Scented products cause indoor air pollution on par with car exhaust

I am having a hard time reconciling the claim in the post headline with common sense.

One frustrating aspect to the study is that it was hard to determine whether they are comparing like for like per unit time. They say the “operation of a gas stove” and “running a generator” — but for how long? It doesn’t seem like they tested each of these things under similar conditions in their lab but rather relied on other studies for that data. Figure 2(b) right does seem to measure this but they haven’t labeled the chart with clear labels and the description is a bit ambiguous.

After reading the study, I think the issue is that the claim it is making is slightly different than the one in the headline. They are measuring VOC and ~PM2.5 pollutants, but gas engines (and gas stoves presumably as well) produce other pollutants like CO, which is what kills you of you run a gas generator indoors.

It’s likely selective factors being measured but on some metric the top engines produce outputs cleaner than air going in so I don’t think it’s all that improbable

> CO, which is what kills you of you run a gas generator indoors.

That's the proximate cause.

> They are measuring VOC and ~PM2.5 pollutants

Which aren't good for your lungs long term.

> the claim in the post headline with common sense.

If you can smell it, it's because little particles of it are in the air, so your scented products necessarily put PM of some size into your home. In other words you are polluting your home merely to produce an olfactory sensation. The lack of common sense in the market for these products has always baffled me.

Well said. I'm not the first to say it, but: common sense ain't so common.

Here's some recommendations from our household, related to my previous battles with mold-related illness:

RabbitAir hepa-level air purifiers. Pricey, but worth it.

Dr. Bronner's soaps. We use them for showering, washing hands and dishes. No dishwasher here; our son has taken responsibility for it, in exchange for our fascilitating his chess-oriented lifestyle.

7th Generation laundry detergent. Unfortunately, we have to use a public laundramat, so we're getting some of the polluted stuff washing through the machines' detergent/softener resevoirs, but the poor have no choice.

We keep the windows closed during rush hour timeframes, and I keep watch on wind directions and know where the fresh air comes from.

We also try to get out into green space away from traffic and get a walk in or just let the teens knock the soccer ball around a bit.

You’re missing my point entirely. VOCs and PM2.5 are bad for you no doubt, which means this study is showing that these non combustible scented candles are producing measurable levels of dangerous indoor air pollution — we’re all in agreement there. That’s not at all what I meant by common sense and my comment was in no way intended to be a defense of scented products.

But the headline says “Scented products cause indoor air pollution on par with car exhaust”. This is not supported by the study. PM2.5 and VOCs are not the only forms of indoor air pollution. Combustion produces other deleterious byproducts that negatively impact human health.

Run a car in your garage for a day and run scented candle and tell me which is worse for you. That is what I mean by common sense.

I'm supposing that when people say "pollution" they most readily mean the PM and the VOC.

I highly doubt that if you were in a room that had /only/ a high concentration of CO would you describe it as "polluted."

Additionally any gas which displaces oxygen is lethal in a confined space. Shall we expand "pollution" to include those as well? Is nitrogen a "pollutant?"