It’s Time For Airlines to Stop Playing Dumb About Fume Events

The fuss started with Flight AA109 on Jan. 27: Headed from London Heathrow to Los Angeles and diverted two hours after take-off with a “mystery illness” affecting at least seven crew members and three passengers, this is the incident that sparked a fresh burst of media interest in the debate over the existence of aerotoxic syndrome.

Why this particular incident made such news I’m not sure – you’ll find that incidents in this category happen with some regularity if you do your research and/or talk to crews — but when AA904 from Rio to Miami diverted under similar circumstances the very next day, some people really took notice for the first time. What has stunned me is the number of frequent flyers, flight attendants and even pilots who claim to have never heard of this before. So let’s answer a few questions.

What is aerotoxic syndrome?

Aerotoxic syndrome is illness caused by exposure to contaminated cabin air. Symptoms include fatigue, burning eyes and blurred vision, dizziness, breathing problems, cognitive problems and hand tremors.

There are two issues debated. One is about whether standard cabin air quality can be a danger. In this scenario, people sensitive to exposure can react to a buildup of everyday levels of contaminants in cabin air, even if nothing goes “wrong” with the system. The second issue is “fume events,” in which an excessive dose of toxic chemicals are released (described below) into the cabin.

What causes it?

This Skift article provides a great summary:

“As part of the propulsion process, aeroplane engines heat and compress air before fuel is added and combusted. On most aircraft this air is then ‘bled off’ and pumped into the aircraft, unfiltered. Ordinarily this process is relatively safe. But occasionally faulty seals can result in contamination by allowing heated and broken down engine oil fumes to escape into the airflow.” [Emphasis mine]

You can read more about the specific toxins (namely TCP) in the aforementioned article.

Why is it controversial?

Aerotoxic syndrome (and the underlying question of whether aircraft manufacturers and airlines have covered up air quality concerns and/or defects leading to the problem) is slippery. Like many neurological illnesses often hard to diagnose (chronic fatigue, lupus and MS, all of which aerotoxic syndrome can be mistaken for), symptoms can be wide-ranging and unpredictable. Fume events happen spontaneously. Some are far more detectable than others. The effects of aerotoxic poisoning are said to set in days or weeks after an incident (so it’s hard to prove specific causation).

Thus, one camp contends you simply can’t prove it. However, there have been lawsuits in which corporate documents have surfaced proving that cabin air contamination has been known about since the 1950s (when the way in which cabin air is supplied changed). It has also been noted that the Boeing 787 is the only aircraft free of this problem, due to a different air system. Boeing says this change has nothing to do with aerotoxicity, but in one document for FAA approval for the design, “the company cited concerns about carbon monoxide, which is released as TCP breaks down.” Furthermore, the chemical signature of the toxins in question has been found many times inside the cabin and cockpit as well as in the test results of blood tests done on many of those affected (but they have to be done within a short time frame).

Why do crews seem more affected?

Bearnairdine Beaumont, author of The Air I Breathe: It’s Classified and representative from the Aerotoxic Association says, “Crew are constantly exposed to some level of contaminated air. If 4 out of 10 people have a reaction on the same flight, it means their personal ‘cup is full and overflowing’… A very sensitive person (say a passenger) can also become affected from one exposure especially if there is a visible fume event.”

Crew members know that flying is hard on the body and can be damaging to health. Many of us report anomalies, like a doctor commenting that one’s lungs are years older than one’s age (as a colleague recently shared). Most crews I know aren’t stewing over everyday cabin air, but fume events are something else. When we only hear through unofficial channels about fume events putting colleagues in the hospital, it’s upsetting.

We would just like to feel assured that our companies care and will do what’s in their power to protect us (crew and passengers alike). While Lufthansa admirably admitted an issue with fume events on their A380s and made changes to address the problem, most airlines continue to say, “We’ve no idea what you’re talking about.”

Finally, unions, at least, have started putting out official statements on what to look or smell for (“dirty socks” is a classic description) and what procedures to follow if identified. The U.K. is a bit ahead of the U.S. in action and research on aerotoxicity, but at least awareness is spreading.

That’s important because something can be done, things like detection systems and filters, less-toxic oil and more action by the FAA. What it really takes is enough people asking for it.

[Screengrab via YouTube]