# nano = big health risk ??



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

hey guys

i wonna try some nano products out... but.... i have heard a lot about these nano tubes/particles and how they can penetrade almost everything.. are you putting yourself in the dangerzone when using these products, ? 

heard it is like asbest particals and can corse lung/skin cancer ? 

i kinda like to be alive :thumb:


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2010)

Who told you this?

You raise an interesting question though, no doubt some people will be quick to say "don't be so silly" - however, they thought asbestos was safe, so who knows.

I'd imagine though a lot of these nano products have absolutely no "nano" scale technology in them at all, marketing jargon.


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

G220 said:


> Who told you this?
> 
> I'd imagine though a lot of these nano products have absolutely no "nano" scale technology in them at all, marketing jargon.


i talk about "real" nano stuff like Gtechniq and nanolex.


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2010)

Are you just going from the thread posted on here though this morning? Until today I've never heard this being discussed.


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

no in denmark this has been discussed in years now,, they even did a test on mouse, and find out that these carbon nanotubes could have the same penetration and damaging effect as asbest/asbestos dust.


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

http://milwaukee.injuryboard.com/to...-dangerous-like-asbestos.aspx?googleid=239856

and

http://earthsky.org/health/when-nanotubes-are-dangerous

these nanotubes are the same used for surface treatment for like paint and glass,


----------



## A Fast Sloth (Aug 14, 2010)

Victor you are correct. I have heard about the health risks associated with the Carbon Nanotubes, but I had not heard them being linked to Asbestos before. 

Interesting question that had actually crossed my mind, but not put much thought into it. I don't think its a silly question, in fact I do think it's good one.


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

the real problem is that the particles are so small that they can't be filtred, and they will go right throug all kind of gloves and protection gear.


----------



## javierpeba (May 2, 2010)

I never heared this before. I´ll be reading the post to know more informatio.


----------



## Larkin (Nov 13, 2010)

In germany its a current theme too. 

But i think when you work not every day oder week with such material and apply it outside or in good aerated area and use gloves (the nano particle are bound in solvent) its not harmful.

On long term nobody knows how our body manage with nano particle.


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

This is part of the reason for 'difficulties' in importing them to US


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

Carbon Dioxide is toxic too, but you don't put your mouth around an exhaust pipe!

Drawing comparisson to asbestos isn't really fair - technology moves on, as does testing.


----------



## justina3 (Jan 11, 2008)

Red_Cloverleaf said:


> Carbon Dioxide is toxic too, but you don't put your mouth around an exhaust pipe!
> 
> Drawing comparisson to asbestos isn't really fair - technology moves on, as does testing.


neither is that comparisson people know carbon dioxide is toxic however a lot (if it is to be proven) do not about the products everone is talking about

:thumb:


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

justina3 said:


> neither is that comparisson people know carbon dioxide is toxic however a lot (if it is to be proven) do not about the products everone is talking about
> 
> :thumb:


I wasn't drawing comparison however, I wont be eating or drinking nonolex products either. :thumb:

I'll take the risk.

Any smokers here?


----------



## B6MFD (Oct 31, 2006)

after i detailed my car using a well known nano sealant i had one of the worst head aches iv ever had. I even made my girlfriend write down what i had used incase i had to go to hospital. Sounds stupid i know but it really was that painful. Now if i even smell the stuff it makes me feel ill. i cant say if it was the product or the fact i spent 12 hours doing the car, but it was the first and last time i will use it.


----------



## Nanoman (Jan 17, 2009)

B6MFD - post changed thanks. Sensible move I think.


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

B6MFD said:


> after i detailed my car using c2 i had one of the worst head aches iv ever had. I even made my girlfriend write down what i had used incase i had to go to hospital. Sounds stupid i know but it really was that painful. Now if i even smell c2 it makes me feel ill. i cant say if it was the c2 or the fact i spent 12 hours doing the car, but it was the first and last time i will use it.


I get like that after drinking a lot of whiskey.


----------



## Ewald (Dec 12, 2010)

Wikipedia mentions some specific safety issues of nanoparticles and nanotechnology.

I sometimes have the impression that the word "nano" is used by marketers because they want to avoid the word "silicone." I'm not so sure whether such kind of nano is always real nanotechnology.


----------



## B6MFD (Oct 31, 2006)

bold? I am giving my experience. As far as i am aware the forum is an open forum, however i have removed my product reference and would suggest you remove the quote of my post.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

grantwils said:


> I personally think you should be careful about what you put on forums and that is a bold post to make. I've used it with no issues whatsoever many times.


Good for you! Some people are sensitive to some smells and chemicals. Not all smokers have cancer either.....


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

There is toxins in all the products we use, sometimes the effects are only evident sometimes over long term use, all products in effect are nano technology.
I see many posts of people using products without any kind of personal safety equipment, eg gloves, so I'm not sure why all of a sudden folk are getting panicy


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

type[r]+ said:


> Good for you! Some people are sensitive to some smells and chemicals. Not all smokers have cancer either.....


Smokers/cancer/risk........swimming/sea/sharks.........driving/injury....crossing the road/being run over.

Car cleaning with nano? I'll never cross the road again.


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

Avanti said:


> There is toxins in all the products we use, sometimes the effects are only evident sometimes over long term use, all products in effect are nano technology.
> I see many posts of people using products without any kind of personal safety equipment, eg gloves, so I'm not sure why all of a sudden folk are getting panicy


Well said that man. :thumb:


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Red_Cloverleaf said:


> Well said that man. :thumb:


Thanks, posted this pic before caustic burns










hence why I rarely do not use gloves even if I'm washing up in the house I use gloves

But definately for car cleaning


----------



## ADW (Aug 8, 2010)

Ive personally been using nano products almost every weekend now for about 4 months and im happy to say that im still alive and well. We rely to much on this health and safety culture and its all to easy to believe, as mentioned above there are bigger risks out there so i wouldnt be worried about using a nano product unless you are physically allergic to it... :thumb:


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

ADW said:


> Ive personally been using nano products almost every weekend now for about 4 months and im happy to say that im still alive and well. We rely to much on this health and safety culture and its all to easy to believe, as mentioned above there are bigger risks out there so i wouldnt be worried about using a nano product unless you are physically allergic to it... :thumb:


It's like smoking though, 1 ciggie won't instantly kill you, the solvents penetrate the skin and get into the bloodstream 
I do smoke, but wear gloves when using any car cleaning and other chemicals :thumb:


----------



## ADW (Aug 8, 2010)

I think it all comes down to common sense and a sense for a sensible approach to anything you do.. :thumb:


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

ADW said:


> I think it all comes down to common sense and a sense for a sensible approach to anything you do.. :thumb:


Yes I fully agree, the opening posts suggests almost that nano products are all bad and all the rest is good, true nano technology still rests with the scientists and in our world it is marketing tripe


----------



## ianFRST (Sep 19, 2006)

crikey, all this from 1 thread that someone posted!


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

ianFRST said:


> crikey, all this from 1 thread that someone posted!


It's all good debate territory, when a thread starts or includes, someone told me.... then you have a good idea where it is going to end up.

Logical vs. emotional decision-making

Decision-making is a cognitive process where the outcome is a choice between alternatives. We often have different preferences as to our preferred, approach, varying between thinking and feeling.
Logical decision-making

When we use logic to make decisions, we seek to exclude emotions, using only rational methods, and perhaps even mathematical tools. The foundation of such decisions is the principle of utility, whereby the value of each option is assessed by assigning criteria (often weighted).
Emotional decision-making

There is a whole range of decision-making that uses emotion, depending on the degree of logic that is included in the process.

A totally emotional decision is typically very fast. This is because it takes time (at least 0.1 seconds) for the rational cortex to get going. This is the reactive (and largely subconscious) decision-making that you encounter in heated arguments or when faced with immediate danger.

Common emotional decisions may use some logic, but the main driving force is emotion, which either overrides logic or uses a pseudo-logic to support emotional choices (this is extremely common).

Another common use of emotion in decision is to start with logic and then use emotion in the final choice.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

I will only believe it when I see some scientific proof.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Ross said:


> I will only believe it when I see some scientific proof.


Wikipedia reveals some"Regulation
Main article: Regulation of nanotechnology

Calls for tighter regulation of nanotechnology have occurred alongside a growing debate related to the human health and safety risks associated with nanotechnology.[46] Furthermore, there is significant debate about who is responsible for the regulation of nanotechnology. While some non-nanotechnology specific regulatory agencies currently cover some products and processes (to varying degrees) - by "bolting on" nanotechnology to existing regulations - there are clear gaps in these regimes."


----------



## nick_mcuk (Jan 4, 2008)

I am going to stick to my Zaino, and Waxes like Swissvax, Dodo and Colli....not because I am scared of the Nano stuff and health risks...I like using LSP and feel that these new products will mean that I wont have to re-apply so often....meaning I will be denying myself the enjoyment!

Besides I think it dosent get any better than Zaino...the Mrs's Golf is still beading after 8-9 months from 3 coats of Z2 with ZFX....and thats with washes mayeb every month and a half


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Red_Cloverleaf said:


> Smokers/cancer/risk........swimming/sea/sharks.........driving/injury....crossing the road/being run over.
> 
> Car cleaning with nano? I'll never cross the road again.


I'll say it again. Some people are just sensitive to some smells and chemicals. 
People are allergic to peantus too! 1/2 a peanut can kill them in minutes.

Never cross the road? Well I'll tell you one thing, if you lived where I live, you would never swim anywhere other than a swimming pool!


----------



## Orca (Apr 16, 2007)

Ross said:


> I will only believe it when I see some scientific proof.


Something which is likely to be determined more by the legal profession than scientific ...


----------



## SkyBuMp (Mar 24, 2009)

This question of the TS is rather interesting and actual question because several governments are conducting research about how "nano tech" relates to our human health.

There are loads of papers written about this subject. For what I have read about this topic is that the long term effects of nanoparticles is unknown.

If you want scientific material/research/papers, just use google scholar : http://scholar.google.com/ and search for "nanotechnology health".


----------



## catalin1984 (Feb 24, 2009)

can we have the msds of a nano 
product and analyze it? Thanks


----------



## Sti_Brumby (Aug 19, 2010)

Whats wrong with the crocs =D



type[r]+ said:


> I'll say it again. Some people are just sensitive to some smells and chemicals.
> People are allergic to peantus too! 1/2 a peanut can kill them in minutes.
> 
> Never cross the road? Well I'll tell you one thing, if you lived where I live, you would never swim anywhere other than a swimming pool!


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

The dust from nanotechnology products that use silica will have a similar effect to asbestos in that you may be breathing in micro particles of glass


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

catalin1984 said:


> can we have the msds of a nano
> product and analyze it? Thanks


*Health and environmental concerns*

A major study published more recently in Nature Nanotechnology suggests some forms of carbon nanotubes - a poster child for the "nanotechnology revolution" - could be as harmful as asbestos if inhaled in sufficient quantities. 
Anthony Seaton of the Institute of Occupational Medicine in Edinburgh, Scotland, who contributed to the article on carbon nanotubes, said "We know that some of them probably have the potential to cause mesothelioma.

So those sorts of materials need to be handled very carefully." In the absence of specific nano-regulation forthcoming from governments (Paul, J. & Lyons, K. (2008) Nanotechnology: The Next Challenge for Organics) have called for an exclusion of engineered nanoparticle from organic food 
[A newspaper article reports that workers in a paint factory developed serious lung disease and nanoparticle were found in their lungs]

Nano materials can be just as carcinogenic as asbestos- http://earthsky.org/health/when-nanotubes-are-dangerous

Nanoparticle Safety - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanoparticle#Safety

Toxicological Sciences - http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/101/1/4.abstract

*Aquartz MSDS* - http://rionix.homejoa.com/web/doc/msds_AQuartz.pdf (look up the MSDS of the actual product you are considering)


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

type[r]+ said:


> I'll say it again. Some people are just sensitive to some smells and chemicals.
> People are allergic to peantus too! 1/2 a peanut can kill them in minutes.
> 
> Never cross the road? Well I'll tell you one thing, if you lived where I live, you would never swim anywhere other than a swimming pool!


I wont clean the car with a peanut either! :lol:


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

Hey guys,

we are aware of this topic and do the best we can to adjust our products permanently to be even safer (more on that below) - just a bit of input from our side regarding this topic:

In general the toxicity is closely connected to the ingredients and the solvent the particles are in.

Some nano-particles are known to be toxic and to cause cancer (like nano-silver) - these are usually not sold of course.

With carbon nano-tubes this might also be the case, but there are no products (I know of) that are sold to the public that contain them.

In general all the particles are tested before they are free for sale - in most consumer products you will find SiO2 particles (of course assuming you have a "real" nanotec system and not something that just looks like it as for example fluorocarbon-systems) or sometimes silicon(e)-particles which are safe - 

of course we should admit that "safe" is relativ since we don't know the long-term (30-40 years) effects 100%

A lot of people mention asbestos in this context - but when it comes to this comparison I think one should take into consideration that we have much better research systems to assess potential risks today.

A few problems mentioned before are clearly mostly due to the solvents that contain the particles - in most cases you will have IPA/ethanol/water as the solvent of choice.

Of course there are no problems with water (and other VOC-free solvents).

When you have IPA/ethanol based products there is of course the risk of getting drowsy/dizzy but that is in no way linked to the particles - it's usually the steams of the solvents that cause these symptoms!

When you use for example our textile sealant for convertible tops (the only IPA-based product we still offer) you should always wear gloves (well you should ALWAYS wear gloves, no matter what you use) and the room should be very well ventilated - if that is the case there shouldn't be any problems.

One should also keep in mind that the particles remain on the surface as the solvent evaporates - they are not in the steams.

We have been trying to make our products safer regarding the solvents, which is why we have switched to VOC-free solvents whenever possible - if that was not possible (yet) we tried to switch from Propanol to Ethanol (which is much less aggressive to the skin and the steams are not as aggressive as well) which was successful in most cases (the Premium Glass Sealant and the Professional Paint Sealant are ethanol based since this spring).

This is quite an extensive topic and of course we will try to answer all your questions - I hope this brought a bit of light into the dark for now :wave:

If you have questions please feel free to approach me at any time!

Cheers, Florian


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

Nanolex said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> we are aware of this topic and do the best we can to adjust our products permanently to be even safer (more on that below) - just a bit of input from our side regarding this topic:
> 
> ...


Well said, Florian.

There you go all you fretters - have a Capstan Full Strength to relax with. :lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

Nanolex said:


> With carbon nano-tubes this might also be the case, but there are no products (I know of) that are sold to the public that contain them.
> 
> Cheers, Florian


isn't there some surface protection system there contain nanotubes ?


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Victor said:


> isn't there some surface protection system there contain nanotubes ?


If you think there is , why not name them?


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

Avanti said:


> If you think there is , why not name them?


because an earlier poster who named a product got shot down for naming a product...


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Ninja59 said:


> because an earlier poster who named a product got shot down for naming a product...


Just been back through the thread and cannot see the suggested article or deleted post remains , but do agree with an earlier post that products with dangerous ingredients are simply not available to the public.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Sti_Brumby said:


> Whats wrong with the crocs =D


Nothing! They make cute and cuddly pets!
P.S. I live in Darwin! :wave:


----------



## uruk hai (Apr 5, 2009)

Very interesting debate and as someone who suffers from COPD it's something that I feel is very relevant to me and my health problems. Although I can only guess that as a keen amateur who only ever works outside the actual risk to me from the products I use and the frequency of use makes any actual risk a minute one that surely carries no more long term problem than the "air" we breathe every day.

Or am I wrong ?


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

B6MFD said:


> bold? I am giving my experience. As far as i am aware the forum is an open forum, however i have removed my product reference and would suggest you remove the quote of my post.


There was no need to remove your product reference. You had an experience using a particular product and it's your right to state what that product was and what happened to you.

It's not slanderous because it's just your individual reaction to that product and there could be any number of medical reasons why that is so.

If you'd said; _"Don't anyone buy XXX because you'll get a terrible headache and might end up in hospital as a result"_ - _that's_ slanderous.


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

Viper said:


> There was no need to remove your product reference. You had an experience using a particular product and it's your right to state what that product was and what happened to you.
> 
> It's not slanderous because it's just your individual reaction to that product and there could be any number of medical reasons why that is so.
> 
> If you'd said; _"Don't anyone buy XXX because you'll get a terrible headache and might end up in hospital as a result"_ - _that's_ slanderous.


Well said.


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

Great to see a vendor (Nanolex) respond to this kind of thread


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

I've not read the whole thread, but if you're that worried either a) don't use them, or b) wear a mask.....


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2010)

-Mat- said:


> I've not read the whole thread, but if you're that worried either a) don't use them, or b) wear a mask.....


Well, suggestion b would be rendered pretty useless as (in theory) nano particles would easily permeate through your average mask.


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

keep your mouth and nostrils closed then :lol:

Just read the entire thread, and TBH, the only "nano" stuff I've used was the Wolfs Chemicals products I've tested.... 

I don't really have an opinion TBH. All I will say is follow usual "saftey precautions" or just don't use the stuff.....


----------



## Alex S (May 16, 2007)

Call me old fashioned, but when I complete my stash of nano stuff I switch back to waxes. Nano products are great but who knows what might happen in the long term. If there's even a minimal risk, I want to avoid it.

Thanks to OP for bringing this up.


----------



## Guest (Dec 29, 2010)

Why did that guy get shot down for mentioning C2??


----------



## StefanYHU (Nov 9, 2009)

Only the good die young fella's, so not to worry.


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

This is something new to me so would someone in simplified terms explain what all this means , are we saying the ingredients lets call them are so particulary small that they can penetrate skin pores and contain products that are harmful to the system which is why i presume asbetos and the spores was used as a similarity. Are the new generation of nano sealents lets call them microscopically glass like in their construction?


----------



## philworrall (Nov 17, 2006)

Having had a general look thought this thread I can understand the concerns some people have but, consider this.....

Since childhood we have all use pencils. Pencil 'lead' is actually graphite, a crystalline structure. We have just discovered 'graphine', a single perfect crystal layer of graphite. This is a nano "particle" in its own right. We have all lived with graphine in every pencil stroke we ever made yet there is no recorded problem with that material therefore I doubt that there is any real problem with "nano" in general. I could be wrong but am I going to worry myself to death over it???

I doubt that you will either, and if you do, you have the choice not to buy.

:doublesho:doublesho

P


----------



## Auto Detox (Dec 22, 2007)

I think when using any kind of chemical using common sense is a must I always wear gloves ( powder free nitrile) even for interiors throughout all details but there are a some detailers that dont use them at all, I recently visited the doc due to some skin nasty ( work related, I would say yes ) 2 of her first questions were what do you do & do you wear gloves ? 

Interesting read this thread
Baz


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

philworrall said:


> Having had a general look thought this thread I can understand the concerns some people have but, consider this.....
> 
> Since childhood we have all use pencils. Pencil 'lead' is actually graphite, a crystalline structure. We have just discovered 'graphine', a single perfect crystal layer of graphite. This is a nano "particle" in its own right. We have all lived with graphine in every pencil stroke we ever made yet there is no recorded problem with that material therefore I doubt that there is any real problem with "nano" in general. I could be wrong but am I going to worry myself to death over it???
> 
> ...


There is a big difference between graphite (carbon) and a graphite nano particle. And who said carbon didn't do anything to you? Black lung anyone???


----------



## Dan J (Jun 18, 2008)

great thread and great responce from nanolex, have enjoyed reading this. and as a few have said, caution and safety measures should always be taken into account when using the products we use.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

As far as i understand it, Cancer is an umbrella term used to describe genetically mutated tissue that is either aggressive or benign. So something that is carcinogenic is something that facilitates these mutations.

Asbestos, certain chemicals, some nano-scale particles *help*/(in varying degrees) these mutations to occur. Some are more susceptible to these mutations than others anyway.

Personally, i would rather apply nano-scale chemicals intermittently (taking the correct precautions) than be constantly exposed to the crappy, Carbon monoxide, dioxide, Sulphur dioxide, Methane, Soot (pure carbon, some of it nano-scale) ridden, air in a major city for example.

*Ahem* Or as a reformed smoker, smoke 20 horrible stinky, smelly cigs a day. Didn't dare say it out loud.


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

Gruffs said:


> *Ahem* Or as a reformed smoker, smoke 20 horrible stinky, smelly cigs a day. Didn't dare say it out loud.


i used to smoke too :thumb:


----------



## Bulkhead (Oct 17, 2007)

This isn't really related to any proposed health risk but I remember reading a scientific journal article concerning copper nano tubes. Abbreviations were used throughout the paper so nano tubes were 'NT' whilst copper used the abbreviated latin name 'Cu' for cuprium! I never thought copper nano tubes could be so entertaining!


----------



## Kokopelli (Sep 18, 2009)

Hi, joining a bit late into this subject. We gathered a group of doctors for a report we made on workspace hazards and studied blast and projectile damage, chemical and biological hazards including dust, electromagnetic effect and strong light/lasers etc. 

Focusing on particle hazards, many protective equipment could be used for known particles, commonly eye wear, masks and gloves, with the known strengths of human skins own block. But when the particles are smaller, even eye, not mentioning the lungs, can be a transparent medium for the particles causing these particles to reach into body deeper, break cell structures, and with high possibility of causing disease or further cancer. 

I understand, even regular protection may not be enough for nano-tech.


----------



## podgehog (Aug 22, 2010)

i think to say "nano particals" is simply to generic, there are a LOT of different ones out there and beause some may be dangerous people think others may be too

a friend of mine did a degree in nano technology and now works in the line of testing and development, obviously they have safety equipment, masks and gloves, etc, but nothing extreme in any of the work he does, and he's not worried...

there are risks associated with pretty much everything, this is just a reletively new science so not all questions can be answered, but i for one am not going to worry


----------



## ocd13 (Aug 25, 2010)

Interesting read and great to hear from a manufacturer of such products:thumb:

I would like to know if nano tech IS actually just used as marketing jargon or not?
I mean there have been posts about research that mentions the different sizes of such particles and how small they would have to be to cause any health risks and surley manufacturers should know whats in there own products. So if they are actually using nano particles in there products and its not just marketing then what are the actual health risks if you compare them to the research already carried out.

Just to be clear I am in no way aiming this post at any one particular company:thumb:

sorry if this makes no sense its getting late rant over carry on


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

Auto Detox said:


> I think when using any kind of chemical using common sense is a must I always wear gloves ( powder free nitrile) even for interiors throughout all details *but there are a some detailers that dont use them at all, *
> Interesting read this thread
> Baz


Only the one's that don't where nail varnish Baz? :lol:


----------



## FasterThanSound (Nov 8, 2010)

Don't get fooled about nanotechnology.
I used it for a few years now and never wear gloves.
I am still alive and in a good health hahahaha.

Please find quote from the article:
"Nanotechnology is a highly multidisciplinary field, drawing from fields such as applied physics, materials science, interface and colloid science, device physics, supramolecular chemistry (which refers to the area of chemistry that focuses on the noncovalent bonding interactions of molecules), self-replicating machines and robotics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, biological engineering, and electrical engineering. Much speculation exists as to what may result from these lines of research. "

I don't know what other companies used as a nano particles but the one I use, are using *coating of silicon and silver nanoparticles.*
I never heard that silver or silicon may be dengerous.

With so many different applications they use different nano praticles for different applications.
Please don't raise panic in here as examples I saw here ARE NOT from car cosmetics but it may by from the completely different industry to use by professional not by public in general


----------



## Nanoman (Jan 17, 2009)

FasterThanSound said:


> supramolecular chemistry (which refers to the area of chemistry that focuses on the noncovalent bonding interactions of molecules)


I believe this is the kind of technology that we are talking about when it comes to detailing products.


----------



## Red_Cloverleaf (Jul 26, 2009)

I used some this weekend...............without gloves!

I also "sniffed" the product too.................

Still breathing..........


----------



## Jesse74 (Jul 19, 2008)

Dag nabbit, I got to the party late again. I was going to say something intelligent, but Florian (Nanolex) already beat me to it. Well said Florian :thumb:! So guys as it's already been said, wear the appropriate protection when using nano products and don't inject them into your bodies like they've done to the rats they were testing them on and you'll be just fine. Also, there are tons of things in this world that can get under your skin and be potentially harmful... solvents, APC's, my wife, IPA, "this gas", "that pollutant", etc. The list goes on, so nano particles should be the last of your worries. I think the chances of those nano particles "soaking" into your skin and disrupting something in your system are as small as the particles themselves...


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Face facts, life itself is carcinogenic!


----------



## FasterThanSound (Nov 8, 2010)

If you are still not convinced and have some doubts please look to your kitchen stuff.
Washing powder, washing liquids, bleach etc is far more dangerous and still used by all of us and no one raised topic about big health risk using them. :devil:


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

*Personal Protective Equipment* (PPE)

PPE is specialized clothing or equipment worn by an employee for protection against a hazard. General work clothes (e.g., uniforms, pants, shirts or blouses) not intended to function as protection against a hazard is not considered to be personal protective equipment.

For your safety and the legally required protection of employees, you will need to have personal protective equipment available that will include a respirator fitting for you and your employees. At no time should you endanger yourself or others, take any unnecessary risks or infringe any laws. OSHA standards require that employers maintain or improve workplace conditions to protect employees.

*Protection from Potential Health Hazards*
1.	Warning: Always use a ground circuit fault indicator) (GFPI) when using any electrical device around water
2.	Eye Protection: I would strongly advise the wearing of safety glasses or visor when operating any machine polisher.
3.	Hearing Protection; the constant pitch of a polishing machine could affect your hearing so wearing ear plugs would be wise to protect you from hearing loss.
4.	Hand Protection; Gloves- with the verity of chemicals a detailer uses on a daily basis wearing chemical-resistant gloves resist penetration and permeation, and will provide protection against dermatitis and chemical burns. 
Gloves can provide protection, but they must be chosen with care, the proper selection matched to the hazard is critical. Chemical-resistant gloves resist penetration and permeation, and cam protect against dermatitis, chemical burns and corrosion. 
5.	Respiratory Protection (N95): Materials such as aluminium oxide (Aluminium oxide is on EPA's TRI list if it is a fibrous form) or silicon carbide (Nuisance particulate-Accumulation in lungs) used in polishes and compounds, and powdered fillers
6.	Crystalline silica (polishes and compounds) poses a serious inhalation hazard because it can cause silicosis and Isocyanate clear coat residue represent a hazard to your lungs and may cause respiratory distress. Use a NIOSH-approved half face respirator equipped with a combination filter cartridge should be worn while using them
7.	Consult the current 3M Respiratory Selection Guide for additional information or call 1-800-243-4630 for 3M technical assistance.
8.	Material Safety Data Sheets: Use a ring binder or other filing system to ensure the appropriate MSDS is always available to identify hazardous substances
9.	Work Hygienic Practices: Rinse cloves under running water before removing them
10.	Chemical clean-up: small spillage: absorb spill with an inert absorbent material (e.g. dry sand or kitty litter), then place in a chemical waste container. If liquid has been spilt in large quantities clean up promptly by scoop or vacuum.
11.	Protect yourself, work safe. As in all things, allow common sense to prevail and proceed with due caution 

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Control of substances hazardous to health (COSHH) is the UK law that requires employers to control substances that are hazardous to health - http://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/basics.htm


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

FasterThanSound said:


> If you are still not convinced and have some doubts please look to your kitchen stuff.
> Washing powder, washing liquids, bleach etc is far more dangerous and still used by all of us and no one raised topic about big health risk using them. :devil:


There is no control or advisory body for 'domestic' chemicals; just common sense


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

My 2p - if you break a normal energy saving light bulb in a small room you will be exposed to a higher level of Mercury in the air than the Environment Agency deems to be safe... 

But, in reality you'll be fine, break a whole box and maybe not - so common sense must always be applied to these 'scare stories'.


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

TOGWT said:


> 4.	Hand Protection; Gloves- with the verity of chemicals a detailer uses on a daily basis wearing chemical-resistant gloves resist penetration and permeation, and will provide protection against dermatitis and chemical burns.
> Gloves can provide protection, but they must be chosen with care, the proper selection matched to the hazard is critical. Chemical-resistant gloves resist penetration and permeation, and cam protect against dermatitis, chemical burns and corrosion.


Do nitrile gloves fulfill this requirement for the like of nano detailing proucts?


----------



## Jesse74 (Jul 19, 2008)

dominic84 said:


> My 2p - if you break a normal energy saving light bulb in a small room you will be exposed to a higher level of Mercury in the air than the Environment Agency deems to be safe...
> 
> But, in reality you'll be fine, break a whole box and maybe not - so common sense must always be applied to these 'scare stories'.


It's even been said that drinking too much milk can be bad for you... Who the heck _are_ these people?


----------



## Alsone (May 19, 2010)

FasterThanSound said:


> I don't know what other companies used as a nano particles but the one I use, are using *coating of silicon and silver nanoparticles.*
> I never heard that silver or silicon may be dengerous.


Silicone, not sure about, but silica causes silicosis when inhaled, a lung disease. Whether silcone (which presumably contains silica) can change back to silica and its other components by breaking down, I don't know as I'm not a chemist.

Silver on the other hand is relatively safe I think. Its now used in some Plasters as its an excellent bactericide. I believe its also used in some water purification systems.

On the COSHH side, aren't hazardous producst supposed to carry a warning with a COSHH label as to the type of hazard? Which means if nanotech products don't have to be labelled as such, there's no_ known_ hazard at this time.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

dominic84 said:


> My 2p - if you break a normal energy saving light bulb in a small room you will be exposed to a higher level of Mercury in the air than the Environment Agency deems to be safe...
> 
> But, in reality you'll be fine, break a whole box and maybe not - so common sense must always be applied to these 'scare stories'.


I've always wondered why governments have backed these globes, when LEDs last a crap load (decades!) longer, are more efficient, and more environmentally friendly? Time will tell I guess!


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

> I've always wondered why governments have backed these globes, when LEDs last a crap load (decades!) longer, are more efficient, and more environmentally friendly? Time will tell I guess!


I agree, after I found out about the whole Mercury thing (through accidently _ahem _shooting one with an air pistol) I am not very keen on them. Although, I believe Mercury is also present in the big flourescent strips too. Having said that, if I had kids I wouldn't have energy bulbs in their rooms.


----------



## ocd13 (Aug 25, 2010)

dominic84 said:


> My 2p - if you break a normal energy saving light bulb in a small room you will be exposed to a higher level of Mercury in the air than the Environment Agency deems to be safe...
> 
> But, in reality you'll be fine, break a whole box and maybe not - so common sense must always be applied to these 'scare stories'.


I have just recently found out about Mercury being in the energy saving bulbs:doublesho and from what I have been told they kept it quiet an its not mentioned anywhere on the box.
My house is full of these bulbs and I would rather not have them but what are we supposed to replace them with?

Sorry for going off topic


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

I don't think we're going to have any option but use these stupid energy saving light bulbs - hasn't sale of the traditional type been banned? I wouldn't mind, but in most cases the energy-saving variety are pretty useless in comparison to the older type.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

DW58 said:


> I don't think we're going to have any option but use these stupid energy saving light bulbs - hasn't sale of the traditional type been banned? I wouldn't mind, but in most cases the energy-saving variety are pretty useless in comparison to the older type.


You can't buy the old globes here in Australia anymore. These new ones cost over 10x as much!


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

ocd13 said:


> I have just recently found out about Mercury being in the energy saving bulbs:doublesho and from what I have been told they kept it quiet an its not mentioned anywhere on the box.
> My house is full of these bulbs and I would rather not have them but what are we supposed to replace them with?
> 
> Sorry for going off topic


LED. :thumb:


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

dominic84 said:


> I agree, after I found out about the whole Mercury thing (through accidently _ahem _shooting one with an air pistol) I am not very keen on them. Although, I believe Mercury is also present in the big flourescent strips too. Having said that, if I had kids I wouldn't have energy bulbs in their rooms.


Yeah, it's pretty interesting how they work. I'll let you google it lol! :thumb:


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

DW58 said:


> Do nitrile gloves fulfill this requirement for the like of nano detailing proucts?


Chemical-resistant gloves resist penetration and permeation, and cam protect against dermatitis, chemical burns and corrosion. Nitrile gloves are three times more puncture resistant than rubber and can be used to offer superior resistance to many types of chemicals. Unlike other latex gloves, Nitrile gloves have low resistance to friction and are very easy to slide on. - Chemical Resistance Chart -http://www.adenna.com/pdf/ChemicalsResistance.pdf

The safest precaution is to ask the vendor of the product you want to use what chemical (s) their product contains


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Alsone said:


> Silicone, not sure about, but silica causes silicosis when inhaled, a lung disease. Whether silcone (which presumably contains silica) can change back to silica and its other components by breaking down, I don't know as I'm not a chemist.


Silicone is a synthetic, made with silicon, oxygen and another organic compound. Varies from solids to liquids. Uses are anything from cooking to oils, but the best use yet is for breast implants! 

Silica is sand, an oxide of silicon :thumb:



Alsone said:


> Silver on the other hand is relatively safe I think. Its now used in some Plasters as its an excellent bactericide. I believe its also used in some water purification systems.


If it kills Warewolves, just imagine what it does to humans!


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

TOGWT said:


> Chemical-resistant gloves resist penetration and permeation, and cam protect against dermatitis, chemical burns and corrosion. Nitrile gloves are three times more puncture resistant than rubber and can be used to offer superior resistance to many types of chemicals. Unlike other latex gloves, Nitrile gloves have low resistance to friction and are very easy to slide on. - Chemical Resistance Chart -http://www.adenna.com/pdf/ChemicalsResistance.pdf


Excellent - exactly what I wanted to know :thumb:


----------



## westerman (Oct 12, 2008)

Red_Cloverleaf said:


> Carbon Dioxide is toxic too, but you don't put your mouth around an exhaust pipe!
> 
> Drawing comparisson to asbestos isn't really fair - technology moves on, as does testing.


So are you suggesting we all stop buying products that contain CarbonDioxide?
Carbon Dioxide C02 is the product used to put the fizz in Coke and Beer!! I think you were meaning Carbon Monoxide but it does go to show how a slip of the tongue could cause even the sales of beer to decline..:lol:


----------



## Alsone (May 19, 2010)

westerman said:


> Carbon Dioxide C02 is the product used to put the fizz in Coke and Beer!! I think you were meaning Carbon Monoxide but it does go to show how a slip of the tongue could cause even the sales of beer to decline..:lol:


Hey don't knock the guy he's not entirely wrong, they both give you a headache. 

Its just one kills far more people than the other one (that would be the alcohol) but the other is far more deadly.


----------



## Victor (Oct 10, 2010)

hey guys new thread from Gtechniq

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=198754


----------



## FasterThanSound (Nov 8, 2010)

Do you think any of ISO14000 accreddited companies would launch products on the market which may be potentially dangerous for average person with lack of knowledge and with with no common sense how to use it?
We live in the world where all well respected manufacturers due to potential court iinjury claims don't let un-tested products be launched to the market.
It's not only about reputation but also about massive amount of money to be paid.
If one won case would be confirmed there will be manny followers looking for easy money.


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

A mfg would not use hazardous acids in their products would they


----------

