Anyway, this sort of stuff has been under review in Europe since the late 90s so it's not a "new consumer scare". The EU passed a temporary ban on certain plastic additives there just before 2000 and have made it a permanent ban in 2005. Old news link-> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20050706/ai_...
For example, see their ban on GM foods.
As for resources, perhaps you can find a peer reviewed study in one of these sites.
This site has pro-phthalate information -> http://www.phthalates.org/
This site has anti-phthalate information under the Chapter 3 section-> http://centerforinvestigativereporting.org/articles/exposeds...
Based on the definition on Wikipedia, I'm not sure my statement qualifies as Bulverism. The definition says that I assume your statement is wrong. What I did was state that if a certain condition exists, you might have a different opinion, which is to say that I assume your current statement is correct. If I misunderstood the meaning of Bulverism, please let me know.
"That's because you don't have children"
You haven't actually proven me wrong in any sense, you've just presented an alternate reality where I would be wrong, which you've framed as an argument against what I initially said. This assumes I am wrong, otherwise you would have agreed with me because there's no logic in presenting a rebuttal to an argument based on nonexistent data (hence the "logical fallacy" part).
The phrase "If you had children..." is always either a case of Bulverism or simple platitude; irrelevant either way. And given the number of times I've heard it, we should probably all be glad I don't have children ;)
That's why I don't really feel that my statement fits the definition of Bulverism. I had no intention of proving you wrong, nor did I assume you were wrong. After all, who knows how you felt about the subject better than you? Because of that, there was really no point in agreeing with you, unless I thought you were lying, and since I don't know you, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. =)
Doing further research, I found the following statement on Bulverism: "The Bulverist’s thought is that if a person’s convictions can be fully explained as a result of non-rational factors then we need not bother about those convictions." Now I consider both the childless and child-laden conclusions to be very rational, though you're probably right in that it's a platitude, I don't hang out with child-laden people often enough. =)
I could watch the video and track the references on my own. However, doing so for every new consumer scare would be a full-time job.
By the way, I'm still happily using a cell phone and brain tumor free. I'm hoping to live a long life if avian influenza doesn't get me. Long enough to see the end of my species by catastrophic global warming, which is unstoppable if we don't act drastically and soon, according to some folks with fancy degrees. I figure I am pretty lucky - I got vaccinated as a child but managed to avoid autism - so maybe I'll even get to be the last person left. I am so hardy, I have even been exposed to second-hand smoke and managed to survive. So yeah, I'll probably make it.
Anything you guys want me to do when I'm the last man on the planet?