Second-hand Toner a health risk?
- Thread starter Geo
- Start date
Rainbow Man
Veteran
I read on Ars Technica a couple weeks ago about some newfangled type of super fine toner which was supposed to be just the bee's knwees the piece said.
Or perhaps it was the developers of this toner who said that and the piece simply repeated it. I can't remember.
Anyway witgh this in mind I'm not so sure I want that toner anywhere near me. Not that I'm prone to hysteria at the first sight of an alarmist health-related article in the (online) press but I'm kind of reliant on my lungs you see.
After all..I use them to breathe.
Peace.
Or perhaps it was the developers of this toner who said that and the piece simply repeated it. I can't remember.
Anyway witgh this in mind I'm not so sure I want that toner anywhere near me. Not that I'm prone to hysteria at the first sight of an alarmist health-related article in the (online) press but I'm kind of reliant on my lungs you see.
After all..I use them to breathe.
Peace.
Rainbow Man
Veteran
Luckily(? - risks might be overblown?) I'm pretty sure I haven't. 
I believe Dell uses Lexmark as their printer OEM manufacturer..
Peace.
I believe Dell uses Lexmark as their printer OEM manufacturer..Peace.
Breathe some in i think you'll live
For how long?
Breathe some in i think you'll live
Are you... retarded? Serious question.
do you really think breathing in the odd bit of smoke is dangerous ?
i assume during your lifetime you have breathed in some smoke tell me did you phone an ambulance ?
or did you ignore it because only prolonged exposure over many years will cause you problems
edit: silly question of course you phoned for an ambulance after all your not retarded are you
i assume during your lifetime you have breathed in some smoke tell me did you phone an ambulance ?
or did you ignore it because only prolonged exposure over many years will cause you problems
edit: silly question of course you phoned for an ambulance after all your not retarded are you
Last edited by a moderator:
What the hell are you talking about? Prolonged exposure. You know, like a parent constantly smoking around their child. Or in this case a worker being in an office 8 or more hours a day with a printer getting used often. I'm amazed at what you've said so far...
You can't be serious with that comment...
If a printer is exhausting potentially harmful particles into the air then its something to be worried about for people spend much of their time in environments that require heavy printer usage. Such environments might often include work in an office building where printers could potentially be exhausting these dangerous particles. Workers there are often exposed to these particles for anywhere between 8 to 12 hours a day on average. Say 5 days a week, nearly the entire year. That would be prolonged exposure and therefore the prolonged exposure to said potentially harmful particles could lead to health risks. What is so hard to understand about this? While you personally may not be in such a environment, many many many many many many people are. That is something to be worried about. Especially considering that a number of printers do not exhaust these particles. Further study should be done to see how harmful the particles are and why certain printers do exhaust and others do not. Prolonged exposure is the entire freaking basis in this.
Now please, use some common sense.
photocopiers use the same tec and have been around for decades have you ever once heard of any toner induced illnesses ? the article is just sensationalist nonsence if you choose to beleive it fair enough but i wouldnt turn down a free laser printer and i doubt many other b3d readers would either
" the authors found, the concentration of particulate matter per square inch was five times higher during working hours than nonworking hours, and about 3.5 times higher inside than outside"
so spending 24 hours a day nowhere near a printer is the same as working 8 hours a day with them time to move into that oxygen bubble
" the authors found, the concentration of particulate matter per square inch was five times higher during working hours than nonworking hours, and about 3.5 times higher inside than outside"
so spending 24 hours a day nowhere near a printer is the same as working 8 hours a day with them time to move into that oxygen bubble
Last comment, I'm pretty much done with listening to anything you ever say again. This thread and the Windows one... well I have my limits...
Just one thing: How the fuck are you going to know it was printer exhaust induced if you have no fucking clue the printer was exhausting dangerous particles!? Its like people who developed lung cancer from smoking before it was widely known that cigarette smoke is a health risk. By your logic before we knew cigarette smoke was dangerous it actually wasn't dangerous. Unless you think cigarette smoke isn't dangerous because it doesn't knock you head on first inhale.
Just one thing: How the fuck are you going to know it was printer exhaust induced if you have no fucking clue the printer was exhausting dangerous particles!? Its like people who developed lung cancer from smoking before it was widely known that cigarette smoke is a health risk. By your logic before we knew cigarette smoke was dangerous it actually wasn't dangerous. Unless you think cigarette smoke isn't dangerous because it doesn't knock you head on first inhale.
Before you stop listening to me skyring ive come up with a design to combat this problem it involves a fan sucking air over a charged plate ( cant say to much industrial espionage and all that) but i am willing to sell you this design for the low low price of $10,000 now keep in mind im only doing this because i do worry about you if it was anyone else the price would be half as much.
so do we have a deal ?
so do we have a deal ?
Similar threads
