Office Printer As Dangerous As Cigarettes

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Australian scientist say that air quality tests have shown that the printer in your office could pose as much danger as taking a drag on a cigarette. Whoa.

An investigation of dozens of laser printers revealed that almost 30 per cent emit potentially dangerous levels of particles into the air. These ultra-fine particles were capable of infiltrating the lungs and causing lasting damage on the scale of inhaled cigarette smoke, said researcher Professor Lidia Morawska of the Queensland University of Technology.
Click to expand...
 
Im glad I got rid of mine OKI C5200. Even if i printed over 3000 pages on it.

But dang, It's the danger of smoking without the cigarette. :eek:
 
o_O, I've got a Okidata 5200n sitting right next to me that I print off all day at work... where is the list?

The university's International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health tested 62 machines and found that 17 were "high particle emitters".
Click to expand...
 
MasterShredder said:
Shouldn't we all just accept that 90% of the things we use daily are probably carcinogens?
Click to expand...

That's true, but most of the products aren't carcinogens if you just sit next to them. For most products, you have to eat them, or touch them and lick your fingers without washing your hands.
 
Ummm...

So if I huff ink fumes all day I'll hurt my lungs? Really? Awesome research. Here's a thought: don't run a tube from the printer into your mouth and suck it in and you won't have to worry about it.
 
"Governments regulate emission levels from outdoor devices such as vehicles, power stations and factories, so why not for printers?"
Click to expand...

Um, because then you're opening a door to a ludicrous amount of legislation. There's no way the government has the time/money/manpower to go around testing every single damn printer that gets invented, never mind all the OTHER things that people suddenly think could harm them.

Of course, since I work about 5 feet away from a HP print station, I'll get in on the class action if it comes up. I'm not too proud to take settlement money. :eek: ;)
 
LeTUOtter said:
Of course, since I work about 5 feet away from a HP print station, I'll get in on the class action if it comes up. I'm not too proud to take settlement money. :eek: ;)
Click to expand...

Only people that make out on those Class Action Settlements are the lawyers.
you will probably just be given a free surgical mask to wear while you are at work. lol
 
Maybe if they stop sniffing toner, they'll feel better.

Exactly how much do you have to inhale? One Cigarette won't kill you, the 3,000th might.
 
I'm sure with enough research they'll find that one cig per day or exposure to one laser printer for a period of 1 hour per day actually opens the tubes in your lungs, providing more volume.

One glass of wine per day is supposed to make you near immortal I hear.
 
I only have one little issue with the way this story is phrased; it leads one to believe that the scientists are suggesting that these printers are actually as dangerous as cigarettes, whereas in fact they simply say that in certain respects they are as harmful.

There is a significant distinction between the health risks of laser printers and cigarettes (for example, there is no evidence of chemical addiction to toner dust...).
 
No wonder my desk at work is only a few feet a way from a hp 4200 laser printer. on a few occasionsI breathe in sharp stuff and it instantly made my trough itich and have uncontrollable coughs. I thought it was a vent or something or my computer spewing stuff at me but moved the fan of the computer another direction.
 
Vryce said:
Ummm...

So if I huff ink fumes all day I'll hurt my lungs? Really? Awesome research. Here's a thought: don't run a tube from the printer into your mouth and suck it in and you won't have to worry about it.
Click to expand...

Haha, I agree.

Alienraptor said:
I only have one little issue with the way this story is phrased; it leads one to believe that the scientists are suggesting that these printers are actually as dangerous as cigarettes, whereas in fact they simply say that in certain respects they are as harmful.

There is a significant distinction between the health risks of laser printers and cigarettes (for example, there is no evidence of chemical addiction to toner dust...).
Click to expand...

Yeah, they worded it to either make some sort of "impact" or to have some sort of agenda pushed.
 
Any of the old timers here will remember the days of Laser Printer Corona Wires and rooms filled with the smell of Ozone from the printers.

Now that was bad stuff...

They finally got rid of the wires and changed to transfer rollers starting with the LaserJet 4 era printers thank goodness.

They still emit some ozone I believe, but not anything like they used to. Hell, they used to have ozone filters on those things! And they almost never got changed.
 
Yeah, ive got my OkiData c6100 spewin out pages and pages right now..
Ill blame my lung cancer on them so that my fellow smokers might live a little longer being less harassed by the non smokers..
 
i know at my school all the teachers are all upset because the toners in teh lazer printer apparently 'cause lung cancer' and now all the sports equipment is gonna be replaces with new printers :(
 
I'm glad I know this cause from now on I'm printing to the machine out in the hall and not the one in my office. There's a long list of things in life that can easily do you in, just enjoy each day you have and be good to your friends & family..
 
The article states that its like taking a drag from a cigarette but they don't qualify that statement at all. Is it like taking a drag from a cig with every print? Is it like taking a drag from a cig once an hour, day, month, year, etc. This sounds like one of those fox news investigative reports were "What you don't know about your toilette could kill your baby!"
 
I hate this kind of junk 'science' reporting. Please, I get more infiltrants into my lungs from sitting in traffic for the better part of an hour to get to work than I do from hanging around my laser printer at work. This is the kind of study that is designed to do one thing? Lean on laser printer manufacturers because of a personal belief by researchers conducting these types of research to affect some sort of change by the manufacturers to change their manufacturing ways to a more 'healthy' and 'green' way to interact with users. The only sign of objectivity was the fact that these Australian 'scientists' didn't name which laser printer exhibited more particulation than other ones.

What makes it worse is the abject complicity of the media, in this case the Courier-Mail websites headline and subsequent summary about this article, in the way it proliferates this nonsense. Have a look:

<headline><b>Office printer as dangerous as cigarettes</b></headline>

<first paragraph of story>THE office printer <b>could</b> pose as much danger to our lungs as a drag on a <b>cigarette</b>, according to air quality tests by Australian scientists</first paragraph of story>

The headline says cigarettes, the first paragraph says cigarette. Plural then to singular. This is terrible reporting from an even worse junk science report. Don't fall pray to this kind of stupidity.
 
For those interested, I downloaded the pdf using my university's subscription. The majority of printers tested were HP and RICOH with a small sampling from other brands like Toshiba, Canon and Mita. Based on their ratio of particle concentration peak value to background value, printers were placed into 4 categories: non emitters (ratios < 1), low level emitters (ratios <1.1 - 5), middle level emitters (ratio < 5.1 - 10) and high level emitters (ratio >10).

I won't go through all the printers, but among the non emitters there are printers like the Laserjet 4 plus, 2200DN, 5, 5N, 4050N. The high level emitters include a Toshiba Studio 450, another Laserjet 5, a laserjet 2420dn and a 8000DN.

Only had a chance to skim through the article, but it seems most of it is devoted towards their study design and analysis. They do mention that their findings are similar to the findings of other studies and the only mention cigarettes in terms of finding that the high printer particle number emission rate was close to the median value of particle emission rate for activities such as cigarette smoking in residential houses.

I'll upload the pdf to rapidshare this afternoon for those interested.
 
Bulwark said:
For those interested, I downloaded the pdf using my university's subscription. The majority of printers tested were HP and RICOH with a small sampling from other brands like Toshiba, Canon and Mita. Based on their ratio of particle concentration peak value to background value, printers were placed into 4 categories: non emitters (ratios < 1), low level emitters (ratios <1.1 - 5), middle level emitters (ratio < 5.1 - 10) and high level emitters (ratio >10).

I won't go through all the printers, but among the non emitters there are printers like the Laserjet 4 plus, 2200DN, 5, 5N, 4050N. The high level emitters include a Toshiba Studio 450, another Laserjet 5, a laserjet 2420dn and a 8000DN.

Only had a chance to skim through the article, but it seems most of it is devoted towards their study design and analysis. They do mention that their findings are similar to the findings of other studies and the only mention cigarettes in terms of finding that the high printer particle number emission rate was close to the median value of particle emission rate for activities such as cigarette smoking in residential houses.

I'll upload the pdf to rapidshare this afternoon for those interested.
Click to expand...

Please do, I'm rather interested to see the conclusion and how they measured the whole puff of cigarettes.
 
So...

Laser printer emissions are as dirty as cigarette smoke!
Fast-food ice is as dirty as toilet water!
Eating margarine is like eating plastic!

I think this type of research is a good thing; it helps correct bad characteristics of products. But let's ditch the exaggerated analogies; a simple "you should keep printers in well-ventilated rooms to decrease your risk of lung problems" would be nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top