Aircraft Fumes and Cancer

[Andy Mayes]

Does anyone recall the study conducted at (IIRC) Berlin Airport after several ground staff discovered in close succession they had cancer (the same type) which was believed to have been linked to fumes from APUs?

I'm pretty sure I read a thread on PPRuNe with a link to the study a few years ago but after an extensive search and google I can't find anything, if anyone can help it would be much appreciated.

[beany]

Can you remember which chemical (if any) was identified as the potential carcinogen?

[Andy Mayes]

I can remember very few details, I only glanced at the report as I didn't feel it would ever affect me or my colleagues, 3 friends down in the last 3 years and I wish I had kept a copy or a link to the report in case there was a link.

[beany]

You should get the Occ Doc on the case. If a company have a group of employees who have a disease potentially caused by a work related exposure; this can (and should, in my opinion) be investigated. Of course, this may be relevant not only to the friends you speak of, but also to current employees.

[Whitebeaches]

I FOUND THIS STUDY ONLINE.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...57316858,d.eWU

[homonculus]

I am not an expert on pollution at airports but have spent considerable time on gaseous pollutants in hospitals

The minimum safe levels are not based on evidence of risk. Most started by being plucked from the air, but politicians who are not responsible for the cost of compliance have reduced maximum permitted levels with little scientific basis

Proving or demonstrating cause and effect between pollutants and cancer is even more problematical. Cancer clusters are common and statistically do not demonstrate causation. We spent seven years looking at the relation between anaesthetic waste gases and abortion in nurses and despite the thousands of anaesthetics, hundreds of hospitals and many nurses proved nothing.

So I very much doubt you will demonstrate several people got cancer in one location due to an environmental pollutant. There may be claims to this effect, but as to proof.......

That is not to say that these contaminants may not put people at risk of various medical illnesses.

Interested in any other views

[gingernut]

It's difficult to differentiate between

1. evidence of effect
2. no evidence of effect
3. evidence of no effect

with so many variables involved, and relative small numbers.

Public Health and Epidemiologists are the bods to ask.

[Andy Mayes]

Thanks for the replies.

Thank you to Whitebeaches for that link, although it isn't the study I was looking for it is definitely very interesting reading.