Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Aerotoxic in the news

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Aerotoxic in the news

Old 8th Jun 2015, 12:31
  #701 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
Cosmic radiation is a known risk that airlines can do little to protect against. Whereas the air cabin can be monitored and filters fitted to lower the toxicity levels. To say just leave and get another job is absurd, especially to pilots who have spent thousands to train for their profession.

It us up to the airlines and aircraft manufactures to provide safer levels of cabin air to prevent future illness. It is basic health and safety at work and human rights that is being ignored.
Pacific Blue is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 12:48
  #702 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
The same committee only tested 8 of a possible 80 chemical compounds. They never managed to capture data from an actual 'Fume Event'. Also there is no safe level limit to TCP exposure, meaning any level can be harmful to health.

Last edited by Pacific Blue; 8th Jun 2015 at 14:30.
Pacific Blue is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 12:59
  #703 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Luton
Posts: 387
the lawyers need something significant to top up their coffers now that the legal system largely prohibits them form raking in 150% plus of what their clients get in compensation...
clipstone1 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 13:03
  #704 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
The same committee only tested 8 of a possible 80 chemical compounds.
Only 80 possible chemical compounds? Come on, you can do better than that! There must be THOUSANDS of "possible chemical compounds." But they tested for the 8 toxic organophosphates that the zealots are claiming are responsible for the effects caused by low-level but long-term exposure. The committee totally debunked that claim.

Also there is no safe level limit to TCP exposure, meaning any level can be harmful to health.
The experts (all over the world) disagree. But of course they're also part of the conspiracy.

And BTW, the committee noted in their report: "The levels [of harmful chemicals in planes] were as low or even lower than those in the home or the workplace." In other words, the airlines are providing a BETTER environment than the typical home or workplace. So explain again why you folks are suing the airlines?
KenV is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 14:11
  #705 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
nocebo effect

Hmmmm. From the article:


In 2013, an independent group of scientists, the Committee on Toxicity, looked at the evidence of long-term health effects for the government.
It could not establish a link between contaminated cabin air and ill health.
"The levels [of harmful chemicals in planes] were as low or even lower than those in the home or the workplace," said Prof Alan Boobis, current chairman of the committee.
"We can't be sure what the levels are in fume events, which are very rare, but we do have some information which would indicate that even in those circumstances levels are probably below those which would affect health in humans.

The committee believes one explanation could be the so-called "nocebo" effect, a psychological condition where exposure to a harmless substance can lead to nausea, fatigue and other medical symptoms.

Of course the zealots claim that this committee is part of the "vast conspiracy" colluding to "cover up" the "mass murder" going on in the skies of every nation on the planet.
KenV is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 14:30
  #706 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
So can you explain why a UK coroner has confirmed the death of air crew members is due to TCP organophosphate exposure. Ken V we have been here before going round in circles and nothing you can post will change my view and vice versa.
Pacific Blue is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 14:31
  #707 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
The same committee only tested 8 of a possible 80 chemical compounds. They never managed to capture data from an actual 'Fume Event'. Also there is no safe level limit to TCP exposure, meaning any level can be harmful to health.
Pacific Blue is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 15:02
  #708 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 306
Also there is no safe level limit to TCP exposure...
Apart from, for example, these ones (required about 5 seconds of googling).
...meaning any level can be harmful to health.
Or meaning that they are not in any way harmful to health.
Nemrytter is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 16:02
  #709 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
Try telling that to the coroner who confirmed the cause of death of affected crew members was due to induced organophosphate poisoning.
Pacific Blue is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 16:05
  #710 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
Try telling that to the coroner who confirmed the cause of death of affected crew members was due to induced organophosphate poisoning.
And where in that report did the coroner state or imply that ANY level of exposure is toxic? Nowhere you say? Hmmmmm.
KenV is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 16:11
  #711 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 51
Posts: 548
every job has its own risk.
if not happy they should leave aviation.
As long as you fly, you need to accept toxic air and cosmic radiation. That's life.
Coal miners need to accept coal dust, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Boiler makers need to accept asbestos, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Sheep farmers need to accept organophosphates, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Electricians need to accept electricution, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Sailors need to accept drowning, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.

Shall we go on...........?
silverstrata is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 16:27
  #712 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,333
Moving to Jet Blast in 3, 2, 1.....
tdracer is online now  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 17:04
  #713 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
So can you explain why a UK coroner has confirmed the death of air crew members is due to TCP organophosphate exposure.
Two comments:

1. Both his methods and his conclusions are highly suspect.

2. The coroner's report provided ZERO evidence that the TCP came from an airplane environment. As was noted in the article YOU cited, the home and office environment is often WORSE than the airplane environment in that regard.

Ken V we have been here before going round in circles and nothing you can post will change my view and vice versa.
Indeed. You are clearly beyond hope. But it's not your view I'm addressing. Its the view others may get from your misguided and misleading zealotry. My purpose is to not leave you zealots free reign to present a very narrow, stilted, misleading, and often downright false view and
1. provide the reader with the other side of this controversy
2. fill in details you zealots intentionally leave out
3. correct the falsehoods you zealots often present as fact.
KenV is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 17:14
  #714 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asia
Posts: 285
Coal miners need to accept coal dust, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Boiler makers need to accept asbestos, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Sheep farmers need to accept organophosphates, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Electricians need to accept electricution, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.
Sailors need to accept drowning, that's life. If not happy, they should leave their jobs.

Shall we go on...........?
that's my point !
others jobs are more dangerous, and people stay and do not complain.
I do personnally know electricians, plumbers...
Greenlights is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 17:24
  #715 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,081
Regardless of the profession the participants have an obligation to make it as safe as we can.

So where's the beef in this profession? If you don't have a viable solution then let's move on from the whinging.

Why is it that we hear the most from those who don't have real solutions? Are they just trolls looking to publicize their name on message boards?
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 17:50
  #716 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
So where's the beef in this profession? If you don't have a viable solution then let's move on from the whinging.
I (and many others, including numerous government regulators and public and private research groups over many years) have strong doubts a problem actually exists, much less a solution to a non existent problem.
KenV is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 19:34
  #717 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 51
Posts: 548
that's my point !
others jobs are more dangerous, and people stay and do not complain.
I do personnally know electricians, plumbers...
That is the dumbest point ever.

Coal mines spend hundreds of millions mitigating coal dust and compensating miners; asbestos has been outlawed; organophosphate sheep-dips have been banned; sailors are given double-hulled ships, life-rafts and life jackets; electricians are given test equipment, earth-straps and instant circuit breakers.

And to protect flight crew against organophosphates in engine oils, flight crews are given ..... errr ..... excuses.
silverstrata is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 19:46
  #718 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
And to protect flight crew against organophosphates in engine oils, flight crews are given ..... errr ..... excuses.

Absolutely false
. There are a HUGE number of design features that preclude engine oil from entering the cabin. Indeed the cited article shows that the environment in airplanes is BETTER than the environment in the typical office or home. How many coal mines, asbestos mines, sheep farms, ships, electrical plants, etc etc can make that claim?
KenV is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 19:59
  #719 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,510
every job has its own risk.
if not happy they should leave aviation.
As long as you fly, you need to accept toxic air and cosmic radiation. That's life.


In 50's & 60's racing drivers were dying with regularity. Sir jackie Stewart was so disturbed, frustrated, traumatised, scared and fed up going to funerals of his friends that he started a massive safety campaign for the cars and race tracks. He, and others, were ridiculed as it was going to be so expensive for the people who made loads of money on the backs of the risk takers. The sport was a risk; take it or leave it. The drivers got on board, followed a leader, joined forces and created change. Look at today; consider what our - spectator's - attitude is today. we accept gravel run off areas; we are amazed at the rare crashes that cause so little injury; we marvel at the risks and can not think of burning exploding race cars. It took 20 years of united determination; but it came from a few people's solid refusal to accept the status quo. They changed the world for the better; and who would deny they were absolutely correct? Who would go back to the bad old days?

Remember the campaign about DVT? How it was ridiculed and then accepted as fact. Trouble was it only addressed the problems for pax and not for pilots. We were more at risk, but who cared?
I've seen cosmic radiation joint reports/studies commissioned by the German & Italian pilot unions. It was very disturbing. Nothing was done about it; it sent to sleep and disappeared. Considering both unions are very active and not shy in protecting their members welfare I am curious why their concerns did not continue. The fear of the authorities was that they could not acknowledge the problem because they did to have a cost affective solution. Were the unions equally convinced or bought off? I've no idea.

Similar has happened in other industries. A few stalwarts to unsettle the share holders and status quo. In the 21st century we are NOT in the old world of mill owners, mine owners and land barons. This is not the diamond mining rat race of Africa i 1900's colonial times.
What is missing in our world? Leadership and enlightened fearless thinking. Too often on here we read people are fearful of their jobs so they keep their mouths shut. People ask about unions. There is ECA & AALPA. Why do they not have a united front to storm the ramparts of the establishment and protect the industry?
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2015, 20:35
  #720 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
I never agreed with or cited any article that said TCP levels were worse in an office or home environment. There are no offices im aware of where it's workers are presenting with multiple neurological symptoms? Can you name any? If so where is the source in the office/home environment of neurotoxins.

My purpose on here is to create awareness of the very REAL issue that Aerotoxic
Syndrome is to the industry and to expose the lengths that the naysayers and industry chiefs will go to in order to keep this brushed under the carpet.
Pacific Blue is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.