Abstract
The National Association of Attorney Generals and several governmental agencies have been seeking to ban Urea-Formaldehyde foam insulation from the market, following all the sensational claims of health hazards appearing in the news media. This paper shows that the incidence of claims is only a fraction of the percent of all the installations made in this country. The individual claims of health hazards have only started to accelerate after one or two bad odor installations have been sensationalized in the press.
Medical tests have not verified the actual sources of the symptoms claimed by the consumers. These very same symptoms have appeared in individuals who have had no known contact with formaldehyde. Population studies have not verified the laboratory studies on test animals, and studies conducted on individuals who have had a life time of exposure to for maldehyde foams have not indicated a serious health hazard exists. Some individuals may be more sensitive to formaldehyde fumes; there is no indication of permanent physiological damage to individuals general health from exposure to formaldehyde fumes, and once these individuals are re moved from contact with formaldehyde fumes, the symptoms dissappear.
The evaluation of Urea-Formaldehyde insulation must be made from a risk-benefit analysis. Industry admits that all testing of health hazards has not been conducted and complete assurance of the absence of a hazard may never be possible. This statement, however, applies to many sub stances in use by the general public today. This product must be evaluated on its potential to conserve our energy resources and reduce our depend ence on foreign oil imports. This benefit must be compared to the slight risk that some installations may create an odor problem within the resi dence and a smaller percentage of these individuals may be irritated from the foam.
Some errors by the applicator or the excess of formaldehyde in general construction materials used in the residence construction can increase the potential for an odor problem. Odors in some incidences are a result of the reduction of ventilation within the structure. Many complaints are claimed to be formaldehyde odor problems because of the same general irritation and symptoms, but on careful and thorouch examination prove to be from a completely different chemical irritant.
This paper concludes that 0.8 ppm of formaldehyde vapors is the thresh old of odor and the safe toxic limit is well above this limit. If a value of 0.5 ppm is established as a standard for formaldehyde vapors in a residence there should be no hazard to the health of the individuals residing in the structure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.