Readers of this newspaper have probably seen the advertisement. It’s the one with a life-size red “Pull In Case Of Fire” alarm on a faded yellow background, accompanied by the phrase “Legislation to ban flame retardants is full of holes – and political hypocrisy.”

The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum paid for the ad. The organization advocates for manufacturers of deca, an ubiquitous chemical flame retardant present in electrical appliances, mattresses, furniture and automobile parts, etc., since the 1970s.

Banning deca from Maine is the subject of LD 1658, sponsored by Rep. Hannah Pingree, D-North Haven, and supported by a litany of groups, including nearly every Maine-based environmental and health advocacy organization, firefighters, and the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Deca has been proven to cause neurological damage in animals, and proponents of the deca ban say human children are vulnerable to deca contamination through long-term exposure inside homes.

Maine is following Washington state, and many others, in moving to ban deca. Washington lawmakers approved a deca ban on April 3, and is expected to earn swift enactment from Gov. Chris Gregoire.

Any chemical that impacts the health of children and wildlife deserves scrutiny, and banishment, but summarily sending deca onto the list of prohibited substances isn’t an easy task. Deca intends to save lives as a flame retardant and deserves serious consideration for preservation, before being thrust into exile.

Improving Mainers health is always right, but prohibiting a product intended to save lives still makes us uneasy.

The deca lobby, for example, makes the good point that Maine’s proposed ban would still allow deca in vehicles, industrial uses, and power transmission lines. If it’s so bad, they argue, why not ban it entirely?

And environmentalists say children are exposed to deca through simply eating and breathing, while adults can find deca daily, each time they use a computer, television, washing machine, hair dryer, television remote control, microwave, toasters, coffee maker or cellular phone. It’s literally everywhere.

Then there’s the philosophical question of whether banning a life-saving product is more, or less, worthwhile than potentially improving public health. Deca raises the melting point for products, like plastics, to reduce the risk of fire.

Deca’s chemical partners in the flame-retardant trinity, penta and octa, are already banned. Arguments for now prohibiting deca are strong, as the advent of other, less harmful, chemical flame retardants have reduced its necessity.

And the unity displayed by the advocacy groups, health agencies and firefighters makes us believe a phased ban of deca can be right for Maine, and we urge the Legislature to pass LD 1658.