15 ms·

Air Pollution in Our Homes

246 points by kingkawn 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
vallode 7y ago
I've always tried to air my home out as much as I can while cooking. Pretty much all windows are open. Article reaffirms my core avoidance of things like toasters/microwaves.
- Clent 7y ago
  The article makes no mention of microwave use.
- NickBusey 7y ago
  The article does mention toasters as a particularly bad culprit, but the word `microwave` doesn't appear anywhere in the text. Curious how you have arrived at this connection between two very different devices.
  - 24gttghh 7y ago
    I would have to think a microwave would be rather clean, considering it is hard to really "burn" something in one.
  - vallode 7y ago
    Erroneous jump to conclusions from my side, I think I naturally group electric appliances in the household in the same 'bad' category. I admit that is an error on my part.
rayiner 7y ago
I am on the fence about research like this. On one hand, as an engineer by training it's hard for me to countenance the idea that any research (properly conducted) could be bad. On the other hand, people have been cooking indoors since time immemorial, and even things like toasters are more than a century old. If they were dangerous, we'd know by know. The risk is that such research gets oversold by the media into a panic, as we have seen time and again. Look at what "science" has done for nutrition in the last few decades--upset a bunch of traditional norms, without offering any meaningful advance. Are VOCs (for the most part, "smells") going to be the subject of the same circus as salt and fat?
- modzu 7y ago
  science isn't easy. if we could just trust our intuitions there would be no point. your sentiment reminds me of the surgeon mentality before germs were discovered. "ive been operating on people for years and saving their lives -- no way could i be giving them an illness just through my hands!", and yet that turned out to be true. the low hanging fruit are gone but there is a lot left to explain in terms of health. for example millions of people die from many kinds of cancers every year for which we have no idea why.
- jartelt 7y ago
  People in some countries have been cooking with indoor wood-fired stoves forever, yet we know for sure that these stoves are bad for respiratory health. That doesn't mean all the research is wrong! I think the big take away is that you should pretty much always turn on the exhaust hood over your stove top when you cook. Doing so removes many of the particles generated by cooking.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    In most homes the "exhaust hood" doesn't vent to outside. It filters the big particles out and mixes the rest. I'm not sure if this is better or not, but the difference isn't much, and after a short time they are the same.
    - jly 7y ago
      The big particles are not what is most dangerous. Range hoods that recirculate air are not helpful. All kitchens should have externally-exhausted vent hoods, and it's even more important when using gas ranges, since a lot of harmful combustion byproducts are also being created (NO2, CO, etc). Sadly as you point out, this is far less common than it should be.
    - rootusrootus 7y ago
      In my experience [in the US, particularly the PNW] most single family homes vent outside, but it isn't uncommon for dinky apartments with retrofitted exhaust hoods to simply filter and recirculate.
orliesaurus 7y ago
The narrative in this article is heavy, but basically if I understand this right..cooking food indoors pollutes the air, and because you are in your kitchen indoors, you're polluting your own living space's air?
- eeZah7Ux 7y ago
  "The narrative in this article is heavy"... to put it mildly. It's terrible writing.
  - orliesaurus 7y ago
    Maybe I'm just not part of the target audience
  - tomxor 7y ago
    Yeah I'm still waiting for a TL;DR, but doubt anyone made it all the way through yet, it's so long, verbose and yet empty.
- downtide 7y ago
  That's my take home. I hate being in a room that has no ventilation. I even get pains in my chest quite quickly. So have learned to always throw open windows if possible. All year round I have the kitchen window open when cooking. We don't bother heating the kitchen or bathroom (south UK rarely below 0). And I like to replenish stale air periodically by creating a deliberate draft for a few minutes throughout the house. If not it soon stinks. I am totally repulsed at the smell of burnt toast and lingering cooking smells, so wonder if that's a natural gagging response.
- fma 7y ago
  The kitchen exhaust fans in American homes are very weak (at least, every one I've lived in, and visited...). When cooking, you can smell what people are cooking, so it's not really doing its job of pulling the air out. I upgraded begrudgingly to a Chines brand called Fotile. It's expensive and I fought tooth and nail with my wife because my natural instincts was not to trust Chinese brands I never heard of. Admittedly, it's one of my best purchases. We can be frying stuff on the stove and standing 5 feet away, you won't smell it. And like the link below says...it's the biggest appliance company I've never heard of. I have the one pictured on the left. https://www.treehugger.com/kitchen-design/chinese-manufacturer-fotile-designs-exhaust-hood-actually-exhausts.html https://www.treehugger.com/kitchen-design/chinese-manufactur...
ezconnect 7y ago
I think the article is selling home air purifiers
surfmike 7y ago
I got a air quality monitor when we had the California wildfires, and I was shocked to learn that my air quality was worse indoors when cooking than outdoors during the wildfires. (I am now in the process of getting a properly vented range hood instead of the dinky recirculating one we have).
- nitrogen 7y ago
  I've noticed that cooking byproducts are less irritating than wildfire byproducts. You still definitely want good ventilation.
- sjg007 7y ago
  Also open a window when cooking.
- jly 7y ago
  I bought an AQI / PM2.5 monitor and was shocked to find the same thing. I placed it in an upstairs bedroom, far removed from the kitchen, and the PM2.5 readings jump to unhealthy levels within minutes or cooking, even that far away. HVAC systems do a great job of circulating bad air throughout the home. I've also observed measurable CO level increases in the upstairs while running a gas oven, using a low-level monitor. I've also come to the conclusion that a vented range hood is really an essential for indoor cooking of any kind. It should definitely be the #1 priority for any home to improve air quality.
- lukeschlather 7y ago
  Air quality sensors don't tell the whole story, and they can only notice particulates of certain sizes. The worst day for me during the past few years' Seattle-area smoke events didn't register as a bad day on the official air quality reports because the particles were too big. But it was the only time where I actually had to stop and take a taxi 7 blocks because I just started coughing uncontrollably and couldn't carry my groceries home.
- closeparen 7y ago
  Anything you can smell is technically air pollution, no?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
downtide 7y ago
I always wonder about small acrylic hairs and such that float about the house. In a bright room just flex your jumper, there's thousands of these weird impurities, and I can't imagine they can be filtered out easily before or after getting into the lungs. The biggest shocker is when you disturb loft insulation. They claim it's not terrible (specifically if undisturbed), but floating glass strands can't be all that nice.
- jjtheblunt 7y ago
  Fiberglas is listed in the US anyway as a carcinogen.
  - twistiti 7y ago
    Interesting that fiberglass fibers are typically 5-25 micrometers (µm), while asbestos fibers can be 180A to 300A (1 angstrom = 1/10000th of a micrometer. So an asbestos fiber is between ~200 to 1400 times smaller than a glass fiber. Acrylic fibers are 15 µm to 25 µm. Merino wool fibers are 15 µm to 30 µm. And human hairs diameters are between 20 to 200 µm. Seems to be a biological limit to the body cleaning system e.g. nanoparticles, abestos
- frutiger 7y ago
  They don’t need to be filtered. They get trapped in mucus. The constant flow of mucus from all your mucosal membranes pushes these outwards. In the case of your lungs they get delivered to the great acid bath that is your stomach.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    This. We evolved in an environment with plenty of particulate matter. It's the exotic stuff that has no analog from the time when we evolved that causes problems.
    - firethief 7y ago
      As opposed to acrylic?
not_a_moth 7y ago
I have a sensitivity to certain cooking fumes. I've tried to assess it objectively like it's a nocebo, which would be great if it were. There are two cafes in SF I used to frequent who do their cooking in the same main space as guests, do not have much if any ventilation, and, if I was there hacking on my laptop around lunch time, I would always get headaches and need to leave. (one is a trendy workspace cafe, that I feel bad naming). It has not happened at other SF cafes despite a lot of working-in-cafes. I also used to have a roommate who didn't like the sound of our ventilation fan and wouldn't open the kitchen back door (to the outdoors) because of the cool air. Anytime she cooked with the oven I would get a headache and need to leave the apartment, while having no problem with the third roommate's cooking who preferred to ventilate.
- graeme 7y ago
  If you got an air quality monitor you'd likely see shocking levels in those scenarios. I got a laseregg two, and normal frying can send indoor air quality to unhealthy levels if something gets a bit browned. Even with a fan on. It's portable and has a battery. Quite eye opening to test it in various scenarios.
  - jly 7y ago
    I'll second the LaserEgg 2. Great product and I've also had some eye-opening experience with cooking and indoor AQI. These used to be tougher to find in the US but I think you can get them on Amazon, now.
LYSTech 7y ago
And what about the lack of natural light? Has anyone seen this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yv8gcFaJL0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yv8gcFaJL0
- cmrx64 7y ago
  This ad campaign from a window company?
graeme 7y ago
I got a laseregg 2, and highly recommend it or a similar monitor. It's been very eye opening to see how various scenarios affect air pollution: * frying indoors generally swiftly puts things in the unsafe range. Especially if it led to browning. * a neighbour's bbq would do the same if the window was open * idling truck on the street for construction? Unsafe range * surprisingly, the toaster would raise levels if it was on high enough to brown toast Really helped me make better decisions about when to open/shut windows and how to cook. I got the laseregg after reading reviews of air quality monitors used in china. Apparently it holds up well to specialized lab sensors. It has a battery and can be moved around
- nsporillo 7y ago
  Seems like the laseregg 2+ at best detects PM2.5, but something like the PurpleAir sensor can detect PM1.0 for roughly the same cost. Have you or anyone else used it? I'm interested in purchasing one.
  - Forbo 7y ago
    Are there any of these types of devices that don't need to phone home or be connected to the Internet? The fewer "smart" devices I can have in my home the better.
    - graeme 7y ago
      Iirc the laseregg works fine with no connection. It can be connected, but isn't necessary. My co2 sensors have no connection either: https://www.amazon.com/Hydrofarm-Autopilot-Desktop-Monitor-Logger/dp/B01FYWU2IS/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?keywords=co2+monitor&qid=1557334844&s=gateway&sr=8-3 https://www.amazon.com/Hydrofarm-Autopilot-Desktop-Monitor-L...
- winchling 7y ago
  >idling truck on the street for construction? Unsafe range Or for ice cream sales -- next to a children's play area.
- salex89 7y ago
PascLeRasc 7y ago
Off-topic, but this lab got $4.5M for equipment and still couldn't pay the students analyzing the data? What's up with that?
- Harvey-Specter 7y ago
  "Student volunteer" probably refers to undergrad students who are working on their theses.
  - SilasX 7y ago
    Ah, then it's okay not to pay the going rate for the labor.
    - danaur 7y ago
      A lot of students benefit from this unpaid labor. I know many people who volunteered in labs to get real experience that they translated into high paying jobs else where. Those people would not be able to get the job if it was paid
- firethief 7y ago
  Students are free labor. They aren't racking up six figures of debt not to be exploited.
- megy 7y ago
  They used $4.5m worth of equipment. They didn't purchase it just for this test.
jly 7y ago
Indoor air quality means different things to different people. There are so many chemicals and particles that qualify as air 'pollution' that I find it helpful to rank how important they are. This article does a good job of quantifying the damage by pollutant, using a metric called 'Disability Adjusted Life Years': https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/which-indoor-air-pollutants-matter-most https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/which-indoor-air-polluta... You can see that while there are a lot of things to consider, PM2.5 is by far the most dangerous. Surprisingly to me, mold is actually the next most dangerous, implying that indoor humidity control is also very important.
macNchz 7y ago
I've found many houses I've been in to be extremely stuffy and stale inside...I think most American homes fall into a bad middle ground for indoor air quality: well enough sealed to trap indoor pollutants, but lacking the more sophisticated HVAC systems that can efficiently exchange fresh air. Additionally, it seems that many Americans also really hate opening their windows (and indeed the climate often doesn't really lend itself to opening the windows, in some places ever). I grew up in a drafty old house with no A/C, and even as a kid felt other people's–newer, not drafty, air conditioned–homes had an airless feeling. It's been interesting to follow the recent studies on indoor CO2 and other air pollution...I don't feel quite so crazy for wanting to open the windows all the time when visiting family.
- e40 7y ago
  Agreed, but many houses in the Bay Area were built in the 1920's (both the houses I've owned were). The windows in my house are not sealed well. The double-hung sash windows have space for the rope and I can feel a draft on windy days. All this talk of CO2 recently has made me value that my house is drafty.
  - kaybe 7y ago
    It would be nice to have a house where you can regulate the draftyness better. In some seasons, draftyness is a feature, not a but, in others, not so much.
pdog 7y ago
If you're concerned about indoor pollution, I highly recommend house plants. In NASA research[1], common house plants were found to remove toxic agents such as benzene and formaldehyde from the air. Some of the best air purifying plants: Chlorophytum comosum (spider plant), Dracaena reflexa (song of India), Nephrolepis exaltata (Boston fern), Sansevieria trifasciata (snake plant), and Chamaedorea seifrizii (bamboo palm). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Clean_Air_Study https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Clean_Air_Study
- rayiner 7y ago
  Do these have any actual impact on health? Like, if I get a house plant, am I going to live a year longer? Two years longer? That’s the whole problem with all this “health science.” It’s completely disconnected from expected outcomes that you can use to determine whether this is something even worth caring about. EDIT re: sibling comment debunking impact of indoor plants. See, this is exactly what I mean. When you don’t tie observed correlations to concrete outcomes, all you do is confuse people. It’s not quite junk science, but it’s not helpful reporting of the science.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- martey 7y ago
  From https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/03/indoor-plants-clean-air-best-none-them/584509/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/03/indoor-p... Recently, Waring and his colleagues reanalyzed all 195 studies that have examined whether houseplants can filter the air. They found that some types of plants can remove higher amounts of VOCs than others. But once you factor in the effects of working in a large room, none of the plants are able to do much. Waring told me to imagine a small office, 10 feet by 10 feet by eight feet. “You would have to put 1,000 plants in that office to have the same air-cleaning capacity of just changing over the air once per hour, which is the typical air-exchange rate in an office ventilation system,” he said. That’s 10 plants per square foot of floor space. Even if you chose the most effective type of VOC-filtering plant, you would still need one plant per square foot, Waring said.
Rudebwoy10 7y ago
It took me a while, but I eventually ended up getting a indoor air quality monitor. I'm in California, and when the fires happened, I expected my brand new condo building to have decent filtration. According to my Awair monitor (http://getawair.com http://getawair.com)... my indoor PM2.5 (Fine Dust) went up to 150 ugm3. 150! We definitely had a chat with the building after that. But yeah, cooking, cleaning, air fresheners... all of them negatively affect my home air quality. Just need to ventilate at the right times. After the DHH video about this topic, I pulled the trigger and got the monitor, which fortunately also tracks CO2 and chemical (VOCs). I'm glad to see 2 topics about air quality trending today. I had to finally register to get in on the one topic I actually know about.
forgotmypw3 7y ago
It's not just cooking, it's all the spray cleaners, liquid detergents, and so on, too.
code_duck 7y ago
I have serious food allergies and celiac disease in addition to allergies/sensitivities to ingredients of cleaning products. I have problems entering are staying in a lot of environments, pretty much anywhere that I don’t have control over the air or access to fresh air. The results on the toaster are not surprising. I’ve worried about toast smoke in coffee shops before because small amounts of gluten or allergens can make me sick. It’s great that they are measuring concentrations of chemicals in the air related to cleaners. Something like someone spraying air freshener or mopping the floor with Pinesol makes me feel ill, and continued exposure will make me sneeze and my eyes turn red and so forth. It’s amazing how casual people are about this. I sat down at the bar the other day and immediately the bartender started spraying Windex all over and wiping a wall. I had to rinse out my nose, and gained a headache. It definitely ruined the experience for me, but most people don’t think twice. The possibility is raised that “The dominant source of VOCs in Los Angeles is now emissions from consumer products, including toiletries and cleaning fluids.“ Again, not a surprise. A statistic that quote to people is that about 5% of VOC emissions in the United States come from dryer vents, from mostly unnecessary chemicals in detergent and dryer sheets. Almost every single chemical product that is packaged for consumers and sold in plastic bottles at stores makes me very, very sick. Conditioners, shampoo, clothing detergent, pesticides, air freshener, candles soaps, fabric softener, floor cleaners, dish soap, glass cleaner. The annoying thing is that while the base formulation of these is bad enough, the part that is the worst for me is the completely unnecessary fragrances.
- clairity 7y ago
  yes, i used to use "simple green" for cleaning because it was advertised as non-toxic, but the resultant sneezing and coughing made me move to even simpler cleaners like dish soap and baking soda.
- stinos 7y ago
  It’s amazing how casual people are about this Only if you think of it that way really, considering a) the majority of people don't have problems and b) long-term effects of those products are sometimes not known at all, let alone known by the general public. Don't forget things like allergy information for food etc are fairly recent developments even in the western world. And studies showing/hinting at links between cleaning produtcs and premature deaths etc are also fairly recent I think, so unfortunately the general population isn't really aware of the dangers.
mensetmanusman 7y ago
I have used 3M Filtrete room-air purifiers as white noise generators for my kids since they were born > 7 years ago. It’s amazing how much is in the air... I believe growing up in a dusty environment contributed to my asthma...
telotortium 7y ago
> CTRL+F "smoke" > CTRL+F "smoking" > 0 results The dominant source of air pollution for almost all of human history has been smoke of one sort or another (see: historical dramas that show indoor light/heating with candles and fireplaces, https://samharris.org/the-fireplace-delusion/ https://samharris.org/the-fireplace-delusion/), to the extent that I personally doubt banning secondhand smoke indoors would have made much difference to non-smokers' health before open wood fires and coal fires were phased out. I suppose it's a notable achievement of our society that both industrial pollution and domestic smoke has been reduced so much that VOCs from other sources indoors are our greatest worry.
- whttheuuu 7y ago
  lol. cigarette smoking pales in comparison to emissions from vehicles. worrying about second hand smoke (unless you're literally trapped in a room like a bar, etc.) is almost laughable.
- graeme 7y ago
  Indeed, I recently read about the health impacts of nicotine, as distinct from smoking. There are many, including cardiovascular trouble. But as far as I can tell, nicotine doesn't cause lung cancer. That's from the smoke itself - any smoke.
tomohawk 7y ago
If you want to reduce the pollution in your home, stop using dryer sheets, fabric softener, Downy, or any laundry detergent that is scented. Instead of fabric softener, use white vinegar as a liquid fabric softener in your washer. It will make your clothes smell fresh - not vinegary. That scent that comes off of clothes that are treated with scented detergents and softeners is air pollution.
- soulofmischief 7y ago
  Care to explain why? Or what mechanism specifically is contributing to pollution? Seems like "pollution" might need some defining, too.
hcurtiss 7y ago
I've been exposed to air toxics risk assessments through my work. The problem, in my mind, is not the toxics we're facing in our homes (or even outdoors). It's that humans are really bad at understanding risk. Let's imagine an annual Thanksgiving dinner presents an excess lifetime cancer risk of 2 (made up number -- probably much lower). Many people would find that unacceptable. But why? Many activities we engage in every day present much more material risk. For instance, this article says the odds of dying in a car crash are approximately 10.7 per 100k. That is 10,000 in a million. Yet we gladly get behind the wheel every day. Noncancer effects are gauged in terms of multiples of the lowest observed effect level or the no observed effect level. If across a spectrum of exposures, we observed no effect at a certain level, that would be our NOEL. Of course, the observed effect could be a runny nose. 100x the NOEL could still be a runny nose (it could, in fact, be no adverse effect at all), but people see 100x the benchmark level and freak out. In my mind, we really need to reshape this discussion around toxics. People are willing to suffer great costs to avoid hazards that do not, in fact, present material risks. [1] https://www.cars.com/articles/are-the-odds-ever-in-your-favor-car-crashes-versus-other-fatalities-1420682154567/ https://www.cars.com/articles/are-the-odds-ever-in-your-favo...
- simple_phrases 7y ago
  > For instance, this article says the odds of dying in a car crash are approximately 10.7 per 100k. That is 10,000 in a million. There are ~30k automobile deaths in the US per year. Your figure is off by several orders of magnitude.
  - hcurtiss 7y ago
    I would point you to the quote in the article I cite: "'Motor vehicle traffic' deaths in the U.S. in 2013, the most recent full year of data available, totaled 33,804, for a death rate of 10.7 per 100,000, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention." I believe the denominator is confined to drivers. No matter, there are dozens of other good examples to support my point that ordinary activities are much riskier than the levels of risk we talk about in the context of air toxics.
skookumchuck 7y ago
My house is a bit drafty, and I couple that with a very effective air cleaner on the HVAC system, and convince myself that it pays off with breathing cleaner air.
jamewatson 7y ago
Air pollution is a huge problem, but usually, we feel protected from it when we are at home. We spend 90% of our lives indoors, so air pollution can be a real threat for us. Even if you can’t see it.

246 points by kingkawn 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

I've always tried to air my home out as much as I can while cooking. Pretty much all windows are open. Article reaffirms my core avoidance of things like toasters/microwaves.

Clent 7y ago
The article makes no mention of microwave use.
NickBusey 7y ago
The article does mention toasters as a particularly bad culprit, but the word `microwave` doesn't appear anywhere in the text. Curious how you have arrived at this connection between two very different devices.
- 24gttghh 7y ago
  I would have to think a microwave would be rather clean, considering it is hard to really "burn" something in one.
- vallode 7y ago
  Erroneous jump to conclusions from my side, I think I naturally group electric appliances in the household in the same 'bad' category. I admit that is an error on my part.

rayiner 7y ago

I am on the fence about research like this. On one hand, as an engineer by training it's hard for me to countenance the idea that any research (properly conducted) could be bad. On the other hand, people have been cooking indoors since time immemorial, and even things like toasters are more than a century old. If they were dangerous, we'd know by know. The risk is that such research gets oversold by the media into a panic, as we have seen time and again. Look at what "science" has done for nutrition in the last few decades--upset a bunch of traditional norms, without offering any meaningful advance. Are VOCs (for the most part, "smells") going to be the subject of the same circus as salt and fat?

modzu 7y ago
science isn't easy. if we could just trust our intuitions there would be no point. your sentiment reminds me of the surgeon mentality before germs were discovered. "ive been operating on people for years and saving their lives -- no way could i be giving them an illness just through my hands!", and yet that turned out to be true. the low hanging fruit are gone but there is a lot left to explain in terms of health. for example millions of people die from many kinds of cancers every year for which we have no idea why.
jartelt 7y ago
People in some countries have been cooking with indoor wood-fired stoves forever, yet we know for sure that these stoves are bad for respiratory health. That doesn't mean all the research is wrong! I think the big take away is that you should pretty much always turn on the exhaust hood over your stove top when you cook. Doing so removes many of the particles generated by cooking.
- bluGill 7y ago
  In most homes the "exhaust hood" doesn't vent to outside. It filters the big particles out and mixes the rest. I'm not sure if this is better or not, but the difference isn't much, and after a short time they are the same.
  - jly 7y ago
    The big particles are not what is most dangerous. Range hoods that recirculate air are not helpful. All kitchens should have externally-exhausted vent hoods, and it's even more important when using gas ranges, since a lot of harmful combustion byproducts are also being created (NO2, CO, etc). Sadly as you point out, this is far less common than it should be.
  - rootusrootus 7y ago
    In my experience [in the US, particularly the PNW] most single family homes vent outside, but it isn't uncommon for dinky apartments with retrofitted exhaust hoods to simply filter and recirculate.

orliesaurus 7y ago

The narrative in this article is heavy, but basically if I understand this right..cooking food indoors pollutes the air, and because you are in your kitchen indoors, you're polluting your own living space's air?

eeZah7Ux 7y ago
"The narrative in this article is heavy"... to put it mildly. It's terrible writing.
- orliesaurus 7y ago
  Maybe I'm just not part of the target audience
- tomxor 7y ago
  Yeah I'm still waiting for a TL;DR, but doubt anyone made it all the way through yet, it's so long, verbose and yet empty.
downtide 7y ago
That's my take home. I hate being in a room that has no ventilation. I even get pains in my chest quite quickly. So have learned to always throw open windows if possible. All year round I have the kitchen window open when cooking. We don't bother heating the kitchen or bathroom (south UK rarely below 0). And I like to replenish stale air periodically by creating a deliberate draft for a few minutes throughout the house. If not it soon stinks. I am totally repulsed at the smell of burnt toast and lingering cooking smells, so wonder if that's a natural gagging response.
fma 7y ago
The kitchen exhaust fans in American homes are very weak (at least, every one I've lived in, and visited...). When cooking, you can smell what people are cooking, so it's not really doing its job of pulling the air out. I upgraded begrudgingly to a Chines brand called Fotile. It's expensive and I fought tooth and nail with my wife because my natural instincts was not to trust Chinese brands I never heard of. Admittedly, it's one of my best purchases. We can be frying stuff on the stove and standing 5 feet away, you won't smell it. And like the link below says...it's the biggest appliance company I've never heard of. I have the one pictured on the left. https://www.treehugger.com/kitchen-design/chinese-manufacturer-fotile-designs-exhaust-hood-actually-exhausts.html https://www.treehugger.com/kitchen-design/chinese-manufactur...

ezconnect 7y ago

I think the article is selling home air purifiers

surfmike 7y ago

I got a air quality monitor when we had the California wildfires, and I was shocked to learn that my air quality was worse indoors when cooking than outdoors during the wildfires. (I am now in the process of getting a properly vented range hood instead of the dinky recirculating one we have).

nitrogen 7y ago
I've noticed that cooking byproducts are less irritating than wildfire byproducts. You still definitely want good ventilation.
sjg007 7y ago
Also open a window when cooking.
jly 7y ago
I bought an AQI / PM2.5 monitor and was shocked to find the same thing. I placed it in an upstairs bedroom, far removed from the kitchen, and the PM2.5 readings jump to unhealthy levels within minutes or cooking, even that far away. HVAC systems do a great job of circulating bad air throughout the home. I've also observed measurable CO level increases in the upstairs while running a gas oven, using a low-level monitor. I've also come to the conclusion that a vented range hood is really an essential for indoor cooking of any kind. It should definitely be the #1 priority for any home to improve air quality.
lukeschlather 7y ago
Air quality sensors don't tell the whole story, and they can only notice particulates of certain sizes. The worst day for me during the past few years' Seattle-area smoke events didn't register as a bad day on the official air quality reports because the particles were too big. But it was the only time where I actually had to stop and take a taxi 7 blocks because I just started coughing uncontrollably and couldn't carry my groceries home.
closeparen 7y ago
Anything you can smell is technically air pollution, no?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

downtide 7y ago

I always wonder about small acrylic hairs and such that float about the house. In a bright room just flex your jumper, there's thousands of these weird impurities, and I can't imagine they can be filtered out easily before or after getting into the lungs. The biggest shocker is when you disturb loft insulation. They claim it's not terrible (specifically if undisturbed), but floating glass strands can't be all that nice.

jjtheblunt 7y ago
Fiberglas is listed in the US anyway as a carcinogen.
- twistiti 7y ago
  Interesting that fiberglass fibers are typically 5-25 micrometers (µm), while asbestos fibers can be 180A to 300A (1 angstrom = 1/10000th of a micrometer. So an asbestos fiber is between ~200 to 1400 times smaller than a glass fiber. Acrylic fibers are 15 µm to 25 µm. Merino wool fibers are 15 µm to 30 µm. And human hairs diameters are between 20 to 200 µm. Seems to be a biological limit to the body cleaning system e.g. nanoparticles, abestos
frutiger 7y ago
They don’t need to be filtered. They get trapped in mucus. The constant flow of mucus from all your mucosal membranes pushes these outwards. In the case of your lungs they get delivered to the great acid bath that is your stomach.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  This. We evolved in an environment with plenty of particulate matter. It's the exotic stuff that has no analog from the time when we evolved that causes problems.
  - firethief 7y ago
    As opposed to acrylic?

not_a_moth 7y ago

I have a sensitivity to certain cooking fumes. I've tried to assess it objectively like it's a nocebo, which would be great if it were. There are two cafes in SF I used to frequent who do their cooking in the same main space as guests, do not have much if any ventilation, and, if I was there hacking on my laptop around lunch time, I would always get headaches and need to leave. (one is a trendy workspace cafe, that I feel bad naming). It has not happened at other SF cafes despite a lot of working-in-cafes. I also used to have a roommate who didn't like the sound of our ventilation fan and wouldn't open the kitchen back door (to the outdoors) because of the cool air. Anytime she cooked with the oven I would get a headache and need to leave the apartment, while having no problem with the third roommate's cooking who preferred to ventilate.

graeme 7y ago
If you got an air quality monitor you'd likely see shocking levels in those scenarios. I got a laseregg two, and normal frying can send indoor air quality to unhealthy levels if something gets a bit browned. Even with a fan on. It's portable and has a battery. Quite eye opening to test it in various scenarios.
- jly 7y ago
  I'll second the LaserEgg 2. Great product and I've also had some eye-opening experience with cooking and indoor AQI. These used to be tougher to find in the US but I think you can get them on Amazon, now.

LYSTech 7y ago

And what about the lack of natural light? Has anyone seen this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yv8gcFaJL0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yv8gcFaJL0

cmrx64 7y ago
This ad campaign from a window company?

graeme 7y ago

I got a laseregg 2, and highly recommend it or a similar monitor. It's been very eye opening to see how various scenarios affect air pollution: * frying indoors generally swiftly puts things in the unsafe range. Especially if it led to browning. * a neighbour's bbq would do the same if the window was open * idling truck on the street for construction? Unsafe range * surprisingly, the toaster would raise levels if it was on high enough to brown toast Really helped me make better decisions about when to open/shut windows and how to cook. I got the laseregg after reading reviews of air quality monitors used in china. Apparently it holds up well to specialized lab sensors. It has a battery and can be moved around

nsporillo 7y ago
Seems like the laseregg 2+ at best detects PM2.5, but something like the PurpleAir sensor can detect PM1.0 for roughly the same cost. Have you or anyone else used it? I'm interested in purchasing one.
- Forbo 7y ago
  Are there any of these types of devices that don't need to phone home or be connected to the Internet? The fewer "smart" devices I can have in my home the better.
  - graeme 7y ago
    Iirc the laseregg works fine with no connection. It can be connected, but isn't necessary. My co2 sensors have no connection either: https://www.amazon.com/Hydrofarm-Autopilot-Desktop-Monitor-Logger/dp/B01FYWU2IS/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?keywords=co2+monitor&qid=1557334844&s=gateway&sr=8-3 https://www.amazon.com/Hydrofarm-Autopilot-Desktop-Monitor-L...
winchling 7y ago
>idling truck on the street for construction? Unsafe range Or for ice cream sales -- next to a children's play area.
salex89 7y ago

PascLeRasc 7y ago

Off-topic, but this lab got $4.5M for equipment and still couldn't pay the students analyzing the data? What's up with that?

Harvey-Specter 7y ago
"Student volunteer" probably refers to undergrad students who are working on their theses.
- SilasX 7y ago
  Ah, then it's okay not to pay the going rate for the labor.
  - danaur 7y ago
    A lot of students benefit from this unpaid labor. I know many people who volunteered in labs to get real experience that they translated into high paying jobs else where. Those people would not be able to get the job if it was paid
firethief 7y ago
Students are free labor. They aren't racking up six figures of debt not to be exploited.
megy 7y ago
They used $4.5m worth of equipment. They didn't purchase it just for this test.

jly 7y ago

Indoor air quality means different things to different people. There are so many chemicals and particles that qualify as air 'pollution' that I find it helpful to rank how important they are. This article does a good job of quantifying the damage by pollutant, using a metric called 'Disability Adjusted Life Years': https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/which-indoor-air-pollutants-matter-most https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/which-indoor-air-polluta... You can see that while there are a lot of things to consider, PM2.5 is by far the most dangerous. Surprisingly to me, mold is actually the next most dangerous, implying that indoor humidity control is also very important.

macNchz 7y ago

I've found many houses I've been in to be extremely stuffy and stale inside...I think most American homes fall into a bad middle ground for indoor air quality: well enough sealed to trap indoor pollutants, but lacking the more sophisticated HVAC systems that can efficiently exchange fresh air. Additionally, it seems that many Americans also really hate opening their windows (and indeed the climate often doesn't really lend itself to opening the windows, in some places ever). I grew up in a drafty old house with no A/C, and even as a kid felt other people's–newer, not drafty, air conditioned–homes had an airless feeling. It's been interesting to follow the recent studies on indoor CO2 and other air pollution...I don't feel quite so crazy for wanting to open the windows all the time when visiting family.

e40 7y ago
Agreed, but many houses in the Bay Area were built in the 1920's (both the houses I've owned were). The windows in my house are not sealed well. The double-hung sash windows have space for the rope and I can feel a draft on windy days. All this talk of CO2 recently has made me value that my house is drafty.
- kaybe 7y ago
  It would be nice to have a house where you can regulate the draftyness better. In some seasons, draftyness is a feature, not a but, in others, not so much.

pdog 7y ago

If you're concerned about indoor pollution, I highly recommend house plants. In NASA research[1], common house plants were found to remove toxic agents such as benzene and formaldehyde from the air. Some of the best air purifying plants: Chlorophytum comosum (spider plant), Dracaena reflexa (song of India), Nephrolepis exaltata (Boston fern), Sansevieria trifasciata (snake plant), and Chamaedorea seifrizii (bamboo palm). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Clean_Air_Study https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Clean_Air_Study

rayiner 7y ago
Do these have any actual impact on health? Like, if I get a house plant, am I going to live a year longer? Two years longer? That’s the whole problem with all this “health science.” It’s completely disconnected from expected outcomes that you can use to determine whether this is something even worth caring about. EDIT re: sibling comment debunking impact of indoor plants. See, this is exactly what I mean. When you don’t tie observed correlations to concrete outcomes, all you do is confuse people. It’s not quite junk science, but it’s not helpful reporting of the science.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
martey 7y ago
From https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/03/indoor-plants-clean-air-best-none-them/584509/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/03/indoor-p... Recently, Waring and his colleagues reanalyzed all 195 studies that have examined whether houseplants can filter the air. They found that some types of plants can remove higher amounts of VOCs than others. But once you factor in the effects of working in a large room, none of the plants are able to do much. Waring told me to imagine a small office, 10 feet by 10 feet by eight feet. “You would have to put 1,000 plants in that office to have the same air-cleaning capacity of just changing over the air once per hour, which is the typical air-exchange rate in an office ventilation system,” he said. That’s 10 plants per square foot of floor space. Even if you chose the most effective type of VOC-filtering plant, you would still need one plant per square foot, Waring said.

Rudebwoy10 7y ago

It took me a while, but I eventually ended up getting a indoor air quality monitor. I'm in California, and when the fires happened, I expected my brand new condo building to have decent filtration. According to my Awair monitor (http://getawair.com http://getawair.com)... my indoor PM2.5 (Fine Dust) went up to 150 ugm3. 150! We definitely had a chat with the building after that. But yeah, cooking, cleaning, air fresheners... all of them negatively affect my home air quality. Just need to ventilate at the right times. After the DHH video about this topic, I pulled the trigger and got the monitor, which fortunately also tracks CO2 and chemical (VOCs). I'm glad to see 2 topics about air quality trending today. I had to finally register to get in on the one topic I actually know about.

forgotmypw3 7y ago

It's not just cooking, it's all the spray cleaners, liquid detergents, and so on, too.

code_duck 7y ago

I have serious food allergies and celiac disease in addition to allergies/sensitivities to ingredients of cleaning products. I have problems entering are staying in a lot of environments, pretty much anywhere that I don’t have control over the air or access to fresh air. The results on the toaster are not surprising. I’ve worried about toast smoke in coffee shops before because small amounts of gluten or allergens can make me sick. It’s great that they are measuring concentrations of chemicals in the air related to cleaners. Something like someone spraying air freshener or mopping the floor with Pinesol makes me feel ill, and continued exposure will make me sneeze and my eyes turn red and so forth. It’s amazing how casual people are about this. I sat down at the bar the other day and immediately the bartender started spraying Windex all over and wiping a wall. I had to rinse out my nose, and gained a headache. It definitely ruined the experience for me, but most people don’t think twice. The possibility is raised that “The dominant source of VOCs in Los Angeles is now emissions from consumer products, including toiletries and cleaning fluids.“ Again, not a surprise. A statistic that quote to people is that about 5% of VOC emissions in the United States come from dryer vents, from mostly unnecessary chemicals in detergent and dryer sheets. Almost every single chemical product that is packaged for consumers and sold in plastic bottles at stores makes me very, very sick. Conditioners, shampoo, clothing detergent, pesticides, air freshener, candles soaps, fabric softener, floor cleaners, dish soap, glass cleaner. The annoying thing is that while the base formulation of these is bad enough, the part that is the worst for me is the completely unnecessary fragrances.

clairity 7y ago
yes, i used to use "simple green" for cleaning because it was advertised as non-toxic, but the resultant sneezing and coughing made me move to even simpler cleaners like dish soap and baking soda.
stinos 7y ago
It’s amazing how casual people are about this Only if you think of it that way really, considering a) the majority of people don't have problems and b) long-term effects of those products are sometimes not known at all, let alone known by the general public. Don't forget things like allergy information for food etc are fairly recent developments even in the western world. And studies showing/hinting at links between cleaning produtcs and premature deaths etc are also fairly recent I think, so unfortunately the general population isn't really aware of the dangers.

mensetmanusman 7y ago

I have used 3M Filtrete room-air purifiers as white noise generators for my kids since they were born > 7 years ago. It’s amazing how much is in the air... I believe growing up in a dusty environment contributed to my asthma...

telotortium 7y ago

> CTRL+F "smoke" > CTRL+F "smoking" > 0 results The dominant source of air pollution for almost all of human history has been smoke of one sort or another (see: historical dramas that show indoor light/heating with candles and fireplaces, https://samharris.org/the-fireplace-delusion/ https://samharris.org/the-fireplace-delusion/), to the extent that I personally doubt banning secondhand smoke indoors would have made much difference to non-smokers' health before open wood fires and coal fires were phased out. I suppose it's a notable achievement of our society that both industrial pollution and domestic smoke has been reduced so much that VOCs from other sources indoors are our greatest worry.

whttheuuu 7y ago
lol. cigarette smoking pales in comparison to emissions from vehicles. worrying about second hand smoke (unless you're literally trapped in a room like a bar, etc.) is almost laughable.
graeme 7y ago
Indeed, I recently read about the health impacts of nicotine, as distinct from smoking. There are many, including cardiovascular trouble. But as far as I can tell, nicotine doesn't cause lung cancer. That's from the smoke itself - any smoke.

tomohawk 7y ago

If you want to reduce the pollution in your home, stop using dryer sheets, fabric softener, Downy, or any laundry detergent that is scented. Instead of fabric softener, use white vinegar as a liquid fabric softener in your washer. It will make your clothes smell fresh - not vinegary. That scent that comes off of clothes that are treated with scented detergents and softeners is air pollution.

soulofmischief 7y ago
Care to explain why? Or what mechanism specifically is contributing to pollution? Seems like "pollution" might need some defining, too.

hcurtiss 7y ago

I've been exposed to air toxics risk assessments through my work. The problem, in my mind, is not the toxics we're facing in our homes (or even outdoors). It's that humans are really bad at understanding risk. Let's imagine an annual Thanksgiving dinner presents an excess lifetime cancer risk of 2 (made up number -- probably much lower). Many people would find that unacceptable. But why? Many activities we engage in every day present much more material risk. For instance, this article says the odds of dying in a car crash are approximately 10.7 per 100k. That is 10,000 in a million. Yet we gladly get behind the wheel every day. Noncancer effects are gauged in terms of multiples of the lowest observed effect level or the no observed effect level. If across a spectrum of exposures, we observed no effect at a certain level, that would be our NOEL. Of course, the observed effect could be a runny nose. 100x the NOEL could still be a runny nose (it could, in fact, be no adverse effect at all), but people see 100x the benchmark level and freak out. In my mind, we really need to reshape this discussion around toxics. People are willing to suffer great costs to avoid hazards that do not, in fact, present material risks. [1] https://www.cars.com/articles/are-the-odds-ever-in-your-favor-car-crashes-versus-other-fatalities-1420682154567/ https://www.cars.com/articles/are-the-odds-ever-in-your-favo...

simple_phrases 7y ago
> For instance, this article says the odds of dying in a car crash are approximately 10.7 per 100k. That is 10,000 in a million. There are ~30k automobile deaths in the US per year. Your figure is off by several orders of magnitude.
- hcurtiss 7y ago
  I would point you to the quote in the article I cite: "'Motor vehicle traffic' deaths in the U.S. in 2013, the most recent full year of data available, totaled 33,804, for a death rate of 10.7 per 100,000, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention." I believe the denominator is confined to drivers. No matter, there are dozens of other good examples to support my point that ordinary activities are much riskier than the levels of risk we talk about in the context of air toxics.

skookumchuck 7y ago

My house is a bit drafty, and I couple that with a very effective air cleaner on the HVAC system, and convince myself that it pays off with breathing cleaner air.

jamewatson 7y ago

Air pollution is a huge problem, but usually, we feel protected from it when we are at home. We spend 90% of our lives indoors, so air pollution can be a real threat for us. Even if you can’t see it.