Health risk for anti-fouling?

[roverhi]

Originally Posted by Looking4Neptune

Ok, I did not lick it off, just used soap and water. And about helping a friend - I was crewing for him to help him get from Athens to Sardinia while his wife had to be away. So I pitch in on whatever needs doing. He did the starboard hull and I did the port.

Starting my cruising life NOW :-)

Nexxt time you are in Kona, will let you scrub half my boats
Bottom. Might even take you sailing afterwards.

[Looking4Neptune]

I figure crewing for someone includes doing maintenance along with the sailing.

Starting my cruising life NOW :-)

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Looking4Neptune

I figure crewing for someone includes doing maintenance along with the sailing.

Starting my cruising life NOW :-)

Great Attitude! One that all folks looking to gain experience on other peoples boats should emulate. I think you will make it as a cruiser if you don't obsess about occasional exposure to anti fouling paint debris. I reckon that much of what comes off when scrubbing a fouled bottom isn't so toxic any more. If it was, the stuff wouldn't be growing on it!

Jim

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

...said the guy who obviously has no idea how boat bottoms get cleaned.

Sheen Marine is a "Total Yacht Care" provider.

We perform bottom work on both sail and power vessels.

The question was not, "Do people scrape anti-fouling in the water?"

The question was, "Is it a health risk".

The answer is "Yes"

If one chooses to expose themselves to the health risk, that is their decision, but it doesn't make the health risk go away.

Ramblin Rod
www.sheenmarine.com

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

The question was, "Is it a health risk".

The answer is "Yes"

Since you have never performed an in-water hull cleaning, you are not in a position to say if it is or not. You state an uninformed opinion as if it were fact.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

Sheen Marine is a "Total Yacht Care" provider.

We perform bottom work on both sail and power vessels.

The question was not, "Do people scrape anti-fouling in the water?"

The question was, "Is it a health risk".

The answer is "Yes"

If one chooses to expose themselves to the health risk, that is their decision, but it doesn't make the health risk go away.

Ramblin Rod
www.sheenmarine.com

Although you may be a "Total Yacht Care" provider for both sail and power vessels, I doubt that expertise includes health and environmental safety.

You have grossly overstated and misrepresented the health risks involved with cleaning a boat bottom in the water.

I would venture that everything else involved with cleaning a boat bottom in the water outside of the actual paint component is more of a risk.

Mark

[Siberianhusky]

I wouldn't worry about occasional contact, skin is a pretty good barrier.
Plenty of other things to worry about especially if you live in a city.
In Toronto after a days walking around downtown try wiping your face with a white napkin and take a look at the black stuff you wipe off. How much of that is in your lungs? Can't see it being different in any other city.
Not saying this is you but I get a kick out of people who live in places like that then worry about some "toxic" pollutant they come in contact with on occasion.
You used to be able to develope film in the water from Hamilton harbour, no chemicals needed just the water! People still swim in it!

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Since you have never performed an in-water hull cleaning, you are not in a position to say if it is or not. You state an uninformed opinion as if it were fact.

You seem t have a personal objections to ramblinrod.

Everyone's opinion is valued on CF. If you don't like that, then don't contribute yourself.

I've never done a bottom scrub, but I am familiar with an msds sheet and I'd recommend avoiding a repeat of this situation.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Looking4Neptune

Last week I was helping a friend clean the bottom of his boat and when I got out of the water I had black anti-fouling on my hands and arms. Took me about 10 mins scrubbing with soap and water to get clean.

That stuff is supposed to be really toxic. Is it a health risk to get it on my skin?

Most antifowls are known carcinogen's. That's a fact.

You advise that despite being in the water you came out 'black', which suggests you were exposed. There's really not much you can do, but just avoid doing that again I'd suggest.

It's purely antecedent, but a friend of mine who spent his life making and sailing boats, died after being diagnosed with cancer. He passed away within three months. He told me personally thought it was from the years of anti fowling. But of course, it's conjecture.

[thinwater]

Facts please, people. Don't state something as a fact unless it is either obvious (today is Friday) or you can support it with documentation. Don't wave the bloody shirt without a real explanation with context.

From an typical antifouling MSDS:
CHRONIC: Reports have associated repeated or prolonged occupational exposure
to solvents with permanent brain or nervous system damage, liver and kidney
damage or may cause cardiac arrhythmia. Ethylbenzene, carbon black and
naphthalene are classified by IARC as possibly carcinogenic to humans (2B) based
on inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of cariogenicity in laboratory animals.

a. The only rational exposure path for these is respiratory. Thus there is no risk from these components when cleaning in the water. The water may have hazards, but they don't seem to come from the paint.
b. Skin absorbant of solvent is possible, but only if you are spraying or practically paint yourself with it.
c. A respirator is a good idea, particularly if there is no breeze or if you do this more than every 2 years.

As for the guy that got cancer, that is unfortunate, and I would not be surprised if solvent exposure contributed, bu we are talking very regular exposure, and he probably did other solvent related work indoors without good protection.

Note that they did not list the copper or zinc, as they are not sufficiently toxic to people to be of concern through these exposure pathways. Lethal to marine organisms, but actually required micro nutrients for people. It is COMMON for mammal and marine toxicity to be VERY different, and relating the 2 is careless. Another example is ethylene glycol; though moderately toxic to people, it is consider to have low toxicity in a marine environment (EPA and USDI).

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Facts please, people. Don't state something as a fact unless it is either obvious (today is Friday) or you can support it with documentation. Don't wave the bloody shirt without a real explanation with context.

From an typical antifouling MSDS:
CHRONIC: Reports have associated repeated or prolonged occupational exposure
to solvents with permanent brain or nervous system damage, liver and kidney
damage or may cause cardiac arrhythmia. Ethylbenzene, carbon black and
naphthalene are classified by IARC as possibly carcinogenic to humans (2B) based
on inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of cariogenicity in laboratory animals.

a. The only rational exposure path for these is respiratory. Thus there is no risk from these components when cleaning in the water. The water may have hazards, but they don't seem to come from the paint.
b. Skin absorbant of solvent is possible, but only if you are spraying or practically paint yourself with it.
c. A respirator is a good idea, particularly if there is no breeze or if you do this more than every 2 years.

As for the guy that got cancer, that is unfortunate, and I would not be surprised if solvent exposure contributed, bu we are talking very regular exposure, and he probably did other solvent related work indoors without good protection.

Note that they did not list the copper or zinc, as they are not sufficiently toxic to people to be of concern through these exposure pathways. Lethal to marine organisms, but actually required micro nutrients for people. It is COMMON for mammal and marine toxicity to be VERY different, and relating the 2 is careless. Another example is ethylene glycol; though moderately toxic to people, it is consider to have low toxicity in a marine environment (EPA and USDI).

A, b and c are just your 'opinion' isn't it?

And whilst I stated most anti fowls are carcinogens, it's states it in the msds sheet as you even posted above. Which sort of supports me saying 'it's a fact'!

[hellosailor]

While there is good cause to suspect a number of chemicals are carcinogens, one might note that the typical MSDS language says they are ASSOCIATED. Meaning, a causal relationship has not yet been established, but prolonged exposure seems to be found in people who have developed the cancers.


With similar logic, I can prove that wearing a wristwatch "causes" fatal car accidents. Almost every driver who has been found dead in a car crash, is also found to be wearing a wristwatch.


ASSOCIATION does not prove CAUSALITY. It does, however, raise a red flag for further caution and study.


Further study proves the wrist watches don't cause fatal crashes. Wearing shoes and underwear are also associated with fatal car crashes, but there is no definitive study done on the causality of those factors either. Yet.

[colemj]

You are missing the "fact" that the OP was cleaning a bottom in the water. There are NO solvents present in the bottom paint at this time or in this environment. So, Thinwater's A, B and C points are facts, and not opinions - he simply states that in-water is no problem with solvents, and that while using these products in liquid uncured form, skin covering and respirators may help reduce intake.

The possible carcinogens are the solvents, not the solids. Again, there are no solvents left in the paint after it is dried, and certainly no way to release or inhale solvents while cleaning a boat in the water.

I know many people who have died from cancer who have never even seen bottom paint - that line of reasoning is effect without cause.

Mark

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

You seem t have a personal objections to ramblinrod.

Not sure where you came up with that. It is not the case.

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Everyone's opinion is valued on CF. If you don't like that, then don't contribute yourself.

Yes, opinions are wonderful things and like a**holes, everbody has one. Unsubstantiated opinions presented as fact however, need to be called out as such.

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Most antifowls are known carcinogen's.

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

And whilst I stated most anti fowls are carcinogens...

BTW- it's anti foul.

[Siberianhusky]

LOL need some of that anti fowl for my decks! Damn seagulls!