Sir,
The three-dimensional (3D) printer is the basic office tool widely used around the world. The environmental effect due to 3D printer use is an interesting issue. Yi noted that “laser printers that emit ultrafine particles (UFP) suggest the need to characterize 3D printer emissions to enable reliable risk assessment.”[1] Stabile et al. reported that using 3D printer could produce airborne particle can spread dose up to 200 mm2 in <1 h.[2] The “ultrafine particles (UFPs, particles <100 nm) are the main emitted particles by the 3D printers.[3] The risk of cancer induced by exposed to such emitted particles is an interesting topic. Here, the authors estimated the cancer risk due to exposure to such UFP particles. Using the same method as previously published in Indian J Cancer,[4] the calculation for the cancer risk was performed. Briefly, individual lifetime cancer risk is equal to “concentration of contaminated particle in atmospheric air × lifetime unit risk factor.” There are data on individual life time cancer risk for UFP particles (average weight 0.106 ng) is previously reported by Liao et al. on risk assessment for exposure to urban environmental pollution and equal to 4.45 × 10−4.[5] According to the report by Liao et al., the calculation based on the situation of exposure to average UFP amount of 1.69 ng/m3 for 15 h/day or equal to 0.113 ng/m3/h.[5] Focusing on the data on the concentration of contaminated particle in atmospheric air is previously reported by Stephen et al.[6] According to the study by Stephen et al.,[6] the “emission rates up to 2 × 1010 particles/min.”[6] This is equal to 1.2 × 1012 particles/h in a close room 32.7 m3 or 3.67 × 1010 particles/m3/h or 0.389 × 1010 ng/m3/h was reported. Hence, the risk for carcinogenesis due to exposure to emitted 3D printers should be 3.44 times higher than simple exposure to urban environmental pollution. The estimated individual life time cancer risk equal to 4.45 × 10−4 or this mean in a life time, there will be 4.45 cancerous cases per 10,000 people exposed to 3D printer. This rate is significantly high and brings attention for further public health concern on the present widely used tool in any office, 3D printer.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.Yi J, LeBouf RF, Duling MG, Nurkiewicz T, Chen BT, Schwegler-Berry D, et al. Emission of particulate matter from a desktop three-dimensional (3D) printer. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2016;79:453–65. doi: 10.1080/15287394.2016.1166467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Stabile L, Scungio M, Buonanno G, Arpino F, Ficco G. Airborne particle emission of a commercial 3D printer: The effect of filament material and printing temperature. Indoor Air. 2017;27:398–408. doi: 10.1111/ina.12310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Azimi P, Zhao D, Pouzet C, Crain NE, Stephens B. Emissions of ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds from commercially available desktop three-dimensional printers with multiple filaments. Environ Sci Technol. 2016;50:1260–8. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.5b04983. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Joob B, Wiwanitkit V. Estimation of cancer risk due to exposure to lead contamination in Thai Ayurveda products. Indian J Cancer. 2015;52:550. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.178426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Liao CM, Chio CP, Chen WY, Ju YR, Li WH, Cheng YH, et al. Lung cancer risk in relation to traffic-related nano/ultrafine particle-bound PAHs exposure: A preliminary probabilistic assessment. J Hazard Mater. 2011;190:150–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Stephens B, Azimi P, Orch ZE, Ramos T. Ultrafine particle emissions from desktop 3D printers. Atmos Environ. 2013;79:334–9. [Google Scholar]