Should Existing Structures Build From Cca-Treated Wood Be Removed? Which Argument Did You Find Most Convincing?

[reeses4life]

Should existing structures build from CCA-treated wood be removed? Which argument did you find most convincing?

[Buenchico]

CCA treatment has been in use for about 80 years, with no recorded incidents of arsenic poisoning to the general public. (The small number of people who've suffered health problems due to CCA have mainly been construction workers). Occasional contact with CCA-treated wood will only lead to very small levels of arsenic (if any) entering the human body and, as the experiences of Victorian times show (when arsenic was widely taken for its supposed health-giving properties), people can build up a tolerance to it.

Further, the practical difficulties of working out which picnic tables and decking (for example) in people's gardens are made out of CCA-treated wood, and then disposing of it all, far outweigh any theoretical benefits from doing so.

[reeses4life]

Thank you so much!!!

[theprof]

Buenchico is absolutely right. There is no evidence that CCA treated timber is harmful to health. The copper (ii) arsenate is not injurious to humans based on the evidence that we have accumulated over many years use of CCA treatment of timber. Soil has the ability to denature the toxicity of the compound when it is leached from timber following many years use. Tests on children using playgrounds where CCA treated timber has been used show no real detectable increase in arsenic in their bodies or in their urine.

While it's as well to remember that countries do vary in the way they regard toxicity of CCA treated timber, the scientific community at present does not consider it toxic.