Jump to content

Cancer causing chemicals coat ships water tanks


Recommended Posts

just read an article in the Sunday times which says RCI was involved in a cover up on the coating of water tanks in 2 of its ships, the Brilliance and Radiance.

They were painted with with paint that was able to leach the chemical Acryonitrile into the water, which as we know is used for drinking.

Not good at all.

the company who did this obtained a High court gagging order but it has now been released, hope we hear more from RCI as to what has been done about the problem

feel worried about the crews exposure to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just read an article in the Sunday times which says RCI was involved in a cover up on the coating of water tanks in 2 of its ships, the Brilliance and Radiance.

They were painted with with paint that was able to leach the chemical Acryonitrile into the water, which as we know is used for drinking.

Not good at all.

the company who did this obtained a High court gagging order but it has now been released, hope we hear more from RCI as to what has been done about the problem

feel worried about the crews exposure to this.

 

Have to pay to view on line article. Tut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not good news Missus - been on both many times!!

 

However, I am still here and cruising and keeping my fingers crossed, as I am sure that this happens a lot in modern life. Hazards we don't know exist!

 

Life is just scary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/cancer_scare_over_cruise_ships_suspect_kbLaWxtn6MoxxC9qo1ESML

 

This article refers to the Sunday Times article but just gives a brief summary.

 

Actually the article does not really tell us anything. Is the paint in the tanks for drinking water or for the brown water? How much chemicals is released and how much water does a person have to consume to get cancer.

 

I am not trying to make fun of this, would like to know more before I make up my mind especially when I am certain that we consume and get exposed to so many other cancer causing chekicals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the article does not really tell us anything. Is the paint in the tanks for drinking water or for the brown water? How much chemicals is released and how much water does a person have to consume to get cancer.

 

I am not trying to make fun of this, would like to know more before I make up my mind especially when I am certain that we consume and get exposed to so many other cancer causing chekicals.

 

 

CARROTS ARE POISONOUS!

(True)

 

The only thing is, you would have to eat about 1200 pounds at a sitting to get enough to kill you.

 

My point is, that almost every compound that we come in contact with has some deleterious affect on us. The details are in the amount of exposure and the accumulation of said toxins in our bodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CARROTS ARE POISONOUS!

(True)

 

The only thing is, you would have to eat about 1200 pounds at a sitting to get enough to kill you.

 

My point is, that almost every compound that we come in contact with has some deleterious affect on us. The details are in the amount of exposure and the accumulation of said toxins in our bodies.

Very true. Have you ever had a lot of carrott juice and seen what it does to your body? Nuff said, LOL.:eek:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CARROTS ARE POISONOUS!

(True)

 

The only thing is, you would have to eat about 1200 pounds at a sitting to get enough to kill you.

 

My point is, that almost every compound that we come in contact with has some deleterious affect on us. The details are in the amount of exposure and the accumulation of said toxins in our bodies.

 

That is not a very good analogy. B carotene, in appropriate amounts, is beneficial for you. There is no amount of acryonitrile that is considered to have health benefits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to pay to view on line article. Tut.

what is this guy's agenda. Does It only apply to cruise ships. what about all the elevated water storage tanks in the world. All I am saying don't be so gullable, any body can say anything that don't make it true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do people always find it necessary to come to the cruise lines defense, they have attorneys for that. I am an avid cruiser but am not going to give a cruise line a pass on something that was done that is detrimental to anyone's health. Don't hide under a gag order...FIX the problem. Carrot example may be true but really doesn't apply here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not a very good analogy. B carotene, in appropriate amounts, is beneficial for you. There is no amount of acryonitrile that is considered to have health benefits.

 

 

True, but by the same token, there is no proof that it causes cancer either in the amounts normally found in the products where it is used.

 

"The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded that there is inadequate evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of acrylonitrile, but classified it as a Class 2B carcinogen (possibly carcinogenic). [2] Acrylonitrile increases cancer in high dose tests in male and female rats and mice."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is true, it's bad and hopefully it's fixed. I hope OP and everyone else who is mad about this wears sunscreen diligently when you're out on your cruises since being out in the sun causes cancer. The Diet Coke I'm drinking right now causes cancer.

 

Seriously, though, usually, with things like this, the amount that people are exposed to isn't high enough to be dangerous. Hopefully that's the case here. It sells papers and gets us aware of the issue--which is good--but luckily it won't reach the point where people are actually impacted. These cases are meant to be preventative--to keep other companies from doing something similar in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not defending anyone. I know many of the products we carry in the luggage store are now required to state they may contain cancer causing compounds (don't remember the exact wording) but it's anything packaged in plastic. I wonder if it contains acrylonitrile (sp)?

 

Cigarettes contain this chemical, if you're afraid of drinking water on a cruise ship can you imagine sucking it into your lungs voluntarily?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this week a steak placed in a bowl and covered in coke will have diappeared in two days. Coke is also good for cleaning corroded battery terminals. Just shows everything can in excess cause us harm. Back to the original topic the question is does this paint have approval

Link to comment
Share on other sites

acrylonitrile http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1197021725163

 

scroll down for carrots

http://www.cancure.org/cancer_fighting_foods.htm

 

Haven't read the Sunday Times article but the NYPost summary makes it sound like they are blaming the paint manufacturer (Hempel) rather than the cruiselines.

 

Maybe someone can summarize the Times article in more detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this week a steak placed in a bowl and covered in coke will have diappeared in two days. Coke is also good for cleaning corroded battery terminals. Just shows everything can in excess cause us harm. Back to the original topic the question is does this paint have approval

 

Steak and Coke, sounds yummy! Maybe that's why it dissappeared!:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This same reference was posted on the NCL board, and I did some research.

 

The chemical breaks down rapidly in air, and in one to two weeks in water. This is from a CDC report on Acrylontrile.

 

It is used in acrylic and is common in refrigerator linings, luggage, office chairs, and a few other commonly used items.

 

I also cannot recall the NCL Star ever being in New York. It is scheduled to be there in 2012, but I don't think it has been there before.

 

This appears to be another media attempt to panic readers or damage cruise lines.

 

I hope I don't sound like a cruise cheerleader, but I feel the truth is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the above poster, fair comment but why take out an injunction in the High court to stop people knowing about this practice.

As i stated i dont worry about a 2 week cruise, although have been on both these ships in the past but the long term effects on the crew could be more serious,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not defending anyone. I know many of the products we carry in the luggage store are now required to state they may contain cancer causing compounds (don't remember the exact wording) but it's anything packaged in plastic. I wonder if it contains acrylonitrile (sp)?

 

Cigarettes contain this chemical, if you're afraid of drinking water on a cruise ship can you imagine sucking it into your lungs voluntarily?

 

California is hazardous to your health. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the above poster, fair comment but why take out an injunction in the High court to stop people knowing about this practice.

As i stated i dont worry about a 2 week cruise, although have been on both these ships in the past but the long term effects on the crew could be more serious,

 

I also have questions about the injunction, but the primary concern is how dangerous is this chemical. Since it is in common use in items that we use everyday, it seems that it is acceptable and only dangerous in large quantities and with immediate exposure to those large quantities.

 

Perhaps the employee who raised the issues had an agenda and the injunction prevented him from damaging the company. I don't know--this is an assumption on my part.

 

The danger (or lack of danger) of this chemical is documented and appears to be overblown by an ambitious reporter.

 

As a reality check, think of the thousands of pieces of luggage handled each week, or of the millions of people who sit in office chairs every day. Same chemical in these items.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the above poster, fair comment but why take out an injunction in the High court to stop people knowing about this practice.

As i stated i dont worry about a 2 week cruise, although have been on both these ships in the past but the long term effects on the crew could be more serious,

 

 

Probably because there's a tort claim being litigated in court, and one of the parties has a concern about their due process being abrogated by the "court of public opinion".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but by the same token, there is no proof that it causes cancer either in the amounts normally found in the products where it is used.

"The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded that there is inadequate evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of acrylonitrile, but classified it as a Class 2B carcinogen (possibly carcinogenic). [2] Acrylonitrile increases cancer in high dose tests in male and female rats and mice."

 

Do you have any idea how many chemicals (medications) are deemed safe for use in humans only to find, after several years of use, that the harmful effects that start to become apparent far out weigh any beneficial medical use?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • Hurricane Zone 2024
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...

If you are already a Cruise Critic member, please log in with your existing account information or your email address and password.