A review of the health effects of energy conserving materials

Our plain-English summary of A review of the health effects of energy conserving materials, by L. Levin, P.W. Purdom (American Journal of Public Health, 1983).

The study

• Authors: L. Levin, P.W. Purdom
• Journal: American Journal of Public Health
• Published: 1983;73(6):683-90
• Type of article: Review
• Cited by: 6 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 000620).

Abstract

The energy conservation movement has promoted both greater use of insulating materials and the reduction of heat losses by sealing air leaks. The release of volatile or airborne materials from the installation of these building materials under these conditions has resulted in an exacerbated indoor air pollution with the potential for certain health and safety hazards. Consequently, a comparative review of the health and safety hazards, exposure standards, and regulatory action associated with the more commonly used insulating materials with particular respect to current energy conservation measures was undertaken. The materials reviewed included asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam, polyvinyl chloride, cellulosic insulations, fibrous glass, mineral wool, and vermiculite. Although no longer used, the past installation of asbestos in a friable form is the greatest potential health hazard. The exposure to formaldehyde gas from its release from urea-formaldehyde foam has elicited subjective complaints of sensory irritation and unresolved controversy and regulatory action regarding its toxicity to humans. Lesser health problems have been associated with the more widely used fibrous glass and mineral or rock wools.

In plain English

This 1983 article was a review, not a new study of patients or workers. The authors compared hazards, exposure standards and regulatory actions for insulating materials promoted by energy conservation. These included asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam, plastics, cellulose, fibrous glass, mineral wool and vermiculite. They also surveyed state and federal health agencies; virtually all positive replies concerned formaldehyde from urea-formaldehyde foam. The article did not name specific asbestos fiber types. Drawing on earlier work, it described sprayed-on asbestos as the most significant cause of indoor airborne asbestos. It reported an earlier survey of 10 New Jersey schools with damaged asbestos surfaces finding concentrations from 9 to 1950 ng/m3. It also cited earlier findings that 7 to 10 per cent of exposed asbestos insulation workers die of mesothelioma. The authors stated that no toxic effects of vermiculite had been reported. They concluded that asbestos is the most hazardous insulating material and that no exposure level can be considered completely safe. They added that existing friable asbestos should be removed or sealed as soon as possible, before deterioration begins, with extreme precautions.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: review (comparative literature and regulatory review), supplemented by the authors' own survey of state and federal health agencies
• Who was studied: Insulating and barrier building materials used for energy conservation in the United States, plus responses from state and federal health agencies surveyed by the authors (number of agencies not stated)
• Exposure: Asbestos (fiber types not specified), urea-formaldehyde foam insulation, polyurethane and polystyrene rigid board, polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride sheeting, cellulosic insulation, fibrous glass, mineral wool and vermiculite. For asbestos, uses discussed included sprayed-on fireproofing and patching compounds.
• Main results:
  • The review described sprayed-on asbestos, even after it was banned, as the most significant cause of indoor airborne asbestos pollution.
  • Citing an earlier survey by Nicholson of 10 New Jersey public schools with damaged asbestos surfaces, the review reported airborne concentrations ranging from 9 to 1950 ng/m3.
  • Citing earlier studies, the review stated that 7 to 10 per cent of exposed asbestos insulation workers die of mesothelioma.
  • Citing earlier work, the review stated that a nonsmoker exposed to asbestos is five times more likely to die from lung cancer than an unexposed nonsmoker, and an exposed smoker 53 times more likely.
  • In the authors' own agency survey, virtually all positive responses concerned formaldehyde release from urea-formaldehyde foam insulation.
  • The review stated that no toxic effects of vermiculite had been reported.
  • In their conclusions, the authors stated that extreme precautionary procedures are required in removal, sealing and disposal of friable asbestos.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that asbestos is the most hazardous of all insulating materials and that no level of exposure can be considered completely safe. They concluded that substitutes should be used whenever possible and that existing friable asbestos installations should be removed or sealed as soon as possible and before deterioration begins.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: vermiculite, Friable.

Related studies

• The thermal transformation of Man Made Vitreous Fibers (MMVF) and safe recycling as secondary raw materials (SRM) — A.F. Gualtieri, E. Foresti, et al. (2009)
• Airways obstruction among older construction and trade workers at Department of Energy nuclear sites — J.M. Dement, L. Welch, et al. (2010)
• What every physician should know about environmental health — C. Carlsten, J. Croke (1997)
• Exposure to airborne asbestos during abatement of ceiling material, window caulking, floor tile and roofing material — J.H. Lange, S.L. Sites, et al. (2008)
• Worker exposure to asbestos during removal of sprayed material and renovation activity in buildings containing sprayed material — N.W. Paik, R.J. Walcott, et al. (1983)
• Asbestos-containing materials in New York City buildings — P. Lundy, M. Barer (1992)

Browse more research in American Journal of Public Health, or return to medical research.