WAXROOM SAFETY By Dr. Thanos Karydas Technical Director, DOMINATOR Wax “Precaution is better than cure.” - Sir Edward Coke, English judge and politician (1552-1634) During the test phase of the first DOMINATOR waxes in 1993, I visited many World Cup waxrooms and worked closely with the technicians. As a Ph.D. chemist I was surprised by the lack of safety awareness: Air quality was poor, respiratory and eye protection were rarely used, and technicians were waxing for long periods of time without exposure to fresh air. I felt that the technicians must be made aware of the risks so they could effectively protect themselves. On that basis, our company has provided risk-awareness information and advocated safe waxroom practices for the past twenty years. To illustrate our position on waxroom safety, we will take an analytical look at the available scientific literature. The original articles, written mainly by medical and biochemical researchers, are very technical, but we have paraphrased the information so it can be understood by the people that really need to know how to protect themselves. Exposure to Hydrocarbon Waxes During a study which took place in northern Sweden during February 1989, five ski technicians were monitored medically over a five-day period. Study results were reported in a 1992 article, ’’Exposure to Ski-Wax Smoke and Health Effects in Ski Waxers.”1 The authors of the study first looked at hydrocarbon wax vapor concentration in the waxroom. Their findings are shown in Figure 1, in which the green areas indicate what the US government considers safe levels and the red area indicate the levels where respiratory protection is mandated. We see that five minutes after waxing began, hydrocarbon wax vapor concentration in the waxroom exceeded the Occupational Safety and Health Act limit. (OSHA is the US agency that monitors workplace safety). In cases where the OSHA limit is exceeded, use of a respirator is mandated. 1 www.dominatorwax.com Figure 2 shows the effect of repetitive waxing on the lung function of one of the five ski technicians monitored during the study. The vertical axis shows lung function; the horizontal axis shows the time elapsed since the start of the monitoring period. Monitoring took place over a 36 hour period which included a total of 20 hours of exposure to ski wax vapor interrupted by a total of 16 hours of rest periods. (This is not an unusual schedule for a cross country wax technician during a competition.) All five technicians monitored in the study showed a 10 - 25 percent decrease in lung function and, although some recovery was observed after the rest periods, the effect appeared to be cumulative for the duration of the test. WORKPLACE SAFETY RULES REQUIRE THE USE OF A RESPIRATOR ONCE A CERTAIN CONCENTRATION OF WAX VAPORS IS EXCEEDED; THE ABOVE STUDY INDICATED THAT NOT USING A RESPIRATOR ONCE THIS CONCENTRATION IS EXCEEDED HAS AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE LUNG FUNCTION OF THE WAXERS. LONG TERM EFFECTS WERE NOT REPORTED AT THE TIME, BUT WE NOW KNOW THAT AFTER LONG PERIODS OF RECOVERY (FROM A WEEK TO A MONTH IN A FUME-FREE ENVIRONMENT), THE LUNG FUNCTION RETURNS TO NORMAL LEVELS. Exposure to Fluoro Waxes This has been a very active area of research in the last five years. A group of Swedish scientists headed by H. Nilsson has published two very comprehensive articles2,3. The contents of these articles can be difficult for non-chemists to fully comprehend, but here is a very simplified summary: Perfluorooctanoic acid (abbreviated PFOA) is a synthetic chemical found in the blood of the general population. There are theories as to how it got there (Teflon pans and microwave popcorn bags among the top suspects), and it is suspected to be hazardous to human health, but there is no concrete evidence at this time. We will represent PFOA with a black- and-yellow-striped square: A number of professional cross-country wax technicians examined in another study showed much higher PFOA content in their blood, around 20 times higher on average than the 2 www.dominatorwax.com general population. This was very surprising because PFOA is not contained in ski waxes in appreciable levels, so where did it come from? To answer this question, a group of wax technicians working for the Swedish and US national cross country teams were monitored during the 2007-2008 World Cup season. Their average workload involved 30 hours of waxing per week. The waxroom air quality was also monitored: The levels of PFOA were very low, but high levels of 2-pefluorooctylethanol (abbreviated FTOH and represented by a black-and-red-striped square) were found. FTOH is a high boiling liquid that is expected to volatilize during ironing, and is a suspected health hazard. There was no report on the origin of FTOH; it could be an impurity in the fluoro wax, or formed from other wax ingredients during the ironing process. The levels of PFOA in the technicians’ blood kept increasing even after the season was over and there was no exposure to wax. This led the researchers to conclude that the FTOH, after being inhaled, was slowly changing into PFOA in the technicians’ bodies through a process called biotransformation: The levels of PFOA reached a maximum shortly after the season was over and then started to decrease. There was no report about the levels before the start of the following season so long term effects are not known. 3 www.dominatorwax.com Clearly, a potential health hazard is present while ironing some fluoro ski waxes. A respirator equipped with cartridges suitable for organic vapor, sulfur dioxide, and hydrochloric acid should provide adequate protection. When DOMINATOR waxes were introduced in 1994, educating the users on how to protect themselves became a strong component of the company’s culture. The above-mentioned PFOA information was not available at the time, but my instinct as a chemist told me that it was certainly a potential hazard to guard against. The safety awareness initiative started on the DOMINATOR wax package, with a warning in three languages. This information was used on all DOMINATOR wax packages. The user education continued with a chapter on “Safe Wax Application” in DOMINATOR’s first wax manual, “Rocket Science, A Guide to Fast Skis”, published in August 1994. We also wrote articles stressing the importance of this issue in a number of industry publications, such as SKI TECH. Readers were mostly ski shop owners and backshop technicians who would tune and wax a large number of skis and snowboards during a season. The articles alerted readers to the downside risk of extensive waxing in confined spaces, and advised them to err on the side of caution. 4 www.dominatorwax.com In 1994, as an invited speaker at the VARA (Vermont Alpine Racing Association) Coaches’ Conference, I said: “Ideally, ski waxing should be done in an environment that protects the waxer from the wax fumes, much like a laboratory hood protects a chemist from exposure to chemicals. We would like to see restaurant-type ventilators installed in waxrooms and trailers. While this is unlikely to happen in the near future, there are steps you can take now to minimize your risk of exposure; at the very least, wear a respirator while waxing and repairing skis.” A targeted safety article was also submitted to AMERICAN SKI COACH as coaches, especially for juniors, do a lot of waxing themselves and interact with parents that wax their children’s equipment. 5 www.dominatorwax.com DOMINATOR’s strong safety campaign elicited adverse reactions from a number of retailers and a few established wax companies. The retailers complained that the warnings “scare people away from wax and hurt sales”. Wax companies’ comments, some written, were that we sensationalized the dangers of waxing to draw attention to our product and that there is no real danger if their waxes are used as directed. Nearly twenty years later, research proves that our concerns were not exaggerated. It is not our intention to say we were right and they were wrong; this would be counterproductive because the common objective should be to safeguard the health of our customers. But it is now time to take yet another look at the risks involved and to advocate adequate caution. While one can never be too cautious while working with chemicals, the following should be noted regarding limited exposure to ski wax vapors: For do-it-yourselfers, H. Nilsson, the primary author of the recent Swedish articles referenced above, advises: “Make sure that the room is ventilated. A [respirator] with a proper filter is also recommended.” She added, “There is no need to worry too much if one only intends to wax the occasional one or two pair.” Concerns are greatest for professionals like those in the studies, waxing as many as 20 pairs of skis a day. 6 www.dominatorwax.com There is one point of caution I will add to the above statement. Some people (myself included) will not wear a respirator when hot-scraping or travel waxing one or two pair of skis with an iron set at the right temperature and in a well-ventilated area. There is, however, a case when this can be very risky: hot-scraping to remove fluorocarbon waxes. Fluorocarbons sublime when heated (go from solid to gas without turning liquid first) so they can be readily inhaled, with the known negative health effects. ALWAYS wear a respirator when hot-scraping fluoros. A facet of waxroom safety not addressed in the above articles is the potentially high concentration of airborne fine powders in the waxroom: The extensive use of roto tools means that there is a lot of powdered wax in the air, and this can cause eye and lung irritation.