The chemicals in our food, circadian rhythm disruptions, pathogens from passengers and crew who insist on flying sick, sunburns on the beach on layovers, alcohol abuse, hmm, what else?
UV exposure in the cockpit
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog
-
Jastapilot
- Rank 8
- Posts: 832
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:42 pm
Re: UV exposure in the cockpit
I've read enough about CR that I'm not concerned about it. There are far more dangerous things we're exposed to on a daily basis as pilots that should be addressed long before worrying about CR.
The chemicals in our food, circadian rhythm disruptions, pathogens from passengers and crew who insist on flying sick, sunburns on the beach on layovers, alcohol abuse, hmm, what else?
The chemicals in our food, circadian rhythm disruptions, pathogens from passengers and crew who insist on flying sick, sunburns on the beach on layovers, alcohol abuse, hmm, what else?
-
Hawkerflyer
- Rank 5
- Posts: 373
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:50 pm
- Location: Here today, gone tomorrow
Re: UV exposure in the cockpit
It was just a joke in regards to healthy eating around YYZ. (lack there of)Airbrake wrote:Hawkerflyer, I love the list, unfortunately a bit short on content.
"Six of us broke formation, five Jerries and I". - George "Buzz" Beurling
-
BE20 Driver
- Rank 7
- Posts: 571
- Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 12:58 pm
Re: UV exposure in the cockpit
FWIW regarding my original post - I drove around with the sunglasses today. They seemed ok when I took the dog for a walk this morning. They were not quite as good as I had hoped in the car though. I assume there is a UV coating which blocks sufficient rays to activate the tinting. I am guessing that I'll have the same problem in the plane.
Now back to discussing all the various other things that will kill pilots.
Now back to discussing all the various other things that will kill pilots.
Re: UV exposure in the cockpit
Hawkerflyer wrote:It was just a joke in regards to healthy eating around YYZ. (lack there of)Airbrake wrote:Hawkerflyer, I love the list, unfortunately a bit short on content.
Yeah, as was mine, this medium loses some of the intended humor sometimes. Oh well
Re: UV exposure in the cockpit
Lots of interesting articles, Some are older and epidemiological. Which by nature must be looked at very carefully.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21888274
Population and animal studies indicate that long-term exposure to short-wavelength visible light and ultraviolet (UV) radiation causes increased risk of certain ocular pathologies such as cataracts and maculopathy. The potential risk to flight crew is unknown. The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has issued guidance to pilots regarding sunglass selection; however, it is not known if this guidance is appropriate given pilots' unique occupational environment. A search and appraisal of the relevant literature was conducted which showed that within the airline pilot population, there is limited evidence of a higher prevalence of cataracts. There are no data of other known UV-related ocular pathology. There is some evidence of higher prevalence of skin melanomas. Studies measuring cockpit UV radiation levels are limited and leave unanswered questions regarding airline pilot exposure. Data from optical transmission of cockpit windshields demonstrates the UV blocking properties at sea level. No studies have addressed the occupational use of sunglasses in airline pilots. Although it is likely that an aircraft windshield effectively blocks UV-B, the intensity of UV-A and short wavelength blue light present within the cockpit at altitude is unknown. Pilots may be exposed to solar radiation for periods of many hours during flight where UV radiation is known to be significantly greater. Aircraft windshields should have a standard for optical transmission, particularly of short-wavelength radiation. Clear, untinted prescription glasses will offer some degree of UV protection; however, sunglasses will offer superior protection. Any sunglasses used should conform to a national standard.
Incidence of cancer among commercial airline pilots.
Rafnsson V, Hrafnkelsson J, Tulinius H.
Source
Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
To describe the cancer pattern in a cohort of commercial pilots by follow up through the Icelandic Cancer Registry.
METHODS:
This is a retrospective cohort study of 458 pilots with emphasis on subcohort working for an airline operating on international routes. A computerised file of the cohort was record linked to the Cancer Registry by making use of personal identification numbers. Expected numbers of cancer cases were calculated on the basis of number of person-years and incidences of cancer at specific sites for men provided by the Cancer Registry. Numbers of separate analyses were made according to different exposure variables.
RESULTS:
The standardised incidence ratio (SIR) for all cancers was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.62 to 1.46) in the total cohort and 1.16 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.81) among those operating on international routes. The SIR for malignant melanoma of the skin was 10.20, 95% CI 3.29 to 23.81 in the total cohort and 15.63, 95% CI 5.04 to 36.46 in the restricted cohort. Analyses according to number of block-hours and radiation dose showed that malignant melanomas were found in the subgroups with highest exposure estimates, the SIRs were 13.04 and 28.57 respectively. The SIR was 25.00 for malignant melanoma among those who had been flying over five time zones.
CONCLUSIONS:
The study shows a high occurrence of malignant melanoma among pilots. It is open to discussion what role exposure of cosmic radiation, numbers of block-hours flown, or lifestyle factors--such as possible excessive sunbathing--play in the aetiology of cancer among pilots. This calls for further and more powerful studies. The excess of malignant melanoma among those flying over five time zones suggests that the importance of disturbance of the circadian rhythm should be taken into consideration in future studies.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21888274
Population and animal studies indicate that long-term exposure to short-wavelength visible light and ultraviolet (UV) radiation causes increased risk of certain ocular pathologies such as cataracts and maculopathy. The potential risk to flight crew is unknown. The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has issued guidance to pilots regarding sunglass selection; however, it is not known if this guidance is appropriate given pilots' unique occupational environment. A search and appraisal of the relevant literature was conducted which showed that within the airline pilot population, there is limited evidence of a higher prevalence of cataracts. There are no data of other known UV-related ocular pathology. There is some evidence of higher prevalence of skin melanomas. Studies measuring cockpit UV radiation levels are limited and leave unanswered questions regarding airline pilot exposure. Data from optical transmission of cockpit windshields demonstrates the UV blocking properties at sea level. No studies have addressed the occupational use of sunglasses in airline pilots. Although it is likely that an aircraft windshield effectively blocks UV-B, the intensity of UV-A and short wavelength blue light present within the cockpit at altitude is unknown. Pilots may be exposed to solar radiation for periods of many hours during flight where UV radiation is known to be significantly greater. Aircraft windshields should have a standard for optical transmission, particularly of short-wavelength radiation. Clear, untinted prescription glasses will offer some degree of UV protection; however, sunglasses will offer superior protection. Any sunglasses used should conform to a national standard.
Incidence of cancer among commercial airline pilots.
Rafnsson V, Hrafnkelsson J, Tulinius H.
Source
Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
To describe the cancer pattern in a cohort of commercial pilots by follow up through the Icelandic Cancer Registry.
METHODS:
This is a retrospective cohort study of 458 pilots with emphasis on subcohort working for an airline operating on international routes. A computerised file of the cohort was record linked to the Cancer Registry by making use of personal identification numbers. Expected numbers of cancer cases were calculated on the basis of number of person-years and incidences of cancer at specific sites for men provided by the Cancer Registry. Numbers of separate analyses were made according to different exposure variables.
RESULTS:
The standardised incidence ratio (SIR) for all cancers was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.62 to 1.46) in the total cohort and 1.16 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.81) among those operating on international routes. The SIR for malignant melanoma of the skin was 10.20, 95% CI 3.29 to 23.81 in the total cohort and 15.63, 95% CI 5.04 to 36.46 in the restricted cohort. Analyses according to number of block-hours and radiation dose showed that malignant melanomas were found in the subgroups with highest exposure estimates, the SIRs were 13.04 and 28.57 respectively. The SIR was 25.00 for malignant melanoma among those who had been flying over five time zones.
CONCLUSIONS:
The study shows a high occurrence of malignant melanoma among pilots. It is open to discussion what role exposure of cosmic radiation, numbers of block-hours flown, or lifestyle factors--such as possible excessive sunbathing--play in the aetiology of cancer among pilots. This calls for further and more powerful studies. The excess of malignant melanoma among those flying over five time zones suggests that the importance of disturbance of the circadian rhythm should be taken into consideration in future studies.
Re: UV exposure in the cockpit
I am working on reporting on this issue. If you are interested in talking to the media, pm me please.
