
German armed forces warn that carbon fiber might be cancer-causing - m8rl
http://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/Bundeswehr-warnt-vor-Krebs-durch-Carbonfasern,cfk114.html
======
mxfh
Since the carcinogenic effect of asbestos is mostly caused by it's physical
properties[1]; anything that resembles the shape of asbestos' micro-particles
is also highly suspected to be carcinogenic.

 _The shape, size, and adsorbing nature of the fibers also appear to be
critically important. Recently, doubts have arisen concerning the safety of
commercially available carbon nanotubes,[2] which may possess the same
carcinogenicity as asbestos fibers because of their similar characteristics.
Ample care has to be taken to prevent a tragedy similar to the one caused by
asbestos exposure._ [1]

[1]
[http://www.med.nagoya-u.ac.jp/medlib/nagoya_j_med_sci/7112/p...](http://www.med.nagoya-u.ac.jp/medlib/nagoya_j_med_sci/7112/p001-010_Toyokuni.pdf)
[PDF]

[2]
[http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v3/n7/abs/nnano.2008.111...](http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v3/n7/abs/nnano.2008.111.html)

On making nanotubes less dangerous: _Shorter is better_
[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201207664/ab...](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201207664/abstract)

~~~
001sky
It's probably worth making the distinction that most people are exposed to
"Carbon Fiber" as CRP[1], not "raw carbon fibers". And it is the ~aersolized
bits raw carbon/dusts (the subject of this article) that are problematic.

_________

[1] The german title is "Bundeswehr warnt vor Krebs durch Carbonfasern", and
From the German wikipedia page "Carbonfasern" ...

 _The fibers are mainly for the production of carbon fiber reinforced plastic
used (CFRP = Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic). Derived from the English, the
abbreviation CFRP (is english Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic) used._

~~~
genericuser
Much like asbestos siding in that regard, where its not exactly being pumped
into the air by most people, but people who work with it, for example sanding
it, create a health hazard.

~~~
jpindar
And indeed one way of making existing asbestos building materials safe (or at
least, safer) is by spraying plastic on them to encapsulate them.

------
Kallikrates
In another life I had to take aircraft crash response training, and was in
charge of recovery (salvage, battle-field repair etc). The response to an
aircraft with composite materials is totally different. With normal
construction we could get to work as soon as the fire, was out and any
hazardous liquids were taken care of. Crashes involving damage to composite
structures required that the damaged areas be sprayed down with a varnish like
chemical by the same troops who handle Chemical weapon response (they had
special suits). Then there would be air particulate tests before we could move
in. Here is a military study:
[http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a420193.pdf](http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a420193.pdf)

~~~
splawn
A long time ago a coworker told me about this. He told me it was because the
dust was conductive and would wreck havoc with electronics.

~~~
JabavuAdams
I've heard an anecdote along these lines, too. It was about a lathe that had
been exposed to carbon-fiber dust starting to turn when supposedly off.

------
exDM69
Formula 1 and other open wheel racing drivers have been exposed to carbon
fiber dust (from the carbon-carbon brakes) for a few decades now. There is
some research going on with former racing drivers.

E.g. former F1 driver Mika Salo underwent surgery where his lungs were
examined to assess the effects of repeated exposure to burned carbon fiber
dust (this was several years ago). Unfortunately, I do not have any links to
sources nor do I know the results of the research.

Another big question mark is the health and environmental effects of graphene.
There is a lot of research going on in applications of graphene but only now
there have been research projects into possible negative effects on the
environment.

~~~
MrBuddyCasino
Here is something:
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/41211...](http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4121126.stm)

Apparently the surgery was unrelated, they found lots of carbon brake dust in
his lungs purely by chance. No conclusion on whether it is dangerous or not.

Edit: grahamel was quicker :)

~~~
exDM69
I recall him telling (in a Finnish commentary for a F1 race broadcast) that he
went to another surgery to examine the carbon fiber dust in his lungs. But
this was almost 10 years ago, I can't remember the specifics.

~~~
nodata
Can you wash the carbon fiber dust out of the lungs?

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Washing air-breathing lungs with water sounds problematic, although with
fluro-carbons and the prevalence of lung cancer I am not going to say no-one
hasn't tried !

~~~
ars
You could wash one lung at a time. Or use extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Water in an of itself won't hurt lungs as long as the patient gets enough
oxygen.

~~~
kleim
"Water in an of itself won't hurt lungs"

Yes it does:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drowning#Secondary_drowning](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drowning#Secondary_drowning)

If you ever get saved from near drowning, you are still not safe.

------
m8rl
A research facility of the german armed forces warns that carbon fiber once
burned at high temperatures is transformed to micro-sized particles having
effects on the lungs comparable to asbestors.

------
chiph
The USAF was concerned at one point that should an F-16 burn on a runway, it
would release carbon-fiber strands which would float around the base and short
out electrical equipment (communications gear, phone switch, power generation,
etc).

Seems like the concern was correct, but misplaced. We had a plane catch fire
on a taxiway and burn, and no electrical mayhem resulted. Perhaps we should
have worn our gas masks -- but we didn't know at the time.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Sounds like that they were aware of 'Soft Bomb' technology and were worried
that an accidental soft bomb could go off via the F-16's fiber/composite
materials burning.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-114/B_%22Soft-
Bomb%22](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-114/B_%22Soft-Bomb%22)

Interesting, that a plane from 1988 had warnings and concerns for a bomb that
wouldn't be used until 1999. I wonder when the US first had one ready to go.
What year was your experience?

~~~
chiph
1983-85 at Hahn. We were the first base in USAFE to get the F-16 (A & B
models).

Now it's a civilian airport where RyanAir tricks people into thinking they're
flying into Frankfurt -- an additional 90-minute bus ride away (there's a
reason why the airfare is so cheap!)

------
bcohen5055
While in undergrad I spent about 5 years working with carbon fiber in a
motorsports setting. I did a lot of cutting and sanding without a mask. There
were weeks I would blow my nose 3 days after working on a part and still find
black specks. I guess I'll find out in a few years...

~~~
claudius
According to the article, this is the actually “good” variant: Normally, the
dust is getting caught in the nose and does not reach the lungs. However,
these fibres break down during a fire at temperatures of 650°C and become much
smaller. This smaller size allows them to enter the lungs and potentially
cause havoc there.

Put another way, every “black speck” you found did _not_ reach your lungs
(although I doubt that this is particularly healthy, either…) :)

------
rnernento
From the Google translated version of the article it looks like it's only
dangerous when burned.

~~~
milge
To be fair, most things are dangerous when burned.

~~~
ars
> To be fair, most things are dangerous when burned.

That's not at all true. Some things are more, some things are less.

Incompletely burned plastic? More. Full burned? Less. Gasoline? Less. Mercury?
More. Arsenic? Less.

------
xmstr
I was in the US military in the late 80s and early 90s and we were told then
that carbon fiber used in aircraft may be cancer causing. Nothing new here.

------
Havoc
Translated highlights:

Carbon fiber once burned at high temperature breaks down sufficiently for it
to penetrate mucous membranes. The risk highlighted by the Germans here
relates to the ash left over after the fire. i.e. Hinting a potential long
term dangers / contamination from the ash floating around.

------
krschultz
Note that this article (at least from the translated version) seems to be
implying that the risk is around burning or particulate carbon fiber. I would
definitely believe that.

The epoxy is also pretty nasty too. If you don't wear the right personal
protective equipment when using it, you can quickly become sensitized to it. I
don't know what that means medically, but it can't be good. I have always worn
the right gear when building things, but it is clearly harmful to you without
proper ventilation and separation from your skin.

I love composites, but they definitely have downsides.

~~~
aluhut
I can confirm this. They say that the dust becomes dangerous above 650°C. The
fibers become even smaller and reach the lungs.

------
wahsd
I find it interesting that this article was yanked from Hacker News just as
quickly as I saw it. I clicked on the link, wanted to go to the discussion and
had to find it through search in spite of its high vote count and recent
submission.

~~~
dang
Hacker News is an English-language site. This is not to disparage content in
other languages; it's just what HN is. Posts not in English mostly get
demoted, unless they're of major significance and nothing is available in
translation.

------
progx
And next week our great Bundeswehr Research Facility will tell us that: smell
of burned oil can make us ill and eating of weapon bullets can cause diarrhea.

------
rikacomet
Though I'm all in to scientific development and the benefits of these new
materials, I still want to point out, that nor carbon-fiber or graphene exist
in nature in large quantities for more than one reason, while diamond and
graphite do. Now the question should be .. why is that?

~~~
judk
Likely because they require complex structures processes to create, not just
pressure and time and heat. "Danger to others" is not a factor in nature's
selection process.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Danger to others that share a gene line IS part of natural selection. That's
why most creatures don't cannibalize within their family/pack for instance.

~~~
simias
That's not what the OP was talking about however. The fact that carbon fibers
are not present in nature only tells us that we didn't have to evolve anything
protecting us from it if it's really dangerous (since it was never a selection
criteria). That doesn't mean it's necessarily harmful though.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Disagree; OP was talking about why no animal in nature produces carbon fibre,
given its dangerous to others nearby. Was it ecological pressure? I answered,
yes that's possible.

~~~
simias
Carbon fibers are pretty complex to produce, that alone can explain why
they're not naturally present in nature. It would be similar to wondering why
silicon microprocessors are not naturally synthesized by nature.

It doesn't necessarily mean that evolution ruled it out, just that it may
never have considered it in the first place because it never came to exist
under the stochastic process of evolution.

