The long battle to educate the public and crew about toxic cabin air has been long in developing and in gaining understanding and recognition. We commend all of the people and organizations who have contributed their efforts and resources to this endeavor.
This is by no means an exhaustive list of efforts and articles to educate and expose regarding the existence and danger of toxic cabin air on commercial aircraft but it is informative, and we urge you to go through this history up to the present day. Hopefully it will enlighten you to the health issues that people and crew have dealt with and how the exposure and the struggle has change their lives, and how they hope to change your thinking and your understanding.
Please, Also review the ‘fume events’ section of our website for articles on some of the publicized exposure events that have occurred on commercial aircraft. Our section on Experiences and spouse support are particularly enlightening.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
Toxic fumes impairing our ability to fly, say pilots
- 15:36 19 June 2007 by Zeeya Merali
- For similar stories, visit the Aviation Topic Guide
Toxic fumes on planes are poisoning pilots and rendering them unable to fly safely, say pilots, who are campaigning for “aerotoxic syndrome” to be recognised as a disease. Two official investigations are being opened after concerns that highly toxic oil contaminants are leaking into cabin air supply on commercial airliners in flight. The UK government is to fit air-monitoring equipment on board aircraft amid increasing concerns that passengers, pilots and cabin crew are being exposed. And 1500 pilots will take part in the first major health study designed to establish the extent of the problem.
“We’re basically the canaries – getting knocked down by the fumes first,” says Susan Michaelis, a former pilot who believes she was poisoned by fumes from leaked engine oil while flying. She and other grounded pilots launched a campaign for the condition to be recognised, at a meeting at the UK’s Houses of Parliament on 18 June.
Compressed air is routinely drawn off engines and supplied to aircraft cabins. If the seal inside the engine is not secure, engine oil can leak into the cabin and contaminating air with toxic tricresyl phosphate (TCP), says Michaelis.
Dirty socks
Michaelis, who is currently at the University of New South Wales, Australia, carried out a survey of 250 pilots and found that 85% had detected contaminated air – which smells like “dirty socks” – while flying. Of these, 57% reported symptoms of ill health relating to the incident, and 8% had to be retired on health grounds.
Michaelis believes that the long term effects of prolonged exposure are largely overlooked by airline companies. Symptoms related to long term exposure purportedly include neurological and respiratory problems, memory loss, difficulties with speech, and chronic fatigue.
“Passengers should be made aware that the pilot’s ability to fly is being impaired,” says Michaelis. One affected pilot reportedly fell asleep in a flight simulator after exposure in a real aircraft, and was told he was unfit for flight.
“Everybody recognises that there are incidents where fumes enter cabins,” says Jonathon Nicholson, a spokesperson for the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). “We will look at further work on the issue if long-term health issues are proven.”
Toxic Fumes in Airplanes Pose Health Risk
A former Australian airline pilot has warned that toxic fumes in airplanes pose a serious health risk even though the British government believes that the leaking of such fumes inside the airplane is a very rare occurrence.
Dr Susan Michaelis, who was a pilot for Australia’s Qantas airline and who has completed a PhD on the subject of toxic fumes, said that she became seriously ill due to such toxic fumes and had to stop flying.
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has received a number of complaints over the last five years regarding the leakage of such fumes, with over 270 cases of engine oil leakages with fumes entering the cabin.
Dr Michaelis said that all of the planes should be fitted with warning systems so that the pilot can be informed whenever such leakages take place. “If you’ve been on an aircraft and smelled that funny odor it’s recognized that’s generally oil fumes. The passengers wouldn’t know. You wouldn’t know and if you were to get sick, it may not be related, but you wouldn’t know. People are getting sick. There are people getting sick and they are getting seriously sick”, she said.
Toxic air plane crash warning
PASSENGER jets risk “dropping out of the sky” because airlines refuse to fit detectors that could save pilots from poisonous cabin air, a toxicologist told the Sunday Express.
Professor Chris van Netten, former US government adviser, says the industry is putting profits before the health and safety of passengers or crew.
He says that by failing to fit monitors that can “easily” detect leaks of odorless, colorless and toxic carbon monoxide, there is always the risk that pilots could inhale fumes and be rendered incapable of safely flying the plane.
Professor van Netten, who is Canadian, is a world authority on bleed-air contamination.
He said: “Carbon monoxide is a relatively rare event but it’s an acute one that can bring an aircraft down.
“When it happens you want to know what is going on because it is incapacitating and you want to be able to flush it out.
“If you can put detectors in the home, why not put them in the aircraft?”
He says they could avert “the worst situation that can make a plane drop out of the sky” and adds that fitting them as standard is “the least” airlines can do.
He claims the failure to fit detectors is symptomatic of a general attitude in the industry towards concerns over cabin air, adding: “If they were to officially admit the aircraft air was not healthy, they are in big trouble financially. They would be bankrupt.” The professor’s warning comes amid growing concern about the safety of cabin air. Last Sunday we revealed that two top British Airways pilots, Richard Westgate and Karen Lysakowska, had died within a month of each other aged 43.
Pilot’s Autopsy reveals death due to toxins in cabin air
BA crew autopsies show organophosphate poisoning
Sustained exposure to organophosphates (OP) from contaminated cabin air contributed to the death of a 43-year-old British Airways pilot, a group of medical experts believe.
The findings are likely to increase pressure on the industry to take the issue of sustained crew exposure to engine bleed air more seriously. Airlines and governments have previously dismissed suggestions that bleed air can be a factor behind flightcrew falling ill.
The pilot, senior first officer Richard Westgate, started flying professionally in 1996 and worked for various airlines before joining BA in 2007. He died in December 2012 after years of increasingly serious symptoms of sickness that went undiagnosed in the UK, despite reference to 15 different medical consultants.
The symptoms included headaches, loss of memory and numbness in his limbs. He was grounded on full pay in September 2011, and consultation with a neurologist in Amsterdam followed. As a result, extensive medical details of his symptoms before death are on record.
Although no coroner’s inquest has been held into his death, medical experts led by Prof Mohamed Abou-Donia of Duke University Medical School, North Carolina – the world’s leading authority on organophosphate poisoning – have published a study into two autopsies carried out on Westgate, who until his illness was a slim, fit, non-smoking paragliding champion.
Abou-Donia and his colleagues are also investigating the January 2014 death of an unnamed 34-year-old BA airline steward, whose tissue samples indicate degradation that appears identical to the pilot’s case, and is “consistent with organophosphate-induced neurotoxicity”. Both Westgate and the steward died in their beds.
Abou-Donia says Westgate’s case is “one of the worst cases of organo-phosphate [OP] poisoning I have come across”.
“In all my specialised tests for neuro-specific auto-antibodies he was the worst by far,” he says. “The air transport industry constantly overlooks vital components of OP poisoning: the combined effects of multiple compound exposure – repeated low-dosage exposure is just as dangerous as a single large dose (often more so) – and the genetic predisposition to toxicity of the individual’s genes.”
Abou-Donia’s latter point is particularly important, as some of the fume events investigated saw one pilot react badly to the neurotoxins while the other was apparently unaffected, which led to confusion.
The potential risks of air contamination have been a sensitive area for some years. While airlines do not deny organophosphates from engine oil additives can be present in the engine bleed air that supplies the cabin, they – and aircraft manufacturers – maintain that this is at a harmless level.
Abou-Donia argues this was not so in Westgate’s case, despite the fact that the pilot had never logged an actual “fume event” during his career.
Frank Cannon, the lawyer acting for the families of both deceased, says the Westgate case is a watershed in this controversy. “They can try explaining one [case] away, but not another and then another,” he says. Cannon adds he has “about 50” cases on his books.
BA says: “It would be inappropriate to comment… on the cause of death of an individual. The safety and security of our customers and crew are of paramount importance to British Airways and will never be compromised.
“Our crew are encouraged to report any possible fume event so that our engineers can investigate it. We would not operate an aircraft if we believed it posed a health or safety risk to our customers or crew.”
U.S. Airways in the News Toxic Air
You must listen and watch this newscast out of Charlotte North Carolina, it is real, and action is needed. Notice that U.S. Airways after the interview is still denying and stonewalling this issue!
Aviation industry urged to respond to medical guidance on cabin fumes
Experts have highlighted the health dangers posed by engine oils and hydraulic fluids in aeroplanes. Bette Browne reports
Last month, more than 200,000 travellers were affected by delays and cancellations when a significant outage hit the UK’s air traffic control system. This outage forced the cancellation of more than 1,200 flights, causing the worst flight disruption in the UK since the Icelandic volcano in 2010.
It was a dramatic example of the potential inconveniences of airports and aeroplanes with which we are all familiar.
Now added to these issues have come serious warnings from health and science experts on the dangers posed when cabins become contaminated by engine oils and hydraulic fluids.
Fume events
The warnings were issued by a team of experts from nine countries. The International Fume Events Taskforce was formed six years ago to investigate the impact of cabin fumes. The taskforce of 17 professionals includes doctors, occupational health specialists, toxicologists, epidemiologists, and aviation experts.
Most commercial aircraft flying today produce compressed air in the engine. Excess air is redirected to systems elsewhere on the airplane, including the cabin. This feature is known as a bleed system. A fume event occurs when bleed air is contaminated by fluids such as engine oil, hydraulic fluid, de-icing fluids, and other potentially hazardous chemicals.
Exposure to the fumes is reported to cause dizziness, fatigue and impairments in both cognitive ability and short-term memory. Exposure has also been associated with cardiac, neurological, and respiratory complaints.
According to the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), such fume events are uncommon. However, a Los Angeles Times investigation in 2020 cited a FAA-funded study by Kansas State University which found the rate of these events occurred in one in every 5,000 flights.
The medical protocol and the review of the health threats posed for passengers and crew was published by the international taskforce on 16 May in the journal Environmental Health. It was led by global aviation health researcher and former pilot Dr Susan Michaelis (PhD), who is based in the University of Stirling, Scotland.
“There are no sensors on board transport aircraft and therefore no contaminants are collected at time of exposure,” according to the taskforce. “Cabin air monitoring studies have identified the presence of low concentrations of individual bleed air contaminants that are well below published chemical exposure limits during normal (non-incident) flights.
“However, few measurements have been undertaken during documented fume events, ground-based exposure limits were not developed for application at altitude or for complex heated mixtures, and the focus has been on individual substances rather than the complex thermally degraded mixtures.”
New guidance
The taskforce has called on the aviation industry to do more to protect passengers and crew from cabin fumes and issued new medical guidance dealing with potential exposure. “There is an urgent need for a consistent, internationally accepted medical protocol to facilitate the recognition of health effects associated with fume exposure in aircraft cabins and cockpits,” according to the taskforce.
Fume Events
Air Safety, Health, and Secutity of ashsd.afacwa.org
Updated February 2, 2024
An excellent summary of efforts to educate the public and expose the existence of toxic cabin air and it’s dangers
The basics
Problems with aircraft air quality include inadequate ventilation, a cabin that is either too hot or too cold, low pressure (oxygen), ozone exposure, and fume events. A fume event is what happens when either engine oil or hydraulic fluid contaminates the ventilation air flow. Usually, there is no smoke or haze – “just” an unusual, unpleasant smell coming from the vents. There are other types of fumes, too, such as electrical, engine exhaust, and deicing fluid. But this page is dedicated to oil and hydraulic fluid fumes because those are reports we receive most frequently, and they have the potential to cause serious health impacts and compromised flight safety.
Audio of conversation between JetBlue pilots and ATC (Dec. 23, 2023) — During climb from JFK enroute to SDQ, the pilots told ATC, “We have a fumes/odor in cockpit/cabin.” The pilots returned to JFK for an overweight landing. Emergency vehicles and medical assistance met the aircraft. Of concern — the pilots told ATC that they were not on supplemental oxygen but “were unable to get the fumes to clear.” The description of the maintenance work on that aircraft was consistent with oil fumes.
In October 2023, the International Federation of Airline Pilots Associations’ updated its Cabin Fumes position paper and briefing leaflet. The global pilots’ association calls for standardized reporting and training of fume events, bleed air filters and sensors, a standardized medical protocol, less toxic oils, and stronger regulatory enforcement.
European standard-setting body (CEN) publishes TR17904
In November 2022, the Center for European Normalization published Technical Report (TR) 17904 which is a comprehensive collection of best-practice recommendations to prevent exposure to oil and hydraulic fluid fumes onboard aircraft. You can purchase it across Europe. It is an important resource for manufacturers, airlines, and regulators. The best-value purchase option is through LVS for 29 euros. To buy a copy of CEN TR17904, register with your email address on the LVS website. Then, enter “17904” in the search box on this page and then “add to cart.”
Examples of fumes events in the news:
LA Times publishes in-depth investigative news piece: Highlights the ways in which fumes can compromise flight safety (Dec. 17, 2020); also, LA Times published two shorter companion articles, one describing how the Times conducted its investigation and the other describing the most common odor descriptors for onboard oil/hydraulic fumes
More reports of “dirty socks” fumes onboard: NBC news segment describes documented fume events that sent crewmembers to hospital and potentially compromised flight safety (Aug. 16, 2017)
Flight crew members say toxic air in plane cabin harmed their health: Good Morning America segment raises travelers’ awareness about the potential for exposure to oil fumes inflight (Nov. 22, 2016)
“Mystery illness” no so mysterious: Fume event reported on British Airways flight 286, Oct. 24, 2016. Captain told air traffic control that the diversion was necessary because of a “fume event” (listen to recording of exchange between ATC and captain, starting at 3:10) Flight scheduled from SFO-LHR; diverted to YVR. “Unusual smell” reported during cruise, some of the cabin crew felt unwell, emergency landing, all 25 members of crew treated upon landing. One passenger said it smelled as though someone took their shoes off. Another passenger said that medical attention had been recommended, but the airline would not cover the cost, quoted at $800 per person. In January 2017, a local news group reported that the investigation is ongoing after a leaked report described the effects on the crew.
Examples of flight safety issues -read more https://ashsd.afacwa.org/?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=1396&page=HealthIssues
Aerospace journal publishes about NTSB and turboprop crashes: Open access article which reviews 1980s NTSB investigation into “hypothesis” that aircraft crashed when pilots were overcome by oil fumes and provides more recent examples of compromised flight safety.
IFALPA publishes Cabin Air Quality documents: The International Federation of Airline Pilots’ Associations emphasizes the potential flight safety hazards posed by inflight exposure to smoke/fire/fumes, and recommends constructive engineering and training solutions. (2023 documents listed above. Also: 2023 position paper, 2023 briefing leaflet, 2018 position statement, 2018 briefing leaflet, 2013 position statement, 2013 safety bulletin)
ICAO publishes Circular 344: The International Civil Aviation Organization published a circular that provides guidance on education and training for airline workers to recognize and respond to oil fumes onboard, given the potential for flight safety to be compromised when crews breathe oil fumes onboard. (Nov. 2015)
Summary of compromised flight safety documents and investigative reports: Summary of a sample of published documents that describe compromised safety (confirmed or suspected) coincident with crewmember exposure to engine oil-contaminated air onboard aircraft (rev. 2016). The earliest reference listed regarding exposure to “hot oil fumes” and the potential for flight safety to be compromised is an aviation medicine textbook published in 1939.
FAA recognizes pilot exposure to oil fumes as “unsafe condition”: Aviation regulator mandates inspections and “corrective actions” in the air supply system on one aircraft type to prevent crew exposure to engine oil fumes. The presence of oil fumes in the air supply system is not unique to this one aircraft type because all commercial aircraft (except for the B787) use unfiltered engine bleed air for ventilation, and all aviation engines are lubricated with chemically-similar oils.
Swedish air accident authority (SHK) investigated near-crash on commercial flight during descent into Malmo, Sweden: Pilot impairment and temporary incapacitation was documented coincident with them breathing oil fumes during the descent phase of flight; view video footage of the captain from that flight.
Sample of published medical/regulatory articles of interest —
- Some published studies have found prevalent, low-level exposure to TCPs and TBP during “normal” commercial flights (Crump et al., 2011).
- In a small pilot study, researchers correlated spikes in ultrafine particle count on aircraft in operation with engine power setting changes during four commercial flights; see — Michaelis et al., 2021. This paper also includes a robust discussion on the UFP literature. Of interest, an article by Howard et al., 2018 proposes that part of the causal mechanism for the symptoms that crews report is cumulative exposure to oil-sourced UFP. Howard, 2020 has also critiqued the inappropriate risk assessment “logic” often used to downplay the toxicity of engine oil fumes.
- Mobil Oil submitted neurotoxicity data on TCPs to the EPA (1988) – Importantly, in this Section 8(e) submission to the EPA, Mobil reported that, based on its own test data, ToCP content is not a reliable predictor of TCP neurotoxicity.
- Counterpoint to the most prevalent myths regarding exposure to oil fumes in the aircraft air supply system: Article published in the Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry, 14: 122–132 (2014). You can access the abstracts of other articles in that issue, all addressing some aspect of onboard exposure to oil fumes, or access the full text of the entire fumes issue in pdf format.
Selection of historical clips and information —
2015: NBC story regarding lawsuit filed against Boeing. Also reported by the Today Show and Chicago Tribune.
2013: 60 Minutes Australia reported on oil fumes on aircraft-contaminated air on aircraft
2012: International Transport Workers’ Federation releases educational film — The ITF is a global organization with 690 member unions representing over 4.5 million transport workers in 153 countries, including AFA-CWA. “Contaminated Air: What You Need to Know” was released in 2012 to help educate airline workers about the potential for exposure to oil fumes on aircraft, including practical steps to take if fumes exposure is either suspected or confirmed
2011: Published review of fume events at one major US airline: Review includes description of impact of exposure to smoke/fumes on crew health and flight safety.
Oct 2011: Boeing suit settlement… , Boeing concerned…as early as 1953 – msnbc.com stories
Mar 2011: UK Department for Transport releases report into flight deck air quality measurements onboard 100 UK flights, conducted by researchers at Cranfield University (Part I, Part II). Report concludes no problem with aircraft air supply contamination. Read counterpoint here.
2010: CNN story on contaminated air event at one US airline
2008-09: King 5 News in Seattle ran an exclusive story in early 2009. In April 2008, the BBC highlighted the dangers of breathing contaminated aircraft air on its news program, “Panorama.”
March 2009: ASHRAE President sent this letter to the heads of FAA and its European counterpart, EASA, urging the two agencies to investigate and determine the requirements for bleed air monitoring and solutions to prevent bleed air contamination with engine oil. This action was unanimously approved by members of the ASHRAE Aircraft Air Quality committee (SSPC-161P) in attendance at the Jan. 2009 meeting
Sept 2008: Australian aviation regulator, CASA, has convened an independent Expert Panel on Aircraft Air Quality (EPAAQ). The EPAAQ has a broad mandate, covering both safety and occupational health and safety matters. The panel will review the evidence and prepare a report with recommendations. The report is expected to be delivered by the first quarter of 2010. The CASA website states that “Individuals and groups representing aircrew members have raised concerns about the possibility of low level chronic exposure to contaminants in aircraft cabin air leading to potential long term health effects. Some flight crew have reported a variety of symptoms that they have associated with cabin air quality. The evidence based relationship between cabin air exposures (either in normal operations or following incidents) and ill health in aircraft crews has been difficult to ascertain. The expert panel will: review existing literature on cabin air quality; seek submissions from interested parties who wish to provide evidence for consideration by the panel; and review the evidence and submissions and prepare a report with recommendations.“
Dec. 2007: At long last, the ASHRAE Aircraft Air Quality Standard 161-2007 has been published. It is a voluntary standard but represents the best consensus between industry and crewmember unions, and it includes provisions to prevent hot cabin conditions, limit exposure to oil fumes and pesticides, require gaspers in crew work areas, and more. The current version of the ASHRAE standard (2018) and its companion guideline (2021) are available as “read-only” files online.
Jan 2007: Australian Transportation Safety Board releases report on pilot incapacitation, citing exposure to toxic fumes as the second-leading cause.
April 2007: UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch issues incident report regarding oil fumes in flight deck and a necessary diversion. Report recommends that EASA and the FAA require a flight deck detection and warning system for oil smoke/mist.
March 2006: Swiss Transportation Safety Board incident report concludes that exposure to oil fumes compromised ability of the copilot during approach and landing, that the captain had not donned his oxygen mask, and that the aircraft had a history of odors/fumes that had not been addressed.
Aug 2005: OSHA succumbs to pressure to settle case with ExxonMobil (see Aug 2004). Crewmembers and their doctors need to understand that the current “warnings” that ExxonMobil has published ignore the health risks associated with inhalation of engine oils and ignore the toxicity of meta and para isomers of the neurotoxic tricresylphosphates. Bottom line: if you are a hen, drink large volumes of engine oil, and are only worried about short-term effects to your peripheral nervous system, then the current warnings on the ExxonMobil labels and data sheets are okay.
Aug 2004: OSHA cites engine oil manufacturer Crewmembers and passengers can suffer neurological damage after exposure to aerosolized oil mists in the cabin and cockpit of commercial aircraft. In Feb 2004, AFA filed a complaint with OSHA, stating that ExxonMobil had, without basis, watered down the warnings about nervous system damage on the labels and Material Safety Data Sheets of its jet engine oils. ExxonMobil was relying on research that was incomplete and irrelevant to the exposure conditions and symptoms experienced by crewmembers and passengers.
June 2004: FAA acknowledges that exposure to pyrolyzed engine oil can cause impairment of the operational skills and abilities of the flightcrew, which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane.” Policy applies to BAe146 aircraft, but all commercial aircraft have bleed air system and all use chemically similar oils
2004: Aviation Organophosphate Information Site (AOPIS) releases documentary video on aircraft air supply contamination and the serious health effects it can cause among flight attendants, pilots, and passengers
July 2003: AFA review of FAA response to 2002 National Research Council committee recommendations on aircraft air quality In January 2002, the NRC Committee on Air Quality in Passenger Cabins of Commercial Aircraft released a report that detailed its year-long assessment of air quality on commercial aircraft, including ten recommendations. In response, the FAA acknowledged that it “has not kept pace with public expectation and concern about air quality and does not afford explicit protection from particulate matter and other chemical and biological hazards.” To date, though, the FAA has still failed to take any meaningful action.
June 2003: Aircraft air quality: What’s wrong with it and what needs to be done AFA submission to the Aviation Subcommittee of The Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, US House of Representatives. Association of Flight Attendants, AFL-CIO. Also see passenger submission to Aviation Subcommittee hearing
June 2003: Timeline of events related to the introduction of ozone exposure standards on commercial aircraft, 1976-1983 Association of Flight Attendants, AFL-CIO
Feb 2003: Position paper of the International Task Group on Aircraft Air Quality Labor group under the International Transport Workers’ Federation concerned about aircraft air quality; members represent cabin crew in the US, Australia, Canada, Europe, Mexico, and South America.
Jan 2003: FAA issues a recommendation (not a regulation) that aircraft passengers not be left without ventilation for more than 30 minutes. We are unaware of action by the airlines to implement this recommendation as policy.
Nov 2002: Update on oil switch at Alaska Airlines and its relevance to crew and passenger health
Aug 2002: UK regulator issues recommendations to airlines in light of increased number of reports of pilot incapacitation Oil leaking from the engines or APU into the air supply systems cited as “the most probable source” of the reports, and state that reducing occurrences of oil contamination will also reduce the risk of flight crew incapacitation.
Nov 2001: Swedish aviation authority (SHK) investigation into air quality incident onboard a commercial flight Nov 1999 during which the captain was incapacitated inflight when exposed to oil fumes. The first officer and the flight attendants also reported symptoms.
Jan 2001: AFA submission to the NRC Committee on Air Quality in Passenger Cabins of Commercial Aircraft
Oct 2000: Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality In the BaE146 Aircraft Official report outlining two-year bipartisan Australian Senate inquiry into complaints of ill health and compromised aviation safety on the BAe146 aircraft
