Saboth

Roundonbothends

We gonna die!

jerseyjokeboy

loquaciousmusic

Rusted

This group was commonly known as "ETD". The acronym had another meaning for many employees, "Eat Toner & Die"!

The folks in Health & Safety assured us that any particles we inhaled would be expelled because they were too large to remain in your lungs. No one quite believed that, but we had no real choice. Now it looks like there may be an issue; are we looking at High Tech Black Lung?

Dacker

jnkdaniel

WebUrbanist

camas22

First I would not put much stock in the report. It's probably a couple of scientists looking for some grant money. As to the particulate levels. Got a test you and them. Go into the bathroom and roll off say 20 sheets of the stuff. You have just released into the air twice the level being suggested in this article from paper particulates coming off the roll.

Oh, now you are going to take up Sharon Crowe's '1 sheet' suggestion? Be gone!

JohnMc

FTA:

The study did not consider variables such as printer age or cartridge type, leading to variations even among printers of the same model.

So it's unclear whether older printers emit particles, or dirty printers. It's not clear whether the source is the printer itself, the cartrige type or manufacturer, or another factor. This is bad science, folks.

The study primarily considered particles less than a micrometer in size, but the authors noted that even their non-emitters might be releasing larger particles, which are also potentially hazardous to human health.

And here's the FUD. The 'non-emitting' printers might be releasing larger particles, which are potentially hazardous to human health.

So something involved in some printers, will sometimes release some amounts of something that could potentially be harmful to your health. But these scientists can't determine the source, cause, frequency, or underlying drivers for this activity.

Disclaimer: I am an employee for Xerox, which makes printers. I am employed in Finance, not P&R, and own no stock. My statements are of my own opinion, and not reflective of the company's position or values. This is just bad science and bad journalism, an opinion I came to independent of my employment.

rodeobob

You mean not a whole lot...
A smoldering cigarette is not a sufficient source of second hand smoke. (the studies that show that secondhand smoke leads to cancer as based on environments where smoke is pervasic)

FrankTheTank

"I don't believe it. Period."

What is it that you don't believe? That scientists can measure particles? That they can measure particles and they were lying? Or that particles in the air can't harm people.

Any thing that you breathe into your lungs that is unable to be exhaled or easily broken down by your body will harm your lungs permanently. There is nothing special about coal dust that gives people black lung disease. Its the same thing that happens from inhaling say rock dust or even asbestos (although there is a rare type of cancer in the lining of you lungs that asbestos does cause)if your breathing in more particles, then your scarring up your lungs faster.

Aladdyn

royal72

North of 49

I said this in the Lifehacker post about the same thing:
The Ozone that laser printers and copiers make is much more hazardous than any particle emissions they make. If they were as dangerous as these eggheads say they are, the whole area around the printer would be covered in toner in a couple days, and that's not the case is it?

DeeJayQueue

EthnicRedneck

caitlinagogo

jamesdenver

theWolf

Untranscribable Sound Of Unmanly Anguish

Cowboys_fan