Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I will guess your average human emits more hazardous VOCs than a vinyl record.

I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"




I'd recommend you read up a more about vinyl - you really aren't treating a very dangerous material seriously enough. PVCs are highly toxic, and at this point there are many regulations to ban their use in plumbing, consumer goods, and especially toys because they are so poisonous. Vinyl records are a hold-out. They leach high levels of phthalates into the air quite quickly which are highly toxic, far, far more toxic than the typical emissions of your average human.

http://www.safemarkets.org/toxic-chemicals-in-products/pvc/v...


Yes, but I’d be much more worried about vinyl flooring, trim, windows, and shower curtains than records.


Wise to not have any of the stuff anywhere. The off-gassing from records is nearly instantaneous and reaches measurable levels where it's dangerous within minutes - having the extra surface area for off-gassing from the grooves makes it much worse. A vinyl collection is certainly better than other vinyl things like you mentioned since an album won't off-gas much in its sleeve, but playing one will definitely do a bit of liver damage if you're near it.


> playing one will definitely do a bit of liver damage if you're near it

That sounds a bit exaggerated. There is evidence that occupational exposure to PVC compounds causes liver damage or cancer, and that’s mostly regarding workers in production lines. You’d have to be closely sniffing your record collection for hours on end to get the same effect.

If this was true you’d have entire generations from the 19x0s suffering from liver failure, as vinyl was the only media available, with billions of records sold.


I meant a bit in a diminutive sense, since the trace exposure to phthalates and dioxins which you will be exposed to when unsheathing a record will have lasting effects on your liver. They won't be severe, but the liver has to work extremely hard to cope with phthalates and it leaves a mark even if it's just a bit and leaves a trace mark. You're taking the least generous spirit possible while talking about phthalate exposure which has strong and lasting effects on the liver even in trace amounts: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6373551/


Quotes from the 1984 study:

> Livers from rats provided with diet containing 2% DEHP show an increased number of peroxisomes after a few days

> In spite of the lack of direct evidences […] the indications so far obtained are sufficiently unequivocal not to be neglected

> We have reasons to believe that accumulating toxicity is valid for humans

> which means that evaluation of chronic human toxicity cannot be performed until around 2000 to 2020!

From that to “vinyl records will damage your liver” seems like a huge jump.


I’m sure vinyl records off gas, but I’m extremely dubious about the liver damage you propose. With all substances the poison is in the dose; you’d need a huge vinyl collection to match the amount of vinyl typical in a typical home with a shower curtain and vinyl windows, let alone one that uses vinyl flooring.


You're not going to die or feel any ill effects from a brief exposure to the phthalates and dioxins released by vinyl, but those phthalates and dioxins both hit the liver very hard while dioxins are carcinogens even in trace amounts. It would be wise to avoid even brief contact:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6373551/


> I will guess your average human emits more hazardous VOCs than a vinyl record.

As I recall, when Benn did the test, putting the record back in its sleeve caused the air quality to go back to normal.

So whatever VOCs he is emitting, I don't think his meter picked them up.

> I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"

Re-check the part about "how much my peepee hurts". I really want to like vinyls, but I'm never going to buy one if they're basically Forever Chemicals that got grandfathered in by being part of pop culture decades ago. And Benn says in the video that he could stand to make a lot of money if he sold out and had vinyls of his work manufactured.


But was "normal" based on an earlier meter reading with him in the room? Or a proven baseline that applies in general?


Have any evidence to back that claim up?

And even of its true, reducing VOCs still sounds like a positive goal




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: