This is a quick guide to contaminated cabin air in aircraft. It may be useful as an introduction to anyone new to the subject, e.g. aircrew, passengers and the media wanting to find out about the health effects and how it fits in with the agendas of the airlines, regulators and the government.

1.  BALPA, the UK's main pilot union says there is a problem with cabin air quality, April 2005

In April 2005, BALPA, the UK’s largest union representing airline pilots held the “Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality” conference over two days in London. As a result a 320 page report was produced.

“Is there a problem?”
“The answer is quite clear – Yes.”
“Story after story, study after study, testimony after testimony from across the world and from other industries with similar exposures, show that chemicals exposures of the type experienced by workers in the aviation industry cause health problems.”

BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality Conference Report  pdf page 314 onwards has a summary plus an endorsement from many leading scientists and doctors

BALPA General secretary on the subject (Video)

2.  Independent studies indicate the scale of the problem

Dr Sarah Mackenzie Ross of University College London says in her report:

“... this could indicate that up to 1,967 flights in the UK may have experienced contaminated air events during 2004. If a modest passenger number of 100 per flight is assumed, over 196,000 passengers could potentially present to general physicians with symptoms of acute toxicity.”

Ill health following exposure to contaminated aircraft air: psychosomatic disorder or neurological injury?

3.  Boeing 787: Clean cabin air, June 2007

In evidence from the House of Lords enquiry, Boeing admit that traditional bleed air design is flawed.

“The Boeing 787 will have a no-bleed architecture for the outside air supply to the cabin. This architecture eliminates the risk of engine oil decomposition products from being introduced in the cabin supply air in the rare event of a failed engine compressor seal. In addition, this architecture improves fuel efficiency, thus reducing fuel burn and associated engine emissions.”

Memorandum by the Boeing Company

4.  The UK government admits there "may" be a problem, September 2007

This report from the UK government Committee on Toxicity (COT) admits that contaminated cabin air can cause short term health problems, but can't seem to understand that long term sickness can result from repeated exposures.

“86. It was not possible on the basis of the available evidence in the BALPA submission or that sourced by the Secretariat and DH Toxicology Unit to conclude that there is a causal association between cabin air exposures (either general or following incidents) and ill-health in commercial aircraft crews. However, we noted a number of oil/hydraulic fluid smoke/fume contamination incidents where the temporal relationship between reports of exposure and acute health symptoms provided evidence that an association was plausible (paragraphs 54 and 74).”

Government COT Report 20th September 2007

5.  The House of Lords recommends urgent action, December 2007

Here is a part of the 2007 House of Lords enquiry recommendations for urgent action on identifying the chemicals in fume events. None of the research has yet been completed.

“4.50. We recommend that the AHWG-sponsored research to identify the substances produced during a fume event be completed urgently. It should be followed up by an epidemiological study on pilots to ascertain the incidence and prevalence of ill health in air crew and any association there might be with exposure to the chemicals identified in the AHWG-sponsored study, paying particular attention to the synergistic effect of these chemicals.”

House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. Air Travel and Health: an Update

6.  House of Commons debate, July 2009.

Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs question the Government over the slowness of the Cranfield tests etc. The Aerotoxic Association is mentioned by John Maples MP.

Air Quality (Aircraft) Westminster Hall debates, 1 July 2009, 2:30 pm

7.  Medical Advice, July 2009

A recently published US Quick reference health guide:

Quick reference guide for health care providers

8.  Interminable research, ongoing

The research called for in step 4 that is being carried out by Cranfield University was supposed to be completed in 2009, then the date was put back to 2010. It now transpires that not only has it not yet been completed, but it will still have to be peer-reviewed. No new estimate has been given. The Aerotoxic Association maintains the study cannot be unbiased due to the University's conflict of interest.

9.  Proof of exposure test, June 2010

Prof Clement Furlong from the University of Washington has almost completed work on a blood test that will be able to prove exposure to contaminated cabin air.

10. Cranfield University report finally published 10 May 2011

In 2007 The House of Lords recommended that 'research identify the substances in a fume event - urgently' 

4 years later and after checking only 100 flights (without a fume event) Cranfield University were able to publish their report.

Despite former pilots offering to fill a jet airliner on the ground with visible oil fumes, the identity of the substances has not been published, although they are obviously known.

"AND SO, THE NEVER ENDING 'RESEARCH' GOES ON AND ON......"