HP to Researchers: Our Printers Are Safe

Fri Aug 3, 2007 12:49PM EDT

See Comments (78)

In the wake of the report, released earlier this week, that expresses grave concerns over the safety of laser printers and ultrafine particulate matter they might be releasing into the air, HP is striking back. Today I received the company's official (and, I have to say, scathing) response to the matter: "HP does not agree with [the study's] conclusion or some of the bold claims the authors have made."

HP doesn't really claim that its printers don't release ultrafine particles (though it's important to note that the study showed that many HP printers didn't release any emissions at all), saying that they are "consistently below recognized occupational exposure limits."

Rather, HP is taking issue with the notion that these emissions are dangerous. Here's what HP says: "There are no indications that ultrafine particle (UFP) emissions from laser printing systems are associated with special health risks. Currently, the nature and chemical composition of such particles—whether from a laser printer or from a toaster—cannot be accurately characterized by analytical technology."

HP agrees more testing is needed and is working with independent testing group Air Quality Sciences in the U.S. and a similar group in Germany. As well, the company says that HP products meet all current health and safety guidelines for office equipment.

So there you have it. HP says the printers are safe. Australia says they aren't. Who's right? Stay tuned, as I'm sure this argument is about to get really nasty...

You can find the entire text of HP's rebuttal here. 

Comments on HP to Researchers: Our Printers Are Safe

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 46 Posted by mmmickey55 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:24PM EDT Report Abuse

    This isn't just an issue of "bad publicity" -- if the danger were to prove out, you'd see what big class action filed against HP and other companies.

  • 47 Posted by bradley.furnish on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:12PM EDT Report Abuse

    HP says their printers are below "recognized occupational exposure limits", yet the study in Australia is proposing that these exposure limits may be too high and pose a health risk. For HP to say their printers are safe and in the same document claim that more testing is needed reeks of hypocrisy.

  • 48 Posted by luca_vio on Thu Sep 3, 2009 6:59PM EDT Report Abuse

    Why everybody's worry about HP only. What about other manufactures of printers and copy machines ? Why they are focused on HP only ? What about others? Should I throw away my OKY laser printer ?

  • 49 Posted by ejanelli on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:52PM EDT Report Abuse

    I am appalled by the responses of many of the posters. Either it's Saint HP or it's Satan HP. First, let's remember how many manufacturers of laser printers there are. Not all are HP. And, for heaven's sake stop voicing your own prejudices as gospel truth. Just because it's your opinion doesn't make it true. dvan_d77 obviously has barely a clue. If the words are coming off, your printer needs service or you haven't set the fuser to the thickness of paper you're printing on. Although the author of the original article calls HP's response "scathing" it is hardly that. Anyone who reads more than his own words knows that it is the standard type of response that a manufacturer or industry would issue when there are, admitted by all parties, no studies either to support the allegations or disprove them. The author later admits that many HP printers are low emitters, a fact he chose not to include in the original publication. Why don't people lobby for the obvious first step... rating the printers according to their particulate emissions. Them the consumer at least has information available to use in a choice. Of course the possible health dangers of toners should also be investigated, but conclusive information is likely to take years to develop whereas levels of emission by the various printer models could be determined in days.

  • 50 Posted by kastormwatcher on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:47PM EDT Report Abuse

    :Reads: :Snorts: I am not convinced. Preliminary testing is hardly conclusive; 'at this time' does not concern me so much as 'in the future', and 'special health risks' is a ridiculous qualifier. I don't want my printer putting me at ANY health risk, special or otherwise. I would be very interested in seeing results of the tests by the two independent companies HP states they have 'been active' with. Maybe they'll have something more concrete- and objective- than what the company 'believes' and a better definition of 'significant'. ...And I have no idea at all what the toaster is doing in there.

  • 51 Posted by adgraham@swbell.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:45PM EDT Report Abuse

    Notice the part in the letter that states they meet all CURRENT saftey standards. So did Asbestos when they were using it.

  • 52 Posted by modelaboy on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:24PM EDT Report Abuse

    HP seems to be taking the heat for this when the problem is the same for any printer or photocopier. Dry toner based copiers have been in use for over 20 years in copy shops and offices. Is there any evidence that there is a higher lung cancer rate amoung people working in these areas? I doubt it. I am willing to bet that household dust is more prevalent in your home than toner dust from your printer.

  • 53 Posted by senatorsmiffy on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:12PM EDT Report Abuse

    I do not use my Printer very much anyway.I like to draw Pictures and I take Photos of Things that might make a nice Painting when I am not in a position to draw it.Then if it is interesting I might make a 10+8 inch Print of it and then Paint it and add Scenery that the Camera did not see.Some times the Naked Eye can see things the Camera cannot.I shall keep an Eye on various reports of Printers in future and be careful of its usage.I have several Printers Hp and Canon Pixma. I have found your article very Illuminating thanks very much for highlighting this Potential Problem.

  • 54 Posted by edge_mountain on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:52PM EDT Report Abuse

    What does it matter anymore anyway? There has always been, always is, and always will be scare news. Anything to scare the daylights out of people, it will be delivered. Do they offer solutions or any bit of hope? No, because that would dull the scare factor... can't do that! Basically it works like this: if you're a carbon-based organism, you're going to die someday. Period... nothing we can do about it. ENOUGH SCARE NEWS!!!!

  • 55 Posted by chogie9 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:23PM EDT Report Abuse

    That's funny that HP says that because I have been working next to an HP for a year now and I have to cough up black residue every mourning so now it makes sense. I would appreciate HP being honest and doing something about the problem before it starts to kill as many people as smoking. signed disgusted client

  • 56 Posted by chogie9 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:23PM EDT Report Abuse

    Dry toner based copiers have been in use for over 20 years in copy shops and offices. Is there any evidence that there is a higher lung cancer rate amoung people working in these areas? What kinda of answer is that. People that make mass production of copies wear at least a mask and do not subject themselves to breathing in the toner. The German's did a study 10 years ago and found out the same thing that's being said now. Toners are dangerouse and cause cancer.....HP do the right thing and admit you made a mistake and get ready to be sued...

  • 57 Posted by shank_not on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:16PM EDT Report Abuse

    HP is just part of the toner market. Toner is in copiers, printers, fax machines and duplicators provided by a large number of manufacturers. To say that HP is the culprit in something like this, even if it may be true, is to single out the largest conglomerate in the industry. If anything you should really be pointing fingers at multifunctional copiers that spill more toner because of the way it is applied. HP even has Vivera ink technology that, in many printers, there is a fine layer of "polymer" that is sprayed over the toner to make it steadfast. Gotta count for something unless the polymer emittance is worse than the toner:) Nevertheless, it is up to you or your technician to keep the machine as clean as possible. But that cost money, and in an downwaard spiraling environment of cutting cost to make shareholders happy, we don't give vendors or IT staff enough money to keep them clean. Well there you go, no matter how you cut it, it always comes down to money and the lining of one's pocket to the potential harm of the consumer. Not gonna change anytime soon.

  • 58 Posted by f_jr27 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:05PM EDT Report Abuse

    Those posting lizbuff93 comments are bogus, are the ones who don't know what they are talking about. I repair laser printers/copiers for a living, and the toner remains in the printer, actually only service techs(like myself) should be exposed to toner, because we take out parts that sheild the user from it. She is right about the copy process, except for the laser. Yes the laser part was wrong,(it writes to the drum, and never touches the paper), the image/words are crushed and burned to the paper by the fuser. If toner is leaking from the machine, or if you can wipe off toner from a print out then the machine needs to be serviced,because it is very dirty or needs mechanical repair(usually both). All machines have maintenance cycles, much like a tune-up for a car,the machine will be hazardous and break down, just like a car will if you wait too long for maintence. Small printers/faxes like for a home, small office, have self cleaning drum units that you can purchase and replace yourself, but it must still be done periodically. The big machines(newer ones, not the old) are even safer because the parts that get dirty are sheilded from the everyday user. I am interested in further study only because techs are exposed to the stuff, users have nothing to worry about unless they don't know how to change toner and don't tell anyone when they spill it.

  • 59 Posted by rnkl_cthrn on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:44PM EDT Report Abuse

    \no more printers in my house. i stopped smoking 30 years ago. i dont need this.

  • 60 Posted by rlaboucane on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:43PM EDT Report Abuse

    I think HP's response only serves to negate the possible chilling effect on printer and toner sales, since it lacks the supporting evidence that the researchers have. I read the research paper myself, and there is nothing sensationalized nor any bold claims within. On the contrary, I found it very well grounded. I mean sure, one of the authors said publicly that Ultra Fine Particles *can* cause damage (as opposed to *will*), but they also said that depends on particle composition. There's plenty of research to back that up too, and this research was referenced in the paper. In short, the researchers have produce a solid paper implying laser printers could be dangerous, backed it up, and HP has responded like an elementary school student, saying "They ARE NOT dangerous!" providing a rationale that is naive at best, and failing to cite any references whatsoever.

  • 63 Posted by warduke@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:40PM EDT Report Abuse

    As a former Army smoke platoon leader I can tell you that our smoke generators which immpregnate dust particles with water or in some cases graphite with water to make smoke emit less small/fine particulates into the air per square inch than a laser printer does considering air volume to space (room size) ratios common to printer/copier rooms and we have to wear protective masks when we do it to avoid getting...TA DA! Cancer! HP is covering themselves like any other corporation when they get caught making a product that is hazerdous without warning the public as to the risks when used improperly. I like HP, but they need to spend some money, research it and post warnings detailing ways to limit exposure so as to ensure that the public uses its products safely and effectively. There is a reason cancer is such a major epidemic in this country and anyone who doubts that industrial/office/home products play a part is only fooling themself.

  • 65 Posted by johnbennett@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:38PM EDT Report Abuse

    HP is using the same tactic that cigarette companies do. It's the argument that something is safe until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's not. Just once I'd like to see a company do the responsible thing... Such as state publicly that "we aren't sure if they are truly a hazardous or not, however, to be on the safe side, we'll immediately begin to develop a printer that does not release any particles, to ensure that people don't suffer some health consequence later on down the road. It would be refreshing to have a company act instead of react.

More Posts: First Prev … 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Post a Comment

Sign In to Post a Comment

My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Site Map | Tour | Subscribe to Yahoo! Tech

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.