If you can't sell your candles on their own merits then you shouldn't be selling.

Using negative marketing ploys to boost your own products looses credibility to potential customers IMO.

[sawyer's moon]

If you can't sell your candles on their own merits then you shouldn't be selling.

Exactly!

:highfive:

Jen

[pinetreecandles]

Could not have said it better!!!

If you can't sell your candles on their own merits then you shouldn't be selling.

Using negative marketing ploys to boost your own products looses credibility to potential customers IMO.

Well Said

[boggled]

As a soy candle maker, when asked the difference; soy vs parra, I specify that there are personal preferences. I will always mention the fact that the use of soy supports american farmers. Of course sooting is almost always brought up by the customer. My response is always the same, if its burning it will produce soot. Anything combustable will, but if you trim your wicks etc etc etc. The average candle consumer doesn't read about the testing done. They will take your word for it. Why wouldn't they we are the ones making the candles, we have done our research we know our facts. It is up to us to try to be as informitive, and honest while trying to make money.

Had a customer the other day wanted to know why I make soy candles.

I basically told her it is my preference. I like them better. Of course the above was included. She then wanted to know why not parra. Again I stated it was my preference. I like soy I like the burn. I personally only burn soy but if I were to purchase a parra candle it wouldn't be through the large companies.

Unfortunately, the large companies are what people know.

They have had some bad experiences and every single time I hear from a new customer that they would never burn a parra again, it's because of those companies, not the small mom and pop companies.

[pinetreecandles]

I actually use a 60/40 para -soy blend that is the best mix I have found. I don't like straight para and I can't stand straight soy. I love the mix though. I don't state anywhere that my candles don't leave soot. I do say that most of mine leave no visible soot if burned properly which is true.

I'm making up a fact sheet about para and soy and citing references. Hopefully I can educate some folks that one is not really better than the other. Mostly a matter of choice.