Slashdot Mirror
Is Your Computer Leaking Toxic Dust?
n0alpha writes "A recent study by scientists at the University of Washington suggests that computers emit dangerous chemicals. Specifically, chemicals called PBDEs (poly-brominated-diphyenyl ethers) found in the household dust that collects on your monitor and keyboard could pose a health threat. Scientists say the chemicals have caused developmental and learning defects in laboratory animals and may pose a threat to people and animals. 'It's critical we phase these materials out,' said Suellen Mele, Citizens for Resource Conservation. And some companies are doing just that."
Yes, but it's good to calculate your risks. Some things ARE more dangerous than others. I'm glad they "phased out" asbestos, for example. (In new construction at least)
I don't know about you, but the on;y
new computer smell' I get is from NewEgg's packing materials. If you're referring to something like what a new Dell smells like, I have no idea. If it's anything like a car's new smell it's probably some volatile compounds left over from the plastic manufacturing.
Evil will always win, because Good is DUMB
Reading this post is bad for my eyes. Going to the toilet to often can give me RSI and serious backproblems. Eating wears out my jawbones. Everything is bad for you if you sart thinking about it. Everything dangerous is called life.
they also mentioned that these compounds are found on many electronic devices. Let's just suppose, for the sake of argument, that this dust shortens your life span by 10-15 years. Are we willing to change our lives radically (go back to 19th century living) in order to live longer? Or will we just deal with it as a cost of progress? Like an earlier poster said, everything kills you.
Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
Unfortunately for us, in the US at least, we have become overly obsessed with germs and germ fighting. Everything you see kills 99.9% of bacteria!
Soon we will be bathing in extra strength bleach, drinking pool water (we basically do), and using disposable/burnable everything.
The more that we try to "fight" bacteria the more our civilization becomes prone to simple infection.
The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!
Seriously, every week we hear about the risks of eating too many carbs and then studies proving otherwise. We hear about why we should buy this and do that. Now we'll start hearing about new improved "Air filters" that remove the new threat of "PBDE"...Only four monthly payments of $69.99! These companies will start cropping up, the moment this story hits the local news channels.
Its kind of sad, but I don't trust most funded scientific studies anymore, they all seem out to snatch our dollar for some other ulterior motive.
Sig it.
Umm, if it collects on your puter and monitor, it was already there. Just now it's in one place for easier cleaning.
The point is not that life can't be "dangerous." We all die at the end of the day.
The point is that there are SAFER ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE. Do you have lead pipes, paint, and asbestos in your house because "life is dangerous?" No one is advocating giving up computers, just using safer components.
Wake up for christ's sake.
"Scientists say the chemicals have caused developmental and learning defects in laboratory animals" A lot of substances are harmful in high concentrations and are these compounds not also found elsewhere? Let's take a realistic look at this before we panic and start wearing gas masks when we are within 10 feet of our computers.
Who needs cases anyway? It's a lot easier to change the configuration on my machines if I don't have to mess with those pesky cases anyway.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
PBDE's were first used in the 1970. All related patents are expired by now, and the revenue stream is tanking due to increased competition. Time to 'leak' some info to the greens who will happily lobby to have these 'dangerous' chemicals outlawed.
Too cynical ?
Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
What really irks me is that these chemicals aren't even needed - flame retardants are used because US companies fear getting sued if someone's monitor catches fire and burns down the building.
It appears that in their "quest for safety", or "liability shield" in corporate-speak, they've actually made their products more hazardous.
Quite frankly, I'm sick of the "We must do something" approach. This is the same thinking that led to:
The biggest problem with "Safety Rush" is that it isn't safe. The inclusion of safety chemicals and features creates the situation in which consumers are collectively dumbed-down; witness, for example, the idiot who tried to trim his hedges with a lawn mower and cut off his fingers in the process. He expected the mower to have a warning that you couldn't use it for that purpose. Why did he expect that? Well, because American companies have gone out of their way to ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, the consumer can't hurt themselves with their product.
In the end, what it really comes down to is that the Safety Rush hurts more people than it helps. At best, it lulls people into a sense of complacency when working with dangerous equipment; at worst, risk to the consumer is compounded by the use of chemicals which aren't known to be safe. While fire is certainly a safety hazard, its danger is much more easily mitigated by the consumer than the risk of cancer through unknowingly being exposed to flame retardants.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
I am very surprised at the reaction from the community here. I hate FUD spreading fear-mongers as much as the next geek, but this isn't the first time we've learned that we need to actively remove dangerous substances from daily interaction.
Anyone here have exposed their kids to PB based paint? Anyone here use any DDT on their lawn this year?
These chemicals are cummulative and the damage cannot be undone. Let's hope these kind of studies continue to educate law makers.
We really shouldn't be so lax about infant technology that hasn't been fully explored.
Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose.
You have to weigh the risks, though. Peru took that study to heart and stopped chlorinating their tap water, thereby saving an estimated 180 people out of a population of 18,000,000. The result? 600,000 cases of cholera with 4,000 deaths. It's not limited to Peru, either. The epidemic spread through Latin America and in a 6 year period there were more than 1.3 million cases and over 11,000 deaths.
Dude, seriously, you're sitting in a swivel chair in an air conditioned office. You could be working in a diamond mine in South Africa, watching your children die of malnurishment. Rejoice in your good fortune.
I know you all think that's really funny, but as someone who's done a fair amount of desktop support, I've cleaned many a keyboard/monitor and especially CPU by dusting with a can of air. Which has usually generated a huge plume of dust. Which I've certainly inhaled quite a bit of.
So pardon as I act a little more concerned than you, because this reads much like the stories from 60 year old guys with lung cancer who worked in asbestos plants and whatnot. "Sure, there was all this stuff flying around, but hey, we thought, 'its just dust'" etc.
Please help metamoderate.
"Three years ago, my six year old son was diagnosed with Autism - a genetic defect that may in fact be linked to chemicals such as these."
Or may not. Not to piddle all over your personal difficulty, but don't get caught in the hysterical search for a single root cause for a problem.
"It's how Silicon Valley has the highest rates of Autism in the country."
Which is likely to be the holdover from when the chip fabs used to use _incredibly_ toxic chemicals before the fabs shifted offshore. Have you tracked down any other hotspots, or just those linked with a high rate of academic overachievers in a single location?
As self-appointed history nazi, I have to take issue with this characterization.
First of all, remember that there wasn't exactly an incredible increase in the technology of drinking vessels near the end of the roman empire. That is to say, people had been drinking out of basically the same types of cups for CENTURIES; why wouldn't they have gotten stupider sooner? Furthermore, I seem to recall that most of the systems used to transport water used lead, too, so it's not like the poor weren't getting their requisite doses, too.
Second, the whole idea of outside barbarians attacking the Roman Empire is a gross simplification and a misunderstanding of the numerous factors involved. Most salient is the fact that pretty much all of those barbarian attacks didn't start in barbarian lands; they were the results of "barbarians" who had been in the Roman Army, and correspondingly granted land for themselves and their descendants, becoming irrate over unfair taxation and denial of wages owed, and taking up arms against what had become THEIR empire. Simply put, the barbarians didn't overrun Rome; they were just what was left when it fell apart.
Yes, yes; offtopic, I know, but I have a bit of a pet peeve about inaccuracies, especially regarding the Middle Ages, the "history" of which most people have learned is basically less history and more a morality play created by Reniassance thinkers to suit their own agendas. Hell, even the NAME reveals the bias (there's the Classical period, and the Reniassance, and then all that stuff in the Middle that doesn't matter and didn't contain anything of value, according to the period thinkers who've shaped our views).
"According to other scientists, such as Dr. Gina Solomon, senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, there is no need to panic. They say that although the levels of PBDEs are high enough to be worth talking about, they are unlikely to pose a serious threat to human health."
'Nuff said.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Asperger's and autism are more likely due to the fact that it's a geek haven.
A choice quote: "Scientists strongly believe that autism is greatly influenced by genes."
I'm not worried about this toxic dust article. I keep my area cleaned. Independent researchers aren't worried about it. We've had computers since the 1970s. When Stallman grows a third arm, that's when I'll start getting worried.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Studies have shown that long-term exposure over many decades results in death. As Red Foxx used to say, "you'll look pretty stupid, 80 yrs old and laying in bed, dying from nothing".
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Think of life an a game of russian roulette with over 1000 chambers and one bullet. I will freely admit that chemicals from electronics is a minor issue. But enough minor issues added together amount to a major issue. Life is not safe, and there are many things that I cannot control. But if there is something that I CAN control, then I would be a fool for not doing it. I am not saying that I am going to throw out my computer. I am just saying that if I can swab my mobo and processor with alcohol wipes first and help protect the health of my family, then it may be worth the effort.
;)
Secondly the "chemicals may be emitted" phrase IS valid. Have you ever heard of a moth ball? There is not chemical reaction there, but vapors are present? It is a physical process called "sublimation." Sublimation is NOT a chemical process, but it does happen. Look it up.
Whenever you smell ANYTHING, it is because either particles or chemicals are in the air. So your theory of chemical reactions is false. Anything which can vaporize will emit chemicals. Plus, the problem is worse if there are porous materials saturated with a volatile chemical (volatile meaning that it can emite a vapor).
As far as cleaning everything first (if that would work), I am not worried about myself, but my children. I feel free to gamble a little with my life, but not those of my kids.
Also, using an air filter on the air intakes of my computer is a step to keep dust out. On my old PC, I found dust around the I/O connectors on my sound card, around the edges of the CD-Rom drives, etc. Then I installed an intake fan and found dust on all of the fans, and all over the processor heat sink. So I decided that I wanted filters to help keep the system running cool, and NOT for health reasons. But if the dust is the problem, then no dust in = no dust out. As simple as that.
If this turns out to be a threat that cannot be controlle, that I am happy to live with it. I am not getting paranoid here. I am still getting my computer. But if I can remove even a minor source of chemials easily, I will do so. If not, then I will just live with it and not worry about it. There is a difference between taking sensible precautions if possible, and spreading panic. Douglas Adams would be proud of me
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
If it was a 'Duh', as you say - this article wouldn't exist. The fact is, these risks aren't always immediately apparent.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."