You asked about PBDEs and indoor air quality and dust. I'm not sure what you're asking me, other than to reiterate the concern I had, which is the fact that there's a legacy problem. What we're finding in evidence from bio-monitoring, but also from evaluations of dust, is that many different products with PBDEs are breaking down very slowly, especially if they're exposed foam like this, and they're ending up in house dust. And that's where the exposure is happening. In terms of being a legacy for a long time into the future, part of the risk management of that is not just cutting it off at the source and allowing very toxic substances to be used in that way, but public awareness about the hazards that exist in, for example, house dust. It's a major focus of the work that I do working with prenatal educators and early learning and child care people, etc., so that people know about indoor hazards and therefore how to avoid them, and the small measure of things they can do.
The concern I still have about PBDEs, after all the announcements in the summer that were reiterated on Friday, is that we're going to ban the mixtures that have already been voluntarily withdrawn. We're not going after the deca-PBDEs, which are increasing in use and for which toxicity information is, in my opinion, almost as compelling and increasingly compelling as more evidence is gathered, in comparison to what we know about the ones that have been withdrawn and that we are taking regulatory action on. So it doesn't go far enough. The regulatory action does not go far enough. Again, it says we're taking a class approach, which is a progressive and important way to go, but then it doesn't. It leaves out the most important one, the deca-PBDEs, the use of which is increasing. So I think that needs to be improved.