Contaminated Air
www.aopis.org
(Aviation Organophoshate Information Site)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contaminated Air
GLOBAL PRESS RELEASE:
Despite 2005 being another year in denial, exposure to 'Contaminated Air' on commercial aircraft is again confirmed as causing long term health effects but airlines and governments fail to act.
Despite 30 years of industry and governmental efforts to bury the truth that some passengers and crews are getting sick following exposure to contaminated air on commercial jet aircraft, the truth continues to come out. The reputable Journal of Occupational Health & Safety in its very recent 'Special Issue' again shows that crews and passengers are suffering long term medical effects. The Journal cover has a title that cannot make the findings any clearer: New findings in aircrew exposed to airborne contaminants: long-term health effects confirmed.'
Despite the mounting evidence provided globally by many union groups such as ITF, AFAP, BALPA, IPA, AFA, CUPE, etc.. and by leading doctors and scientists that contaminated air is a serious health and flight safety issue, nothing is done to protect the travelling public and working crews. Passengers are NOT told that they have been exposed to contaminated air and the governments do nothing to ensure that airlines tell passengers what they are legally entitled to know, notably they have been exposed to neurotoxins such as the organophosphate TCP.
Filtration technology exists to protect passengers and crews at relatively low cost (US$ 10,000) but airlines put their profits ahead of passenger and crew welfare.
Notes to editors:
The passenger cabin and cockpit air becomes contaminated with jet engine oils and hydraulic fluids due to poor engine design and poor maintenance. These oils when heated or pyrolised, produce toxic fumes which are inhaled and absorbed via the skin by passengers and crews when the air is being contaminated. The toxic fumes include the organophosphate TCP; Carbon Monoxide; Benzene, 1,1,1-Trichloroethane; 1,2-Dichloroethane; Formaldehyde; Acetaldehyde; Toluene etc..
The recently published report is available at:
Publisher: CCH Australia Ltd
Fax: +61 1 300 300 224
Special Issue of The Journal of Occupational Health & Safety - Australia & New Zealand
Volume 21 (5)
'New findings in aircrew exposed to airborne contaminants: long-term health effects confirmed.'
For more information:
See www.aopis.org
Email: [email protected]
or contact unions in your country:
In Australia contact AFAP
In the UK contact BALPA, IPA, ITF or TGWU
In the US contact AFA, USALPA
In Canada contact CUPE
In France contact ETF
Additional Reading: New Papers From 2005 Showing That Contaminated Air is Harmful:
Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces
Series: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry
Vol. 4: Air Pollution, Part H
Hocking, Martin B.; Hocking, Diana (Eds.)
2005, XV, 410 p. 29 illus., Hardcover
ISBN: 3-540-25019-0
http://www.springer.com/sgw/cda/fron...9600-0,00.html
or
Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference.
Held at Imperial College, London, 20-21 April 2005
(Conference called for by UK MPs John Smith and Paul Tyler)
ISBN 0-7334-2282-9
E mail UNSW, Sydney: "Chris Winder" <[email protected]>
Despite 2005 being another year in denial, exposure to 'Contaminated Air' on commercial aircraft is again confirmed as causing long term health effects but airlines and governments fail to act.
Despite 30 years of industry and governmental efforts to bury the truth that some passengers and crews are getting sick following exposure to contaminated air on commercial jet aircraft, the truth continues to come out. The reputable Journal of Occupational Health & Safety in its very recent 'Special Issue' again shows that crews and passengers are suffering long term medical effects. The Journal cover has a title that cannot make the findings any clearer: New findings in aircrew exposed to airborne contaminants: long-term health effects confirmed.'
Despite the mounting evidence provided globally by many union groups such as ITF, AFAP, BALPA, IPA, AFA, CUPE, etc.. and by leading doctors and scientists that contaminated air is a serious health and flight safety issue, nothing is done to protect the travelling public and working crews. Passengers are NOT told that they have been exposed to contaminated air and the governments do nothing to ensure that airlines tell passengers what they are legally entitled to know, notably they have been exposed to neurotoxins such as the organophosphate TCP.
Filtration technology exists to protect passengers and crews at relatively low cost (US$ 10,000) but airlines put their profits ahead of passenger and crew welfare.
Notes to editors:
The passenger cabin and cockpit air becomes contaminated with jet engine oils and hydraulic fluids due to poor engine design and poor maintenance. These oils when heated or pyrolised, produce toxic fumes which are inhaled and absorbed via the skin by passengers and crews when the air is being contaminated. The toxic fumes include the organophosphate TCP; Carbon Monoxide; Benzene, 1,1,1-Trichloroethane; 1,2-Dichloroethane; Formaldehyde; Acetaldehyde; Toluene etc..
The recently published report is available at:
Publisher: CCH Australia Ltd
Fax: +61 1 300 300 224
Special Issue of The Journal of Occupational Health & Safety - Australia & New Zealand
Volume 21 (5)
'New findings in aircrew exposed to airborne contaminants: long-term health effects confirmed.'
For more information:
See www.aopis.org
Email: [email protected]
or contact unions in your country:
In Australia contact AFAP
In the UK contact BALPA, IPA, ITF or TGWU
In the US contact AFA, USALPA
In Canada contact CUPE
In France contact ETF
Additional Reading: New Papers From 2005 Showing That Contaminated Air is Harmful:
Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces
Series: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry
Vol. 4: Air Pollution, Part H
Hocking, Martin B.; Hocking, Diana (Eds.)
2005, XV, 410 p. 29 illus., Hardcover
ISBN: 3-540-25019-0
http://www.springer.com/sgw/cda/fron...9600-0,00.html
or
Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference.
Held at Imperial College, London, 20-21 April 2005
(Conference called for by UK MPs John Smith and Paul Tyler)
ISBN 0-7334-2282-9
E mail UNSW, Sydney: "Chris Winder" <[email protected]>
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
The above post is thinly-disguised attempt to encourage you to purchase the "The Journal of Occupational Health & Safety - Australia & New Zealand".
What AOPIS don't tell you is that a subscription to that publication, which you will need in order to obtain the special issue, will cost you AUS$640.00 (A$581.82 Ex. GST).
As such, it would appear to be advertising, which I thought was against PPRuNe rules.
If AOPIS have any credibility at all, they should make the information available to the pilot community, through whatever licence they can negotiate with CCH.
If not, they should cease and desist with their alarmist claptrap.
What AOPIS don't tell you is that a subscription to that publication, which you will need in order to obtain the special issue, will cost you AUS$640.00 (A$581.82 Ex. GST).
As such, it would appear to be advertising, which I thought was against PPRuNe rules.
If AOPIS have any credibility at all, they should make the information available to the pilot community, through whatever licence they can negotiate with CCH.
If not, they should cease and desist with their alarmist claptrap.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
This campaign is even more insidious in the uk. I've recently undertaken some work on behalf of my airline and the findings are astounding.
Of all reports of " fumes" in 757 aircraft, 98% of the reports are UK originating. Of the UK reports on 757's 97% are from two individual pilots, who are active in a union campaign on this issue. A similar story is true on the BAE146, except in this case over 90% of the reports are from ONE INDIVIDUAL
There is little doubt that this is a campaign by a small group and the extent of the problem ( if there is one) is being clouded by these individuals and groups.
It is accepterd that early 757's had an issue with overfilling of engine oil, but that was addressed some time ago.
No-one needs to be told that breathing contaminated air is harmful, we can all take that for granted. What we need to know is the real extent of this issue, something that is being clouded by a few individuals.
Lets get some truth out there, without paying AOPIS A$518.
Of all reports of " fumes" in 757 aircraft, 98% of the reports are UK originating. Of the UK reports on 757's 97% are from two individual pilots, who are active in a union campaign on this issue. A similar story is true on the BAE146, except in this case over 90% of the reports are from ONE INDIVIDUAL
There is little doubt that this is a campaign by a small group and the extent of the problem ( if there is one) is being clouded by these individuals and groups.
It is accepterd that early 757's had an issue with overfilling of engine oil, but that was addressed some time ago.
No-one needs to be told that breathing contaminated air is harmful, we can all take that for granted. What we need to know is the real extent of this issue, something that is being clouded by a few individuals.
Lets get some truth out there, without paying AOPIS A$518.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Absolutely right, and the same goes for the 146. Once the causes were understood, the fixes were effective.
One wonders how an hour on a 146 compares to a week in a smoggy city, when it comes to health risks. Shall we shut London down until smog is eliminated?
No, what this is really all about is a small group of people preparing the way for legal action, trying to gain compensation for whatever they can blame on "fumes".
OSH are notoriously quick on the trigger in the UK, if they believed there was a case to answer, they would have grounded the aircraft and then carried out a protracted investigation.
AOPIS is simply trying to get enough people to agree with them, to justify having a go in the Aussie courts.
One wonders how an hour on a 146 compares to a week in a smoggy city, when it comes to health risks. Shall we shut London down until smog is eliminated?
No, what this is really all about is a small group of people preparing the way for legal action, trying to gain compensation for whatever they can blame on "fumes".
OSH are notoriously quick on the trigger in the UK, if they believed there was a case to answer, they would have grounded the aircraft and then carried out a protracted investigation.
AOPIS is simply trying to get enough people to agree with them, to justify having a go in the Aussie courts.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Darwin
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
jmc-man and MOR seem to be the folk on a denial agenda not AOPIS.
AOPIS are simply quoting a published paper in the CCH publication, their posting also lists two other published books if you took the time to read the complete posting in the 'Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces' and the 'Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference'.
Having read with an open mind the 'Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference' and the CAA paper on Air Quality issued in 2004 which clearly states the CAA did not investigate long term health effects, I will trust the AOPIS view.
As far as the jmc-man statistics go can you please post these online to substantiate your allegations which you will not be able to do. You are simply trying to cover up a problem, we all as crew know exists, but don't want to acknoweldge.
According to my AME, the CAA failed a Thomsonfly B757 Captain's medical in early November due to neurological problems directly resulting from exposure to contaminated air. Can't get a clearer message than that. Was he one of the 2 big reporters you have created jmc-man ?
I have ordered the CCH publication and you can if you look just purchase a single issue but you don't like looking at facts!
AOPIS are simply quoting a published paper in the CCH publication, their posting also lists two other published books if you took the time to read the complete posting in the 'Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces' and the 'Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference'.
Having read with an open mind the 'Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference' and the CAA paper on Air Quality issued in 2004 which clearly states the CAA did not investigate long term health effects, I will trust the AOPIS view.
As far as the jmc-man statistics go can you please post these online to substantiate your allegations which you will not be able to do. You are simply trying to cover up a problem, we all as crew know exists, but don't want to acknoweldge.
According to my AME, the CAA failed a Thomsonfly B757 Captain's medical in early November due to neurological problems directly resulting from exposure to contaminated air. Can't get a clearer message than that. Was he one of the 2 big reporters you have created jmc-man ?
I have ordered the CCH publication and you can if you look just purchase a single issue but you don't like looking at facts!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
I've read them both, and neither are definitive. Balpa are on a mission, if you read their stuff, they are basically taking every ailment known to man and blaming it on cabin air. They have absolutely no evidence that these conditions are primarily caused by contaminated air - a true scattergun approach if ever I saw one. Unless you know the medical history and level of exposure to ANY toxin over the life of the individual, you can't possibly come to the conclusion that these problems are caused solely by pyrolised oil fumes.
Can you substantiate that? If not, it is just hearsay. A rumour. It isn't even close to being a clear message, as you have no idea what the medical history of the captain is, or what he might have been exposed to outside the cockpit. How do you know he didn't live next to a fertilizer factory?
If you are interested in facts, the FACT is that nobody has yet produced any evidence that is sufficiently compelling to cause any government or government agency to act (and they generally love to act at the drop of a hat in these situations).
According to my AME, the CAA failed a Thomsonfly B757 Captain's medical in early November due to neurological problems directly resulting from exposure to contaminated air. Can't get a clearer message than that.
If you are interested in facts, the FACT is that nobody has yet produced any evidence that is sufficiently compelling to cause any government or government agency to act (and they generally love to act at the drop of a hat in these situations).
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Gentlemen,
Can we agree some facts?
1. I think that everybody agrees that if you heat up certain engine oils and then allow people to breath those fumes, it cannot do their health any good and will probably result in abnormal effects? Y/N?
2. Certain people will be affected in different ways - my wife is always getting colds, whereas I never get one. That's the way it is with illness. Y/N?
3. As I have already said some time ago, I experienced these fumes for many years on the 146, particularly on the ground. That awful smell was NOT pure air it was contaminated air. Contaminated with oil fumes. I believe it did long term damage at the time causing fatigue, forgetfulness, headaches and confusion - not things one likes to admit to as an Airline Captain. Unfortunately many of the symptoms are still felt. Y/N?
4. It can also not be in doubt that BAe recognised there was a problem and I believe made some improvements about 5 years ago which have improved things but that also confirms that the fumes from years ago were an issue, did damage, it was recognised and something was done about it. A bit late for those who suffered the fumes for several years. Y/N?
5. Just lately (post BALPA confrence etc.) I have had to deal with certain AME's, GP's and experts in flight safety and was amazed and a little disappointed that none of them had even heard about the contaminated air problem. If these people don't know about it, what chance have we as a group of pilots got of getting the message across? Y/N?
By definition, certain interested parties are never going to admit any liability, obviously. It would just be helpful if certain facts could be established and made known to the wider Aviation community but clearly some people would have difficulty in admitting any of these facts - usually non pilots, which is a bit unhelpful and even dangerous when you consider the jobs they hold.........
Happy (fume free) New Year.
Can we agree some facts?
1. I think that everybody agrees that if you heat up certain engine oils and then allow people to breath those fumes, it cannot do their health any good and will probably result in abnormal effects? Y/N?
2. Certain people will be affected in different ways - my wife is always getting colds, whereas I never get one. That's the way it is with illness. Y/N?
3. As I have already said some time ago, I experienced these fumes for many years on the 146, particularly on the ground. That awful smell was NOT pure air it was contaminated air. Contaminated with oil fumes. I believe it did long term damage at the time causing fatigue, forgetfulness, headaches and confusion - not things one likes to admit to as an Airline Captain. Unfortunately many of the symptoms are still felt. Y/N?
4. It can also not be in doubt that BAe recognised there was a problem and I believe made some improvements about 5 years ago which have improved things but that also confirms that the fumes from years ago were an issue, did damage, it was recognised and something was done about it. A bit late for those who suffered the fumes for several years. Y/N?
5. Just lately (post BALPA confrence etc.) I have had to deal with certain AME's, GP's and experts in flight safety and was amazed and a little disappointed that none of them had even heard about the contaminated air problem. If these people don't know about it, what chance have we as a group of pilots got of getting the message across? Y/N?
By definition, certain interested parties are never going to admit any liability, obviously. It would just be helpful if certain facts could be established and made known to the wider Aviation community but clearly some people would have difficulty in admitting any of these facts - usually non pilots, which is a bit unhelpful and even dangerous when you consider the jobs they hold.........
Happy (fume free) New Year.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
The problem with all that is that you can't pin it on the aircraft so easily.
Nobody is suggesting that inhaling pyrolised (not just hot) oil is good for you. However the real question is how much did you ingest, and what effect it has had.
You say you experienced the standard 146 "smelly socks" first flight smell. So what? The nose is extremely sensitive, with most compounds it will detect them at a few parts per million. More to the point, there are dozens of other smells you may experience during your working day, that could also be harmful - everything from fuel smells to the pyrolised crew meal the #1 just handed you. How do you quantify their effects? Also, you mention experiencing this on the ground - but that is actually the least dangerous phase of you job, as you have other forms of ventilation available to you.
You may believe that exposure to what is basically a smell, has caused the symptoms you describe. How do you know? How can you be sure that you don't have some other problem? Or is it just that you have read the stuff that AOPIS peddles, put two and two together, and come up with a bag of apples? Do you have any evidence at all that you problems come from fumes?
The reason that the medical people don't know much about it, is that nobody has told them. That is because the authorities that regulate medical matters in aviation do not believe that the evidence yet exists of a direct causal link between cabin fumes and the rather large basket of ailments that BALPA are seeking evidence of.
This whole thing reminds me of the furore over cellphones a few years ago. All of a sudden, cellphones were frying our brains. Or not... has anyone heard anything about that recently? Didn't think so. Once the possibility of litigation receded, interest waned.
If you want a risk-free life, take up knitting (with suitably blunt needles).
Nobody is suggesting that inhaling pyrolised (not just hot) oil is good for you. However the real question is how much did you ingest, and what effect it has had.
You say you experienced the standard 146 "smelly socks" first flight smell. So what? The nose is extremely sensitive, with most compounds it will detect them at a few parts per million. More to the point, there are dozens of other smells you may experience during your working day, that could also be harmful - everything from fuel smells to the pyrolised crew meal the #1 just handed you. How do you quantify their effects? Also, you mention experiencing this on the ground - but that is actually the least dangerous phase of you job, as you have other forms of ventilation available to you.
You may believe that exposure to what is basically a smell, has caused the symptoms you describe. How do you know? How can you be sure that you don't have some other problem? Or is it just that you have read the stuff that AOPIS peddles, put two and two together, and come up with a bag of apples? Do you have any evidence at all that you problems come from fumes?
The reason that the medical people don't know much about it, is that nobody has told them. That is because the authorities that regulate medical matters in aviation do not believe that the evidence yet exists of a direct causal link between cabin fumes and the rather large basket of ailments that BALPA are seeking evidence of.
This whole thing reminds me of the furore over cellphones a few years ago. All of a sudden, cellphones were frying our brains. Or not... has anyone heard anything about that recently? Didn't think so. Once the possibility of litigation receded, interest waned.
If you want a risk-free life, take up knitting (with suitably blunt needles).
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
MOR,
I can assure you that if you fly the 146 every day for 5 or 6 days on the run you get a fairly good idea of the same smell every time and what might be responsible! I know that the smell originated from the APU air on the ground mostly and it really is quite difficult to get away from the smell if it's blasting out around you!
Obviously one could be sitting in this gas for 45 minutes before each take off. We did open windows and doors prior to taxiing but you then get cold, so I suppose we tended to just put up with the stink. So we were subjected to repeated doses of the same stink for years until somebody worked out that it might not be a good idea and very wisely, did something about it.
We felt rough after the stink - I don't know how you prove anything conclusively - especially this sort of thing but it seemed like quite a coincidence to me. You just associate a wretched headache and nausea with the awful atmosphere you have just been in.............
I don't think I was the only one who smelt it.
I am sure it would be possible to recreate the exact atmosphere by using the old type of oils and old type of APU, but I won't hold my breath for this to happen as the results would not be convenient to certain parties.
I am sure that if you volunteered to be a guinea pig for the trial, you would make a lot of people very happy.
It's a bit irritating when you can't just accept a few simple facts.
I can assure you that if you fly the 146 every day for 5 or 6 days on the run you get a fairly good idea of the same smell every time and what might be responsible! I know that the smell originated from the APU air on the ground mostly and it really is quite difficult to get away from the smell if it's blasting out around you!
Obviously one could be sitting in this gas for 45 minutes before each take off. We did open windows and doors prior to taxiing but you then get cold, so I suppose we tended to just put up with the stink. So we were subjected to repeated doses of the same stink for years until somebody worked out that it might not be a good idea and very wisely, did something about it.
We felt rough after the stink - I don't know how you prove anything conclusively - especially this sort of thing but it seemed like quite a coincidence to me. You just associate a wretched headache and nausea with the awful atmosphere you have just been in.............
I don't think I was the only one who smelt it.
I am sure it would be possible to recreate the exact atmosphere by using the old type of oils and old type of APU, but I won't hold my breath for this to happen as the results would not be convenient to certain parties.
I am sure that if you volunteered to be a guinea pig for the trial, you would make a lot of people very happy.
It's a bit irritating when you can't just accept a few simple facts.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Orange County
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
jmc-man, how can you possibly know that those figures you quote are accurate unless you work for the CAA? In which case you had better find out the real size of the Iceberg and start addressing the obviously massive under reporting that your figures clearly show.You can start by making all ASR's regarding air contamination into Mandatory Occurence Reports and not letting the operators filter out what they think is not MOR able.
Then and only then will you get an understanding of the gravity of the situation.
Then and only then will you get an understanding of the gravity of the situation.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
I can assure you that if you fly the 146 every day for 5 or 6 days on the run you get a fairly good idea of the same smell every time and what might be responsible!
Your conspiracy theory aside, several attempts HAVE been made to re-create and measure the problem. In the company I worked for, aircraft that had had a fumes incident were grounded and were test-flown by a volunteer crew (with no work done to the aircraft in the interim), who then had their blood checked for any of the toxins in question. The results were negative, nothing was ever detected.
It's a bit irritating when you can't just accept a few simple facts.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Darwin
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Dear MOR
Whats is very important in all these issues whether they be GWS, Smoking, Pesticide exposures etc.. is to look at the data very carefully without any agenda.
In your case as a former Flybe 146 Fleet Manager you have a vested interest so I would urge you to let the independeant experts prevail and help them to stop exposing thousands of passengers to contaminated air.
As you know very well airlines are not telling the public they have been exposed to contaminated air. How many are getting sick ? How would their doctors know to treat them when they present with neurological and lung injuries if they themselves are not being told. Is that not their right to be informed ?
BALPA have no agenda apart from to protect the health of their members and to reduce the flight safety impact that contaminated air is having.
Take the time to actually read the data.
Whats is very important in all these issues whether they be GWS, Smoking, Pesticide exposures etc.. is to look at the data very carefully without any agenda.
In your case as a former Flybe 146 Fleet Manager you have a vested interest so I would urge you to let the independeant experts prevail and help them to stop exposing thousands of passengers to contaminated air.
As you know very well airlines are not telling the public they have been exposed to contaminated air. How many are getting sick ? How would their doctors know to treat them when they present with neurological and lung injuries if they themselves are not being told. Is that not their right to be informed ?
BALPA have no agenda apart from to protect the health of their members and to reduce the flight safety impact that contaminated air is having.
Take the time to actually read the data.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Well, first of all, I was never a flybe fleet manager. Secondly, I don't fly the 146 now, nor do I work for an airline that does. So in what way could I possibly have a vested interest? In fact, the reverse is true, it would be in my interest to jump on the bandwagon and try and blame my sore knee on cabin fumes, get some compo, and retire early!
No. They aren't telling them of the dangers of a sudden decompression or a structural failure either. But in any case, your premise is false - they haven't necessarily been exposed to contaminated air, in fact the chances are very slim that they have. Even if they had, an hour or so in an aircraft is highly unlikely to have any detrimental effect.
Certainly. In which case, they should be informed of the dangers of breathing car exhaust fumes and other industrial pollutants, the dangers of fumes given off by car interior plastic trim, the toxicological effects of too much tea, and the possible effects of being bitten by a mosquito. Everything on the planet is toxic if you take things to extremes.
Oh, grow up will you. BALPA are a UNION, and as such will take any opportunity to gain leverage with the airlines. They are certainly interested in the things you mention, but they also understand the value of the issue as a bargaining chip - particularly with BA.
All the data so far is INCONCLUSIVE, and I'm certainly not paying hundreds of dollars to look at this latest article. When it is in the public domain (as it would be if there were serious health implications), I'll read it, but I am pretty certain I will not be surprised.
As you know very well airlines are not telling the public they have been exposed to contaminated air
Is that not their right to be informed ?
BALPA have no agenda apart from to protect the health of their members and to reduce the flight safety impact that contaminated air is having.
Take the time to actually read the data.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Well, first of all, I was never a flybe fleet manager. Secondly, I don't fly the 146 now, nor do I work for an airline that does.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Lol well think whatever you want. Isn't anonymity great? You have absolutely no idea who I am, do you? Nice fishing exercise though.
The sentence is true in every respect, by the way.
Think about it...
The sentence is true in every respect, by the way.
Think about it...
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
MOR - Of course I know who you are.....and have done for quite a long time.
We haven't been able to work out who Flying Fiona is yet though.
We haven't been able to work out who Flying Fiona is yet though.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
MOR - Of course I know who you are.....and have done for quite a long time.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Penzance, Penzance.
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
You are letting yourself down here MOR, can't trust a word you've said now.
Followed by
Touche!
I've read them both, and neither are definitive
All the data so far is INCONCLUSIVE, and I'm certainly not paying hundreds of dollars to look at this latest article.
Touche!
Last edited by Torycanyon; 5th Jan 2006 at 17:28.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
Lol ok then, I was of course referring to "Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces" and "Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference".
Of course you can trust me , well more so than the Aussie ambulance chasers!
Of course you can trust me
, well more so than the Aussie ambulance chasers!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 52N 20E
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Medical effects of contaminated air CONFIRMED
MOR, if you are going to keep telling Porkies then you need a good memory.
If my Memory serves me well, then I recall not that long ago you were posting on the Formally British European, then Latterly the FlyBe, Specific Airline Site.
Not doing too well here are we MOR 
If my Memory serves me well, then I recall not that long ago you were posting on the Formally British European, then Latterly the FlyBe, Specific Airline Site.
Well, first of all, I was never a flybe fleet manager. Secondly, I don't fly the 146 now, nor do I work for an airline that does.