Rock wool and health

[Christophe]

Visible??? Oh?

This is one of the biggest scandal (coming) sanitary that France has ever known (much worse than the case of tainted blood or mad cow who have yet made the headlines for months!)

France was one of the worst asbestos lobby in the world with the CPA Asbestos Standing Committee! http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comit%C3%A ... nt_amiante

See this topic and this docu very good: https://www.econologie.com/forums/infrarouge ... t9213.html

All this is likely to be stifled as are the deaths of French civilian nuclear in France!

[Obamot]

Thank you for your feedback. But the questions remain.

Concerning the protections (masks, gloves), the professionals put but is it enough for the fibers less fine than those of asbestos but fine anyway? the rockwool manufacturers give different levels but all agree that there are no risks. True or false ? studies on the subject?

Then, what I notice is that in some houses the rock wool used for the insulation of the roof is blown which raises sanitary questions for the one who poses and then for those living in the house. Ditto for rock wool boards placed on the walls (houses, warehouses) because there is no guaranteed watertightness: defect in the panels, poor installation ...

In addition, for the ancient rockwool (before the end of the 90 years), what is the quality of this product? The questions that go back most concern this problem and also lead to the current quality of rockwool including the presence of formaldehyde.

please

For formaldehyde, just air the room where we work, it is very volatile (so do it during the summer). Then, I do not imagine using rockwool / glass, without partitioning it, it seems to me an elementary precaution (that's what I did in the blind boxes whereas before the wool was exposed to all wind). Idem between the beams of a galetas.

The finest particles can hardly pass through the masks that filter the gas, I suppose...
It has become very common to find masks that filter fine microparticles (diesel, etc.), it's really not / more a problem, it's gone into the mores.

After that if we do not have an answer to some questions / s ... we protect ourselves!

As for the dangerousness, according to our chemist, there is no rule since each metabolism reacts differently. Each individual does not have the same "terrain", nor does each person necessarily do early prevention (diet, lifestyle, etc.).

Even altitude can play a big role ...

So we protect ourselves against ALL pollutants, even aerosols deemed harmless.

If it is some repair work a scarf can suffice, if it is for a day, it protects ... Question of common sense.

To ChatelotI have not put a link on this report, because I find it biased, and I am wary of the health authorities (I've said it often and even in this thread): so put a link to such a report, do not by publishing extracts, it would be to endorse the figures. And as long as our chemist told us it was dangerous, it means that the numbers are weighted down. This is for me a question of intellectual honesty.

[Obamot]

Visible??? Oh?

This is one of the biggest scandal (coming) sanitary that France has ever known (much worse than the case of tainted blood or mad cow who have yet made the headlines for months!)

for asbestos the danger was visible on the disease statistics

Statistics? Really, everyone did not care about the 40's in ... the sixties ...!

Indeed it was not "visible" a priori, and that is why our teacher and dean at the time - who had a study office in France elsewhere - had warned us against this. incipient plague (he did not understand why architects continued to use it when in design offices we knew very well that ...). But at the time, these people as well as all the industrialists, real estate developers and politicians did not care. People were brought up "roughly" and the cranky had no say in the matter! (While the legislator mainly saw his career and re-election prospects ...) Meanwhile the workers and workers poisoned themselves in silence (at the same time as the future inhabitants of the premises) the reason why it was not visible , it is precisely because it is a “buried” disease, and that when it appeared it was on the radios at the pulmonologist and that the pulmonary fibrosis was already well advanced and preparing its time bomb.

With us the main producer (the boss of Eternit) has just been sentenced (he is currently a penis of finishing his old days in a country that does not extradite ...) It took 50 years until the conviction while all concerned circles of the BAT branch could not not know in 1970 already ...

For the wools of rocks / glass, it has not been that long that we isolate buildings at all costs using these materials. And so the first victims could very well have passed through the "background noise" of deaths due to "orphan" diseases ... So Chatelot, just so as not to repeat the same mistake as with asbestos: you might as well protect yourself! In any case, these fibers - ultimately glass - have by the sharp and microscopic side, all the chances of penetrating into the tissues, then by the respiratory tract ... It is a question of "stress" of the tissues, past a certain threshold of intolerance (which perhaps a simple allergy) it eventually becomes pathological then chronic then ... ???.

And that's not trivial when you demolish a building, there is a fire or what do I know. Because, for example, when the towers of the WTC collapsed, they scattered tons of poison in all Manathan ...! And as we speak, there is no study on the public health impact of the attacks of 11 September, but in the neighborhoods ... I would not like to have lived there!

Rather choose cellulose wadding, why not ...

cellulose wadding is less durable, and less efficient and more expensive ... I do not see the interest

Do you have a doc to say that Chatelot, if so publish it

Sustainability
I have no documentation to say that cellulose wadding "would be less durable"than rock / glass wool, (since as far as I know, it's even the opposite) if you have any documentation on it, it could be interesting ...

For what I know:
- 70 kg / m3 cellulose board wadding does not settle. It therefore remains stable over time.
- Glass wool / rock settles down, and even badly after already 2 decades. Accelerated phenomenon if it is sometimes subjected to a humid environment, condensation, fog, infiltration, etc ...

performances (thermal conductivity):
Rockwool: 0,034 - 0,040 W / mK
Cellulose wadding: 0,035 - 0,041 W / mK

There, no more, in all respects similar! Can you support?

Same for the cost...:
Cellulose wadding 20 € / m² for 100 mm thickness.
Rockwool 5 10 € / m² 100 mm thick.

If it costs less initially, the building may not be well isolated later ... If it went very well in the era of energy at low cost, passive houses are much more demanding ...

So it looks like ...

Mébon, as long as all precautions are taken: it should not be excluded from outdoor use in the form of compressed panels (again this will be difficult to settle over time, but then it is necessary to maintain a perfectly healthy construction) or elsewhere, always being very careful. In fact, the choice of the type of insulation is a question of need and technical requirements. So we cannot a priori rule out neither. It is on a case by case basis. But to choose if the conditions allow it and the budget: take the most "durable" and the least dangerous / toxic ...

[I Citro]

I fired the insulation in rolls of glass wool which had packed a lot after 35 years and no longer meets current standards.

Despite the combination, the mask for the eyes and to breathe, I drooled well ... I completed it while vacuuming.

I then blew the cellulose wadding (35cm) using a battery-ventilated mask that injects filtered air. Without this device, it is almost impossible to work. All these powdery products are probably not very good for the bronchi, wadding included.
That's 5 years and she has settled down 5 good centimeters as announced by the supplier ...

In hindsight, I wonder if these blown insulators are a good idea ...

Last month, I still buried a colleague asbestos victim, he was not yet retired, it is the 3ème in 2 years ...

Asbestos, diesel, aluminum in water, pesticides in food, ... the danger is EVERYWHERE ...

[chatelot16]

the blown insulation does not inspire me confidence: too mobile

good old glass wool roll remains or we put it

I have seen blown insulation spread loose on the floor of an attic: completely uneven thickness! work poorly done? or moved alone with the wind?

I use glass wool in ordinary roll, the least expensive, even on vertical wall, but retained by wooden sticks: it seems to me very durable

the glass is an inert and durable material, but the glass wool is not only glass there is a little glue so that the glass does not fly ... and according to the nature of the glue there is different risk polution ... alas I never know the details of composition of the glass wool that I buy ...

cellulose wadding also has its chemical risk, with boron salts that have been banned to put lonely amonium salt source of ammonia when there is bad condition

cellulose is a material too natural, too edible! he needs a conservative

the glass is inert inedible no need for preservatives, it's always taken

[I Citro]

Glass wool should not exist.
It is part of cement plants, materials in which we recycle the worst of our waste. We even found radioactive glass wool ...
We can isolate ourselves much better and cheaper than with this crap, with straw for example, which stores the CO2 instead of consuming mountains in glass wool factories ...

[Obamot]

Furthermore Chatelot:

You say lots and lots of things, but besides logical TA, nothing to support!

Then, we should see not to confuse boron and bromine ...

It is the latter which is very toxic (particularly for runoff) and in the POPs category (persistent organic pollutants).

Boron is certainly to be monitored, but what is contained in cellulose wadding no longer boronIs a boron salt. Salts in chemistry are as stable as glass. They are not reactive since they are already the product of a completely completed reaction.

Boron is found in homeopathy (yes!)

And even borax (from which the boron salt is drawn) is not toxic in direct contact (at the prescribed doses). It is used as antiseptic in medicine, and even in eye drops. None of these medical products require a prescription, and you tell us it's dangerous!

Among the strongly "borated" foods are: cabbage, lettuce, leek, celery, etc. All these foods are highly useful for health, also in fruits (except those of the citrus genus), legumes and nuts. Among the richest foods are avocado, peanut, plum, grape, chocolate powder and wine ... (Soure wiki)

The danger of this boron is a question of threshold (boron salt) it's a bit like if instead of a vitamin C tablet 1000mg you had to eat 25 kilo of oranges to reach the dose it's no worse than that, except that you do not have a quilt in cellulose wadding treated with boron salt and that you would sleep every night in it. So you do not risk anything.

And do you know why we do not find in citrus ...?

On the other hand, industrial derivatives such as boric acid ... That's something else.

[chatelot16]

I have nothing against boron! I know that its main salt is borax! a product without any danger ... but why was the boron salt banned for a certain time to impose a perfectly dubious amonium salt?

I do not know where is the resolution of this false problem ... if we had not tried to ban boron there would have been no problem

for the glass wool the one I have seems durable and inert ... but I have no specific information to give: the one who sold it to me did not give me his composition

it's the whole problem: to make real ecology you have to know the exact composition of what you use ... it's the same problem for the electronic bazaar which we can not have schema and products whose composition we do not know

all I notice is that glass wool put in a fire burns a bit, as if there was a little organic glue

[Obamot]

1) did not answer the question: why there is no boron salt in citrus ... ( )

I have nothing against boron! I know that its main salt is borax! a product without any danger ... but why was the boron salt banned for a certain time to impose a perfectly dubious amonium salt?

2) ... yeah that, I did not know, so I drew and stumbled upon the following! It seems like a big deal and ... hypocrisy! The glass industry has said that boron is dangerous in cellulose wool, even though boron is found in ... glass wool, but in large proportions and in a much more dangerous form (boric acid or form). may be converted to boric acid in the body during the biosolubility process). So in the end, I say that roughly and roughly: we would be at an acid-base risk with boron in glass wool, while it is almost zero in the form of boron salt in cellulose wadding, except obviously during the process of industrial production, but it is a problem that must be managed upstream (it will interest Citro ...)

Biosolubility or on the contrary biopersistence?

However, it is currently indicated on the website of the French manufacturers of mineral wools: "Mineral wools marketed in France by all manufacturers benefit from the exemption of the carcinogenic classification in application of the Directive 97 / 69 / CE adopted by the European Commission in December 1997, transposed into French law in August 1998 because they passed the tests provided for by this directive and their biopersistance is lower than the defined values. This exemption is certified by the EUropean CErtification Board, EUCEB »

At the level of communication, in the language of industry in a few years we went from biosolubility to biopersistence. These two terms, however, refer to the same phenomenon: that of the physical disappearance of absorbed fibers, one being the opposite of the other in the sense of elimination. A persistent fiber is poorly soluble and a soluble fiber is not very persistent.

About fifteen years ago, at the time of the asbestos problems which was a persistent fiber, we quickly made the substitution of biosoluble glass fibers. Glasswool manufacturers have developed this feature to avoid the problems posed by longer, larger asbestos fibers that accumulate in tissue. The biosoluble fibers are absorbed and dissolved by macrophages in the pulmonary alveoli. Critics of these insulators based on mineral fibers then communicated on the dusty composition of these products and glues they contained based on formaldehyde and other isocyanates.

The changing times and asbestos risk removed, the soluble character "drinkable, absorbable, poison" becoming negative with respect to the general public their communication has slipped towards the persistence "solid, spittable, unabsorbable". Reduced biopersistence means high biosolubility, which means that our body quickly assimilates these fibers and therefore their ingredients. Reduced biopersistence is now commonly accepted by consumers and made mandatory by European standards.

Boron and boron salt in glass wool
Moreover, the Société Chimique de France, in its article on boron, tells us that half of the world's production of boron is used by the glass industry. From there to think that there is boron in the glass wool is only a step and since the glass fibers are biosoluble, it follows that anyone handling glass wool would be susceptible to be exposed to boron.

The scientific literature attests that glass wool usually contains 2 15% boron oxide B2O3. The presence of boron is also mentioned on the manufacturer's environmental and health declaration form. For example, the FDES of the Comblissimo waste glass fiberglass made by ISOVER indicates 0.0679 kg of boron for 3.87 kg of total mass. The analyzes that we had done last May 16 in an independent laboratory confirm the presence of boron. Supafil blow wool manufactured by KNAUF also mentions this element in its FDES.

The Chemistry recalls concerning the boron that the presence of 0.0679 kg of this component causes the formation of 0.388 kg of boric acid H3BO3 in physiological medium. [CQFD, note]

In fact, the molar mass of hydrogen is 1 gram, that of boron is 10.80 grams and oxygen 16 grams. One mole of boric acid H3BO3 weighs 1 X 3 + 10.80 + 16 X 3 = 61.80 grams, and therefore to pass from the weight of boron to the weight of boric acid the amount of boron is multiplied by 5.72 (61.80 divided by 10.80)

According to the manufacturer's data, in glass wool COMBLISSIMO placed in contact with a physiological medium for 3.87 kg of total mass 0.388 kg of boric acid is formed 10% by mass of the product and the European regulation requires that these compounds have a low biopersistence ie a high biosolubility to be absorbed quickly.

The interest of boron in glass wool is confirmed in an Isover patent of April 2010 9 ° paragraph of the description: "the boron oxide is interesting to reduce the viscosity of glass and improve the biosolubility of the fibers. Its presence also tends to improve the thermal insulation properties of mineral wool, in particular by lowering its coefficient of thermal conductivity ... ". In addition, a Chinese company mentions that in the world market boron salt is also used as antifungal compound for fiberglass.

The Collective Expertise of INSERM cited above confirms these bioluable glass wool formulas. This study also explains that because of its small size compared to the siliceous matrix of the fiber, boron passes more quickly in solution in saline than other components.

3) "Exemption from the carcinogenic classification" ayayay, we learn things from it, you will tell me so much ...! And for what reason? "Chûûût, here are some questions!"

I do not know where is the resolution of this false problem ... if we had not tried to ban boron there would have been no problem

4) AND well I was like you. I did not know. So I investigated and people are very poorly informed these days ... So I asked our chemist who gave me some keys to understanding and after a week or two everyone had concluded that it was not was de facto not dangerous (boron salt). Maybe those who wanted to ban messed up, maybe they didn't study the problem in depth as we had done ... Maybe it's a big money story (as we can suspect) I don't know, it's a plausible hypothesis. The beginning of the letter speaks volumes, at the start we all have the impression that glass wool has become completely harmless, then we discover some cover-ups that make us understand that the problem is not so simple, and that is where we switch from harmlessness to "the duration of the persistence of the poison in the body", and this is where we understand that it can vary from one subject to another ... ! Very interesting!

Mister President,

Last May, France notified the European Commission of a draft decree relating to insulation based on cellulose wadding.

The 31 October 2012, the Director General of Risk Prevention at the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy mentioned in a note on the regulatory status of a component of building materials in the 6 ° paragraph of the second page: "This Franco-French approach is the subject of exchanges at Community level, such restrictions must be the subject of Community measures, the Commission is very vigilant on this point. "

We affirm that the draft decree submitted today to the European Instances also originates from a Franco-French approach which was not only due to a concern of Public Health, the problem it resulted can find its solution without Community measures and we hope that the Commission will be very vigilant on this issue.
Biosolubility of glass wool

First of all we invite you to realize the following experiment:
- Take a basin of warm water and put in a pinch of salt, a pinch of sugar, two teaspoons of vinegar and a few drops of household cleanser. You will thus have roughly reproduced the chemical conditions of the physiological fluid.
- Sprinkle with a handful of glass wool, stirring everything.
- Keep warm (37 ° is ideal!) And mix occasionally for 48 hours.
- After this period, note; a good part of the glass wool has disappeared, dissolved in the basin.

You will then reproduce a fact unknown to the general public and yet calibrated by standardized tests by the AFNOR concerning glass wool: that of the biosolubility of glass fibers in physiological medium at 37 °.

At the microscopic scale, a fiberglass resembles the Eiffel Tower, namely a siliceous framework associated with other components. In the human body these fibers are hydrolysed and decompose.

Throughout our research we have been intrigued by not finding recent results on the biosolubility of glass wool, but we have come to understand why.

When I searched for the term "biosoluble" on an internet search engine, I came across several results including these two texts:
- "In order to eliminate any health risk associated with exposure to glass wool fibers or rock wool for insulation, their chemical composition has been adapted by making it biosoluble"
- "These adaptations have been facilitated by the development of in vitro tests measuring the biosolubility of fibers in physiological fluids simulating that found in pulmonary alveoli."

These links return to the Saint Gobain Recherche website and clicking on it brings up a page "not found" and deleted. In other words, there is no longer any online communication from Saint Gobain Recherche on the biosoluble nature of glass wool (however even Saint Gobain has not succeeded in erasing all its traces on the web…)

It is by looking for patents and scientific articles that one finds elements on the biosolubility of the glass fibers dating from about ten years of which a Collective Expertise of the INSERM pages 8 to 16, various patents and sources appearing in links.

5) then return to the second part of the letter put at the beginning and one understands better the how of the why of the turning of jacket ...

6) glass in the body at a biopersistance coefficient, shows that even the industry does not have a clear answer on this issue. This is a definite progress, but we have moved on to the issues of sensitivities (forgiveness, biopersistance coefficient) individual! So, basically:

- If your body supports it well and the "stress" undergoes is well understood / managed, no problem we could say (except that we cannot know it in advance ...). Thus a young athlete with no previous history will fare better than a person of an advanced age with unfavorable terrain ...

- If you are young but you have (or have had) a bad diet and an organic acid_VS_Base imbalance (the case of more than 80% of the population nowadays ...) WARNING DANGER, we are then one of the subjects to risks and then we do not know what will give the invasive stress of a large amount of glass wool particles (or any other product ...)

- If you already have signs of degenerative diseases, at any age (frequent colds, hay fever, asthma, various allergies or chronic, etc.) great danger: imperative protection.

But anyway, faced with the growing multiplicity of chemical agents with which we are in presence every day, it would be well to protect ourselves all the time against everything (without making a fixation, but just because we are aware of it and that we want to do "prevention").
Here it is ... And it does not make me more than that to help my neighbor!

it's the whole problem: to make real ecology you have to know the exact composition of what you use ... it's the same problem for the electronic bazaar which we can not have schema and products whose composition we do not know

... and yes, many things are like that nowadays, alas!

Conclusion: there are tons of boron in glass wool saperlipopette and in forms more harmful ... What band of bachibouzouk they hid us all!

... good, but it is "less worse" than if they had done nothing without doubt ...

[plasmanu]

oulala, the ugly rockwool.

It's great on the contrary, natural (of volcanic origin), compactable, fireproof, water repellent, rodenticide, guilty, collapsible, collatable, economical ...

http://www.acqualys.fr/page/laines-mine ... thermiques