4 ms·

Attendants have higher risk than pilots. This kind of makes sense, as my understanding is they don't have pilots fly too often. Meanwhile, attendants are flyi

by RajT88 2mo ago

Attendants have higher risk than pilots. This kind of makes sense, as my understanding is they don't have pilots fly too often. Meanwhile, attendants are flying all the time.

dukeofdoom 2mo ago
[flagged]
- bertil 2mo ago
  Your comments makes problematic suggestions, but I found it funny that the more childish one —farts– is actually very true: with the lower pressure, people do fart more on airplanes.
  - philipallstar 2mo ago
    What problematic suggestions?
    - deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]
- devin 2mo ago
  [flagged]
- Der_Einzige 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - devin 2mo ago
    I handed it a downvote. Here's why: > Older flight attendants look really damaged by the job. First off, this is just anecdotal and I know FAs who do _not_ look "damaged by the job". So, we're off to a bad start. > The combination of irregular sleep, quite likely too much alcohol and sun in layover locations when younger. Not all FAs fly crazy schedules. This comment then makes assumptions about where younger FAs fly, and suggests they all drink too much. More conjecture to back up a weak claim without any evidence provided. > Plus radiation, and biological hazards like being around sick people and smelling farts all day. Being in an enclosed space is not that great for the lungs either, just being around people wearing perfume, is likely bad for the lungs OK, so this article is about radiation. That is at least addressing the topic. Calling "smelling farts" a biological hazard is borderline ridiculous. "Being around sick people" is what nurses do all day. There are _many_, _many_ professions where _being around a lot of people_ is part of the job. It does not seem particularly notable here. They end by saying that being in an enclosed space is bad for your lungs. Uh, ok. Maybe? Probably? How bad? Compared to what? Being outdoors in an area prone to air pollution?
    - alex43578 2mo ago
      Any flight attendants are going to have a disrupted schedule, that’s just inherent to the time change and travel. The “farts” comment is juvenile, but the cleaners, oil fumes, respiratory illnesses and more that fill an airplane cabin certainly contribute to respiratory issues. Nobody’s saying nurses or stone masons aren’t exposed to different respiratory risks.
      - devin 2mo ago
        No, "any" flight attendants are not going to have disrupted sleep schedules. Many FAs sleep in their own beds consistently. Not all FAs fly long haul. Most of them _don't_ fly long haul routes. Domestic carriage is dominant. Junior staff have less choice when it comes to flying routes where this kind of thing is true, but that changes as they gain seniority. Cleaners, fumes, etc. almost certainly are not good for you, but the comment started from "look at all of these old haggard FAs" and I don't think any of the rest of this is particularly strong supporting evidence for that claim, even if I agree you shouldn't huff campfire smoke.
- tzs 2mo ago
  They are also more exposed industrial disinfectants and cleaners used to clean the cabin than are pilots.
jader201 2mo ago
> as my understanding is they don't have pilots fly too often From a quick search, I can’t find evidence of this. If anything, pilots are in the air more of their week/lives vs. flight attendants.
- RajT88 2mo ago
  I guess I am going off when a pilot spoke at my high school for career day. (Decades ago...)
- jeswin 2mo ago
  In my search, I found that they spend almost an equal number of hours in air like you said - 75-100 hours per month. If that's the case, after adjusting for sex, these numbers holding would throw some uncertainty into the radiation hypothesis.
  - potatoking 2mo ago
    The fuselage probably has a lot less attention to shielding even if the cockpit seems very exposed.
  - beembeem 2mo ago
    This is peak HN. Two engineers running google searches without any primary sources speaking up about the issue.
    - xeromal 2mo ago
      Account created 2021
    - illusive4080 2mo ago
      Collaboratively trying to figure out an unknown. I quite enjoy this type of interaction of strangers versus the typical arguments
  - tzs 2mo ago
    According to a bit of Googling (which included LLM responses so if you need to be sure verify what follows), although flight attendants and pilots spend about the same amount of time in the air and so get the same exposure, flight attendants have fewer rest requirements and scheduling protection. This results in them working more erratic shifts with shorter rest windows, which results in more circadian rhythm disruption than in pilots. Important mechanisms in the body to suppress tumor growth and repair DNA damage are linked to circadian rhythms and are less effective when those rhythms are disrupted.

by RajT88 2mo ago

Attendants have higher risk than pilots. This kind of makes sense, as my understanding is they don't have pilots fly too often. Meanwhile, attendants are flying all the time.

dukeofdoom 2mo ago

[flagged]

bertil 2mo ago
Your comments makes problematic suggestions, but I found it funny that the more childish one —farts– is actually very true: with the lower pressure, people do fart more on airplanes.
- philipallstar 2mo ago
  What problematic suggestions?
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
devin 2mo ago
[flagged]
Der_Einzige 2mo ago
[flagged]
- devin 2mo ago
  I handed it a downvote. Here's why: > Older flight attendants look really damaged by the job. First off, this is just anecdotal and I know FAs who do _not_ look "damaged by the job". So, we're off to a bad start. > The combination of irregular sleep, quite likely too much alcohol and sun in layover locations when younger. Not all FAs fly crazy schedules. This comment then makes assumptions about where younger FAs fly, and suggests they all drink too much. More conjecture to back up a weak claim without any evidence provided. > Plus radiation, and biological hazards like being around sick people and smelling farts all day. Being in an enclosed space is not that great for the lungs either, just being around people wearing perfume, is likely bad for the lungs OK, so this article is about radiation. That is at least addressing the topic. Calling "smelling farts" a biological hazard is borderline ridiculous. "Being around sick people" is what nurses do all day. There are _many_, _many_ professions where _being around a lot of people_ is part of the job. It does not seem particularly notable here. They end by saying that being in an enclosed space is bad for your lungs. Uh, ok. Maybe? Probably? How bad? Compared to what? Being outdoors in an area prone to air pollution?
  - alex43578 2mo ago
    Any flight attendants are going to have a disrupted schedule, that’s just inherent to the time change and travel. The “farts” comment is juvenile, but the cleaners, oil fumes, respiratory illnesses and more that fill an airplane cabin certainly contribute to respiratory issues. Nobody’s saying nurses or stone masons aren’t exposed to different respiratory risks.
    - devin 2mo ago
      No, "any" flight attendants are not going to have disrupted sleep schedules. Many FAs sleep in their own beds consistently. Not all FAs fly long haul. Most of them _don't_ fly long haul routes. Domestic carriage is dominant. Junior staff have less choice when it comes to flying routes where this kind of thing is true, but that changes as they gain seniority. Cleaners, fumes, etc. almost certainly are not good for you, but the comment started from "look at all of these old haggard FAs" and I don't think any of the rest of this is particularly strong supporting evidence for that claim, even if I agree you shouldn't huff campfire smoke.
tzs 2mo ago
They are also more exposed industrial disinfectants and cleaners used to clean the cabin than are pilots.

jader201 2mo ago

> as my understanding is they don't have pilots fly too often From a quick search, I can’t find evidence of this. If anything, pilots are in the air more of their week/lives vs. flight attendants.

RajT88 2mo ago
I guess I am going off when a pilot spoke at my high school for career day. (Decades ago...)
jeswin 2mo ago
In my search, I found that they spend almost an equal number of hours in air like you said - 75-100 hours per month. If that's the case, after adjusting for sex, these numbers holding would throw some uncertainty into the radiation hypothesis.
- potatoking 2mo ago
  The fuselage probably has a lot less attention to shielding even if the cockpit seems very exposed.
- beembeem 2mo ago
  This is peak HN. Two engineers running google searches without any primary sources speaking up about the issue.
  - xeromal 2mo ago
    Account created 2021
  - illusive4080 2mo ago
    Collaboratively trying to figure out an unknown. I quite enjoy this type of interaction of strangers versus the typical arguments
- tzs 2mo ago
  According to a bit of Googling (which included LLM responses so if you need to be sure verify what follows), although flight attendants and pilots spend about the same amount of time in the air and so get the same exposure, flight attendants have fewer rest requirements and scheduling protection. This results in them working more erratic shifts with shorter rest windows, which results in more circadian rhythm disruption than in pilots. Important mechanisms in the body to suppress tumor growth and repair DNA damage are linked to circadian rhythms and are less effective when those rhythms are disrupted.