[SATLUG] Laser printers can pollute more than tobacco smoke

[Charles Mims]

I find nothing about any specific health problems associated with toner
particles.  At this point it seems
most that can be said is, 'Laser printers emit toner particles.  We need to
find out if there is any danger.'


On 8/2/07, Ernest de Leon <dryicezero at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't know what statistically significant data there is, but you can
> get an idea from here:
>
>
> http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:In7o4XV3eFwJ:www.nysut.org/cps/rde/xchg/nysut/hs.xsl/healthandsafety_6920.htm+toner+pollute+tobacco&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us&client=firefox-a
>
>
> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23406506-details/Office+printers+emit+dust+particles+which+are+'as+bad+for+you+as+smoking'/article.do
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/07/31/printerhazard.html
>
> As a matter of fact, if you do a generic google search on the phrase
> "laser
> printer pollution" there is a plethora of information available.
>
> Ernest
>
> On 8/2/07, Charles Mims <chmims at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Would you know what the documented health problems associated with toner
> > particles
> > happen to be?
> >
> > On 8/2/07, Ernest de Leon <dryicezero at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Well that all depends on how you quantify easy.  If you are speaking
> > > strictly of the odor and possible nasal reaction, then I could see
> where
> > > it
> > > would be easier to handle laser printer emissions.  If you are
> speaking
> > of
> > > long term health effects, however, in a situation where the laser
> > printer
> > > emissions *may* pollute more than second hand tobacco smoke, then the
> > > choice
> > > is not so obvious.  Cyanide and natural gas, after all, are odorless,
> > but
> > > I
> > > wouldn't say that I would choose exposure to either over exposure to
> > > second
> > > hand tobacco smoke.  I am not defending tobacco smoke at all.  I have
> > very
> > > sensitive allergies and I absolutely cannot stand tobacco smoke or the
> > > after-smell that the American Lung Cancer Association drags into the
> > > building consistently.  I was more than elated when they banned
> smoking
> > in
> > > just about all public locations.  I will be even happier when
> employers
> > > ban
> > > the use of tobacco during work hours period.
> > >
> > > Ernest
> > >
> > > On 8/1/07, Charles Mims <chmims at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If given a choice whether to stay in a room with a smoker or
> > > > a laser printer I think the choice would be easy.
> > > >
> > > > On 8/1/07, M K Ramadoss <mkr777 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In a recent study, it was found that some of the laser printers
> are
> > > > > polluting worse than tobacco smoke. Here are the results: For the
> > full
> > > > > article, just Google.
> > > > > ==================================
> > > > >
> > > > > Printer tests showed levels of ultra-fine particle pollution:
> > > > >
> > > > > High-level emitters
> > > > >
> > > > > HP Color LaserJet 4650dn
> > > > >
> > > > > HP Color LaserJet 5550dtn
> > > > >
> > > > > HP Color LaserJet 8550N
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 1320N
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 1320n
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 2420dn
> > > > >
> > > > > *HP LaserJet 4200dtn
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4250n (old cartridge)
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4250n (new cartridge)
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5(a) (further study needed)
> > > > >
> > > > > *HP LaserJet 8000DN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 8150N
> > > > >
> > > > > Toshiba Studio 450
> > > > >
> > > > > Mid-level emitters
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 1020
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4200dtn
> > > > >
> > > > > Low-level emitters
> > > > >
> > > > > Canon IRC6800
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5M
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 9000dn
> > > > >
> > > > > Ricoh CL3000DN
> > > > >
> > > > > Non-emitters
> > > > >
> > > > > HP Color LaserJet 4550DN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP Color LaserJet 8500DN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 2200DN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 2300dtn
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4 plus
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4000N
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4000TN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4050N
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4050TN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 4si
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5(b) (further study needed)
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5000n
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5100tn
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5N
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5si
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 5si/NX
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 8000DN
> > > > >
> > > > > HP LaserJet 8150DN
> > > > >
> > > > > Ricoh Aficio 2022
> > > > >
> > > > > Ricoh Aficio 3045
> > > > >
> > > > > Ricoh Aficio 3245C
> > > > >
> > > > > Ricoh Aficio CC3000DN
> > > > >
> > > > > Toshiba Studio 350
> > > > >
> > > > > *possible high emitter
> > > > >
> > > > > ================
> > > > >
> > > > > mkr
> > > > > --
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > SATLUG mailing list
> > > > > SATLUG at satlug.org
> > > > > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> > > > > Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
> > > > >
> > > > --
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > SATLUG mailing list
> > > > SATLUG at satlug.org
> > > > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> > > > Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
> > > >
> > > --
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SATLUG mailing list
> > > SATLUG at satlug.org
> > > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> > > Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
> > >
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > SATLUG mailing list
> > SATLUG at satlug.org
> > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> > Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
> >
> --
> _______________________________________________
> SATLUG mailing list
> SATLUG at satlug.org
> http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
>