Office Printers May Pose Health Risks 227
drewmoney writes "The BBC reports on new findings which may have implications for the way offices are laid out. According to an Australian study, around a third of modern printer models release 'potentially dangerous levels of toner into the air' as they are completing a job. 'Almost one-third were found to emit ultra-tiny particles of toner-like material, so small that they can infiltrate the lungs and cause a range of health problems from respiratory irritation to more chronic illnesses. Conducted in an open-plan office, the test revealed that particle levels increased five-fold during working hours, a rise blamed on printer use. '"
Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
This study says nothing that isn't trivially obvious. Does airborne toner represent a particular health threat above and beyond the whole "breathing particles into your lungs" thing, or is this just another "ZOMG! Stuff in the air!" study with no actual facts to back it up. Doubly annoying for them to compare it to smoking, because the least problem with smoking is the particulates.
Re:Why do people still print? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Paper shredders do this too (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No worries - they still have a perfect scapegoa (Score:5, Insightful)
No, we hate people who participate in it because of their unbelievably rude practice of subjecting everybody else to their filthy reeking emissions. Stale smoke smells like fucking shit.
Since so few smokers through the years have taken it upon themselves to do the civilized thing and ensure that nobody around them has to experience their vile backwashed fumes, the victims are banding together to help the smokers learn what should have been common courtesy.
Re:we've solved this problem (Score:5, Insightful)
They are absolutly discusting...
It's disgusting, and this isn't limited to printers. Keyboards, cases, anything that touches smoke is going to get brown. Well, "dark-beige", if you want. I'm guilty myself for smoking.
Doctors realised a long time ago that smoke was bad for you. I've seen quotes of over 100 years old saying that "smoke was vile". Anyway, you also have to realise that smoking became way more common with the introduction of the cigarette that was made to be smoked anytime anyplace. A hundred years ago, the man came home and smoke a pipe and only one because tobacco was hugely expensive and a big luxury. Cigars were the same: you took time to enjoy them. Cigarettes changed that all. So the amount consumed was way less than it was not, making the health impact much less.
I don't like cigarettes at all, as you might have understood by now. Yet, I love my cigars.
Re:Why do people still print? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do I still print?
Because when I have 3 or more documents I'm reading to review etc, it's more convenient to be able to
a) flick between the pages of different documents
b) underline/highlight/ make notes in the margins
c) carry them with me/ dump them on a couch/chair while reading.
d) I often need the computer screen to write a review document.
My PC screen's resolution isn't up to the job of having multiple documents open side-by-side (and the laptop's is even worse). Furthermore,the interface to Acrobat/Word/anything for that matter, is pathetically slow. A mouse and keyboard are no substitute for human hands on paper combined with a simple pen.
Maybe when we have desks that are touch sensitive LCDs with 10k*10k resolution, things may change.
Re:Good try, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's see... because, on 9/11 alone, more people died prematurely of cancer than of terrorism. Office pollution is the most dangerous thing around, but it is something that can be easily corrected (of course, if walking 5m to get a printout is a problem to you, odds are you already have a short life expectancy).
"Why don't we just throw up our hands and walk around with oxygen tanks and masks?"
Because, 1- in excess, O2 is toxic and 2- large scale bottled O2 production is rather expensive and polluting (the power requirement alone is huge).
Re:No worries - they still have a perfect scapegoa (Score:3, Insightful)
*** HOW ABOUT? ***
No, we hate people who participate in it because of their unbelievably rude practice of subjecting everybody else to their filthy reeking emissions. Car exhaust smells like fucking shit.
Since so few drivers through the years have taken it upon themselves to do the civilized thing and ensure that nobody around them has to experience their vile backwashed fumes, the victims are banding together to help the drivers learn what should have been common courtesy.
*** OR ***
No, we hate people who participate in it because of their unbelievably rude practice of subjecting everybody else to their filthy reeking emissions. The average bean fart smells like fucking shit.
Since so few bean eaters through the years have taken it upon themselves to do the civilized thing and ensure that nobody around them has to experience their vile backwashed fumes, the victims are banding together to help the bean eaters learn what should have been common courtesy.
*** OR EVEN ***
No, we hate people who participate in it because of their unbelievably rude practice of subjecting everybody else to their filthy reeking emissions. Shit smells like fucking shit.
Since so few defecators through the years have taken it upon themselves to do the civilized thing and ensure that nobody around them has to experience their vile backwashed fumes, the victims are banding together to help the defedators learn what should have been common courtesy.
*** DISCLAIMER: I'm a reformed tobacco smoker. Used to smoke 2 packs a day for about 10 years. Quit cold turkey. It wasn't the idea of 5 fewer years in my life, but 5 years of slow gurgling death that convinced me.
Re:No worries - they still have a perfect scapegoa (Score:1, Insightful)
Not anymore it doesn't. We made drivers pay for expensive emissions control systems to clean up the stink.
Most people who fart do have the common courtesy to leave, or at least apologize if it was involuntary. Some hide their transgressions in anonymity, but smokers can't really get away with that.
That's why we have dedicated bathrooms, usually with exhaust fans. Smokers generally couldn't be bothered to even do that.
FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
"ultra-tiny particles of toner-like material"
I don't know which is more obnoxious - the non-measurement-measument (ultra-tiny is not a size) or the mis-statement of hazards. The material is either toner or it isn't. If the material is toner, say it is toner. If the material isn't toner, tell me waht it is. There is no "toner like material" in a toner-based printer other than the toner itself.
Re:Paper shredders do this too (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because one scare story got through does not mean the reputation of the whole BBC is ruined, it just means that sometimes shit happens.
Re:No worries - they still have a perfect scapegoa (Score:3, Insightful)
No - but I do find it funny that no matter what story about air quality comes out, it invariably gets compared to the same thing - smoking.
In spite of this, we have industry belching out (in spite of progress) far more particulates and pollutants, and the average daily freeway load of cars pouring out far more in the way of toxic gases.
It's a proportional argument, IMHO.
FUD, indeed. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd like to further submit that such developer product quite plainly consists of "ultra-tiny particles of toner-like material."
FWIW, HTH, HAND, etc.