Search Results

21-40 of 44 results for subject:Formaldehyde

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment the NHS has made of the potential health risks of exposure to formaldehyde used in the manufacture of everyday products.

Asked by

Dan Jarvis (Labour)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

21 March 2016

Reference

31000

House

House of Commons

Housing: Formaldehyde

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the efficacy of the published acceptable limits for formaldehyde in the air within a domestic dwelling.

Asked by

Cathy Jamieson (Labour; Co-operative Party)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

19 June 2014

Reference

200819; 582 c690W

House

House of Commons

Biocidal Products: Formaldehyde

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the Biocidal Products Directive (98/8/EC) on funeral practices in the United Kingdom, especially the embalming of bodies with formaldehyde prior to burial.

Asked by

Bishop of London (Bishops (affiliation))

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

29 March 2010

Reference

2892; 718 c336-7WA

House

House of Lords

Industrial Health and Safety: Formaldehyde

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether the Government has undertaken an impact assessment on the recommendations of the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits to reduce occupational exposure limit values for formaldehyde to 0.2 ppm for 8-hour time weighted average and to 0.4...

Asked by

Peter Atkinson (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Work and Pensions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

25 October 2007

Reference

465 c533W; 160222

House

House of Commons

Industrial Health and Safety: Formaldehyde

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE's) Disease Reduction Programme has concluded its benchmarking exercise; what steps the HSE plans to take on workplace exposure limits for formaldehyde; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by

Martyn Jones (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Work and Pensions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

24 October 2007

Reference

465 c323-4W; 160390

House

House of Commons

Industrial Health and Safety: Formaldehyde

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether the Government will adopt the recommendations of the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits to reduce occupational exposure limit values for formaldehyde to 0.2 ppm for eight-hour time weighted average and to 0.4 ppm for short-term exposure...

Asked by

Martyn Jones (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Work and Pensions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

24 October 2007

Reference

465 c323W; 160389

House

House of Commons

Dept of Health

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will remove (a) formaldehyde, (b) mercury, (c) foetal calf serum and (d) monkey kidney cells from UK childhood vaccines.

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

18 January 2005

For answer on

10 February 2005

Answered on

10 February 2005

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will remove (a) formaldehyde, (b) mercury, (c) foetal calf serum and (d) monkey kidney cells from UK childhood vaccines. [210276] Miss Melanie Johnson: Formaldehyde is used as an inactivating agent to eliminate poliovirus infectivity. Also, it is used to inactivate diphtheria and tetanus toxins. Gluteraldehyde, a closely related chemical, is used to inactivate acellular pertussis toxins. The quantities present in the new vaccines are low, and less than 0.1 milligrams of formaldehyde and less than 0.02 mg gluteraldehyde per 0.5 millilitre dose. Formaldehyde is present naturally in the human body at levels of about 2.5 micrograms per ml of blood. For a two month old child, this is about 10 times as much as in the amount present in a single dose of vaccine. There is no evidence that these quantities pose a risk to health and there are no plans to remove these substances from vaccines. None of the current vaccines used in the childhood immunisation programme contain mercury. Thiomersal, which releases ethylmercury, has played an important role either as a preservative or in the initial stages of the manufacture of some vaccines for over 60 years. Thiomersal was contained in the diphtheria, tetanus and whole cell pertussis (DTwP) and diphtheria and tetanus vaccines. However, with the introduction of the new vaccine Pediacel on 27 September 2004, the routine childhood immunisation programme no longer includes mercury-containing vaccines. Foetal bovine serum is an essential growth supplement for the cells used for the propagation of live viruses. The bovine serums used have demonstrated compliance with European Union regulations for minimising the risk of transmitting animal spongiform encephalopathy agents via human and veterinary medicines. The serum is used solely in the early stage of the manufacturing process of the vaccine and is reduced to trace amounts during purification and dilution steps. The monkey kidney cell line used for the production of inactivated poliovirus in the new vaccines has been extensively examined for contaminating viruses. The cell line meets the requirements of the World Health Organisation and European Pharmacopoeia. To exclude the risk of extraneous viral contamination each production lot is examined for contaminating viruses during the production process. The viral inactivation process has been fully validated. No monkey kidney cells are present in the final vaccine.

Date

10 February 2005

Reference

210276; 430 c1686-7W

House

House of Commons

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, what proposals he has to change the regulations on industrial formaldehyde emissions in the light of HSE advice on the levels of concentration at which strong odours occur. - Including figures and ref to Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1999 (COSHH) and...

Asked by

George Howarth (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

4 July 2002

For answer on

19 September 2002

Answered on

19 September 2002

Mr. George Howarth: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what proposals he has to change the regulations on industrial formaldehyde emissions in the light of HSE advice on the levels of concentration at which strong odours occur. [68354] Mr. Meacher: I have been asked to reply. Risks to worker health from formaldehyde are already addressed by the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1999 (COSHH). The Health and Safety Commission has approved Maximum Exposure Limits (MELs) for formaldehyde at 2 ppm (parts per million by volume) as an 8-hour time-weighted average, and 2 ppm as a short-term limit with a 15-minute reference period. Under COSHH, exposure by inhalation to a substance with a maximum exposure limit must be reduced as far as is reasonably practicable, and in any case below the MEL. In its documentation summarising the criteria for setting MELs, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) states that formaldehyde has a threshold of detection by smell at around 0.8 ppm. An earlier HSE Toxicity Review notes that the threshold for odour detection varies among individuals, with values in the range 0.05-1 ppm having been reported; it is expected that all would detect the odour at the latter value. HSE has issued no further advice relating odour to concentration; it does not normally seek to offer advice on odour problems. Industrial formaldehyde emissions to the wider environment are currently regulated by local authorities or, where larger industrial processes are concerned, by the Environment Agency, under the provisions of the Environment Protection Act 1990. Each industrial process requires an authorisation from the regulator. Where formaldehyde emissions are likely to cause environmental harm, each authorisation will contain conditions designed to limit its release. The regulator may at any time vary those conditions if it considers that necessary. The regulatory system established by the 1990 Act is gradually being replaced--from now to mid-2007--by that set out in the Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000. Each industrial installation will require a permit, which must contain conditions relating to formaldehyde emissions if these are likely to be significant to human health or human senses, or to impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment.

Date

19 September 2002

Reference

68354; 390 c216-7W

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper Dep 99/1488

Deposited by

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Deposited papers

Date

28 July 1999

Reference

Dep 99/1488

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, if he is now in a position to report on the further research his Department commissioned on galvanised steel wall ties. - Includes ref to 19 January 1998 at 304 c374-5W and fact that copies of results...

Asked by

Melanie Johnson (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

26 July 1999

For answer on

27 July 1999

Answered on

27 July 1999

Miss Melanie Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he is now in a position to report on the further research his Department commissioned on galvanised steel wall ties. [93805] Mr. Raynsford: The then Energy Efficiency Minister announced on 19 January 1998, Official Report, column 374, that as part of my Department's ongoing programme of research into rain penetration of cavity walls, she had asked for precautionary checks to be carried out on the condition of galvanised steel wire wall ties in a sample of houses with cavity walls filled with insulation. This followed the preliminary results of research at the BRE which indicated that there was a possibility that the life expectancy of green coloured galvanised steel wire wall ties might be shortened when used in conjunction with urea formaldehyde from cavity fill. These checks have now been completed along with further experimental research and an independent review of the findings. In the houses examined, there was no premature deterioration of galvanised ties with or without the green identification film in contact with urea formaldehyde form cavity insulation. The further experimental research was carried out on galvanised ties with and without the green identification film. The research comprised accelerated corrosion tests and chemical interactive tests with urea formaldehyde foam. Neither of these experiments indicated any discernible loss of galvanising. With these results to hand and with the benefit of an independent review undertaken by consultants WS Atkins, BRE re-examined their earlier experimental findings. They have concluded that the accelerated corrosion observed under the experimental conditions could have been caused by vapour from the urea formaldehyde which under certain conditions of very high humidity can lead to very high rates of corrosion of galvanising. The conditions under which this could happen were present in the preliminary experimental research, but were unlikely to occur in houses. The work concludes that there is no evidence that urea formaldehyde foam cavity wall insulation shortens the lifetime of galvanised wall ties. Copies of these results have been placed in the House Library.

Date

27 July 1999

Reference

336 c357W; 93805

House

House of Commons

Dept of Health

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants plans to consider aldehydes; and if he will make a statement; what further action he plans to take to reduce levels of aldehyders in ambient air; and what plans he has for...

Asked by

Desmond Swayne (Conservative)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

25 January 1999

Reference

324 c110W; 66728;66713

House

House of Commons

Hayman, Baroness

Statement on what are the latest results of the research into rain penetration in cavity walls. [HL 219]. - Includes fact that Building Research Establishment (BRE) research report in Library and have asked for precautionary checks to be carried out on the condition of galvanised steel wire wall ties in...

Asked by

Lord Gregson (Labour)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

19 January 1998

Reference

HL 219; 584 c215-6WA

House

House of Lords

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

Statement on the latest results of his Department's research into rain penetration in cavity walls.

Asked by

Bill Etherington (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

15 January 1998

For answer on

19 January 1998

Answered on

19 January 1998

Mr. Etherington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what are the latest results of his Department's research into rain penetration in cavity walls. [24238] Angela Eagle: On behalf of the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions the Building Research Establishment has undertaken research into water penetration in cavity walls filled with insulation. As part of my Department's ongoing programme of research into rain penetration in cavity walls, I have, in consultation with my hon. Friends the Minister for London and Construction and the Minister of Local Government and Housing, asked for precautionary checks to be carried out on the condition of galvanised steel wire wall ties in a representative sample of homes with cavity walls filled with insulation. This follows the preliminary results of research which indicate that there is a possibility that the life expectancy of green coloured galvanised steel wire wall ties might be shortened when used in conjunction with Urea Formaldehyde foam cavity fill. The tests were undertaken on dwarf walls without the protective features found in real houses. I wish, therefore, to establish whether the effects indicated in the BRE research occur in real houses. I want to stress that there is no conclusive evidence of a safety risk involving galvanised steel wire wall ties in cavity wall insulation. But it would be wrong if, as a result of the preliminary findings, we did not investigate quickly and thoroughly whether or not the possible problems with green coloured galvanised steel wire wall ties in some cavity fills were occurring in people's homes. This is a prudent, precautionary measure and I have asked that further research be carried out as soon as possible. The expert, independent, advice I have received from the BRE is that, while it believes that its initial findings indicate the need for a wider study, it is strongly of the view that it would be premature to place any firm interpretation on its findings until it can be established whether they are representative of conditions inthe UK housing stock. While the number of homes containing galvanised wire wall ties with a green film, in cavity wall insulation, is a small portion of the housing stock, it is prudent to carry out these precautionary checks which will be extended to examine other forms of galvanised wire wall ties in cavity fill. BRE's test results show: Accelerated corrosion has occurred to galvanised steel wire wall ties which have been coated with a green identification film when embedded in moist urea formaldehyde foam cavity insulation. Whilst there was visual evidence of corrosion of "grey" (without the green film) galvanised steel wire wall ties embedded in moist cavity fill insulation, the measurement of loss of zinc was too small to be significant. No significant corrosion was found in either form of galvanised steel wire wall tie embedded in moist blown mineral wood or mineral wool batt cavity insulation. There was some visual evidence of corrosion on both types of galvanised steel wire ties at the gap which occurs between the masonry and all three types of wet insulation. Stainless steel wire wall ties showed no signs of corrosion irrespective of the cavity fill material and exposure. There results were obtained from experimental walls after 12 and 18 months subject to regimes of accelerated exposure. Copies of BRE's Research report have been placed in the House Library.

Date

19 January 1998

Reference

24238; 304 c378-9W;304 c374-5W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, what steps his Department is taking to encourage the use of (a) alternatives to medium-density fibreboard and (b) low or zero formaldehyde emission fibreboard in do-it-yourself home construction.

Asked by

Brian Jenkins (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

17 November 1997

Reference

16065; 301 c4W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, what is the safety exposure limit, in parts per million, for formaldehyde emissons set by (a) the Health and Safety Executive and (b) other EU member states; and what international figures his Department has evaluated. - Inc...

Asked by

Brian Jenkins (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

28 October 1997

For answer on

4 November 1997

Answered on

4 November 1997

Mr. Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what is the safety exposure limit, in parts per million, for formaldehyde emissions set by (a) the Health and Safety Executive and (b) other EU member states; and what international figures his Department has evaluated. [13865] Ms Angela Eagle: Formaldehyde has a maximum exposure limit (MEL) of two parts per million for an eight-hour time weighted average and for a 15-minute reference period under the Control of Substances hazardous to Health Regulations (COSHH). The occupational exposure limits for other EU member states and worldwide, where information is available, is in the table below. Under COSHH, employers are required to control exposures to formaldehyde to a level as low as is reasonably practicable and in any case below the MEL. It is therefore misleading to compare the numerical value of the MEL with limits in other countries, where limits have different definitions and applications. Occupational exposure limits and guidelines for formaldehyde _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Country or Year Concentration Interpretation region (mg/m{3}) (ppm) Australia 1991 1.5 1.2 \ TWA; probable human carcinogen, sensitizer STEL 3 2.5 / Austria 1982 1.20 1.00 TWA Brazil 1978 2.30 1.90 TWA Belgium 1991 1.2 1 TWA; probable human carcinogen 2.5 2 STEL Bulgaria 1984 1.00 0.80 TWA Chile 1983 2.40 2.00 Ceiling China 1982 3.00 2.50 TWA Czech Republic 1991 0.5 0.4 TWA 1 0.8 STEL Denmark 1991 0.40 0.30 STEL; suspected carcinogen Egypt 1959 6.20 5.00 TWA Finland 1993 1.30 1.00 STEL, 15 min; significant absorption through skin France 1991 3.00 2.50 STEL Germany 1993 0.60 0.50 TWA; suspected carcinogenic potential; local irritant; sinsitizer Hungary 1991 0.60 0.50 Ceiling; probable human carcinogen; irritant; sensitizer India 1983 3.00 2.50 Ceiling Indonesia 1978 6.00 5.00 Ceiling Italy 1978 1.20 1.00 TWA Japan 1991 0.61 0.50 TWA; suspected carcinogenic potential Mexico 1983 3.00 2.50 TWA Netherlands 1986 1.5 1.2 TWA 3 2.5 Ceiling, 15 min Norway 1990 0.6 0.5 TWA; allergen; suspected carcinogen 1.2 1 Ceiling Poland 1991 2.00 1.60 TWA Romania 1975 4.00 3.00 MAX Russian Federation 1991 0.50 0.40 STEL; significant absorption through skin; allergen Sweden 1991 0.6 0.5 TWA; sensitizer 1.2 1 Ceiling Switzerland 1991 0.6 0.5 TWA; sensitizer 1.2 1 Ceiling Taiwan 1981 6.00 5.00 TWA; significant absorption through skin; United Kingdom 1992 2.5 2 TWA; maximum exposure limit 2.5 2 STEL, 15 min USA ACGIH{1} 1993 0.37 0.3 Ceiling; suspected human carcinogen 0.02 0.01 TWA; potential human carcinogen NIOSH{2} 1992 0.12 0.1 Ceiling, 15 min 0.9 0.75 TWA OSHA{3} 1993 2.5 2.0 STEL _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Key {1} ACGIH: American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists--This is a non statutory body and the limits they prescribe are only a recommendation. {2} NIOSH: National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health: A research institute whose limits are only advisory. {3} OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration: The statutory agency whose limits apply by law. MEL: Maximum exposure limit. MELs have a particular status under COSHH. Under the Regulations, there is a duty to control exposure to substances with a MEL to a level as low as is reasonably practicable, and in any case below the MEL. This duty to reduce exposures thus does not stop once the MEL level has been achieved, but continues until all that is reasonably practicable has been done. This special status of MELs means that it is misleading simply to compare the numerical value of a MEL with a limit that applies in another country, where limits have different definitions and applications. TWA: Time weighted average. Both the long-term and the short-term exposure limits are expressed as airborne concentrations averaged over a specified period of time. The period for the long-term limit is usually eight hours; the short-term exposure limit (STEL) in the UK is 15 minutes but may be different elsewhere.

Date

4 November 1997

Reference

13865; 300 c142-4W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, if he will list the research centres whose work has been evaluated by his Department in respect of research into (a) exposure to fine wood dust and (b) exposure to formaldehyde particles; what contact his Department has...

Asked by

Brian Jenkins (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

4 November 1997

Reference

13866; 300 c142W

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper Dep/3 4358

Deposited by

Department of the Environment

Type

Deposited papers

Date

19 December 1996

Reference

Dep/3 4358

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment

Statement on what assessment his Department has made of the risk to human health from the inhalation of formaldehyde fumes.

Asked by

Llew Smith (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

For answer on

18 December 1996

Answered on

18 December 1996

Mr. Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment his Department has made of the risk to human health from the inhalation of formaldehyde fumes. [9564] Sir Paul Beresford: I have been asked to reply. The Health and Safety Executive on behalf of the Health and Safety Commission reviewed the health effects and occupational exposure of formaldehyde in 1984. HSC'S advisory committee on toxic substances agreed that the inhalation of formaldehyde fumes causes severe irritation of the eyes and upper respiratory tract. However, there was no evidence that the inhalation of formaldehyde fumes causes occupational asthma and the evidence for causing nasal tumours was considered equivocal. The Department commissioned the Medical Research Council institute for environment and health to review the available data on exposure to formaldehyde in typical UK homes and assess the likely impacts on the health of occupants. This assessment was published by the institute in May 1996, the conclusions on health effects of formaldehyde were: 1. The irritant effects reported in some of the US studies from the 1980's related to mobile homes and relatively high levels of formaldehyde exposure, and are not relevant to the current situation in the UK. 2. Chamber studies with normal adults or those with pre-existing asthma have not demonstrated any dysfunction to mean formaldehyde levels currently found in UK homes by the Building Research Establishment study (0.020-0.025 mg/m{3}, 0.017-0.021 ppm) or even at levels several times higher. 3. Epidemiological studies have not demonstrated any increase in respiratory symptoms or lung function at estimated current levels of formaldehyde in UK homes. However, there is a suggestion of an increase in asthma and chronic bronchitis among children living in homes with formaldehyde levels above 0.07 mg/m{3} (0.06 ppm). 4. There is no evidence to suggest that current domestic exposures to formaldehyde in the UK pose a carcinogenic risk.

Date

18 December 1996

Reference

9564; 287 c709W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment

What regulations are currently in force in respect of the protection of human health and the environment from formaldehyde fumes.

Asked by

Llew Smith (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

18 December 1996

Reference

9565; 287 c607-8W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment

What research he has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated into the carcinogenic properties of formaldehyde.

Asked by

Llew Smith (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

18 December 1996

Reference

9567; 287 c709W

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher