Mac Pro 2009 toxic for your health?

[sailmac]

Unfortunately most tech products off-gas harmful chemicals. It may however not be enough to make a difference for most people. For myself, I sit in a room with several computers, 10 displays, printers and external hard drives, and have for 25 years.

As an example, I recently did a 24h urine test for Bromide. It turns out I excreted 14.5mg bromide over 24h. This is very high. Anything over 5mg interferes with iodine utilization for example. The bromide in my body comes primarily from breathing in off-gassing brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from my electronics.

The solution is to move as much of our electronics as far away as possible, and have good ventilation. A machine room would be ideal. And with Thunderbolt, it is now easy to move the computers to an adjacent room.

Wow.

An appropriately sized HEPA unit in your room will help the situation, too.

 

[Pitagora]

@sailmac thank you for you elaborate response.
You know how I get the idea to search on the internet if the Mac Pro is toxic? I've putted the Mac Pro under my desk and when I was sitting at the desk I feel some hot air coming under the desk and I can't explain why? Because the Mac Pro has 2 ventilators near the CPU, not near the cd/DVD rom, is this normal?

 

[DPUser]

The EU will take of this.

 

[eawmp1]

@sailmac thank you for you elaborate response.
You know how I get the idea to search on the internet if the Mac Pro is toxic? I've putted the Mac Pro under my desk and when I was sitting at the desk I feel some hot air coming under the desk and I can't explain why? Because the Mac Pro has 2 ventilators near the CPU, not near the cd/DVD rom, is this normal?

At idle the Mac Pro runs ~125 W and puts out quite a bit of heat. Heat rises. For more information abut energy consumption and BTU output read here: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2836

 

[m4v3r1ck]

Just sell it!

 

[seveej]

OP,

You are enduring a bit of ridicule here for what seems like a sincere question. Probably not the responses you expected, but not surprising since relatively few people have deep knowledge in both the details and the big picture regarding toxic body burden (the pollution in people).

SNIP

(If you want more resources about toxic burden let me know, I devoted years researching the subject…)

Wow! Here we have one of the certainly most respectful postings I've encountered on this forum <deep bowing>

Without sailmac's expertise, I do share some of the worries people have about the harmful substances our bodies gather. One of the most memorable discussion I've had was in a bar, talking to a gravedigger (he was old enough to retire), who (while arguing the advantages of cremation) flatly stated that bodies buried within the last 25 years do not decompose as they used to.

I think there's an interesting disconnection between different "industry practices". Before pharmaceutical companies can launch a new drug, it has to be extensively tested (and still some bad drugs manage to reach the market), whilst most other industries can launch products/additives/chemicals which first have to conclusively proven to be harmful before they are banned (and even then sometimes not). It seems the burden of evidence is overturned...

RGDS,

 

[m4v3r1ck]

Help Save the health in China!!!!!!!

Wow! Here we have one of the certainly most respectful postings I've encountered on this forum <deep bowing>

Without sailmac's expertise, I do share some of the worries people have about the harmful substances our bodies gather. One of the most memorable discussion I've had was in a bar, talking to a gravedigger (he was old enough to retire), who (while arguing the advantages of cremation) flatly stated that bodies buried within the last 25 years do not decompose as they used to.

I think there's an interesting disconnection between different "industry practices". Before pharmaceutical companies can launch a new drug, it has to be extensively tested (and still some bad drugs manage to reach the market), whilst most other industries can launch products/additives/chemicals which first have to conclusively proven to be harmful before they are banned (and even then sometimes not). It seems the burden of evidence is overturned...

RGDS,

LET US BUYERS OF THESE EXPENSIVE PRODUCTS WORRIE MORE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO PRODUCE AND ASSEMBLE IN FORREIGN COUNTRIES LIKE CHINA!!!!! Talking about health problems in this regard is for us buyers a luxery problem! I rest my case!

 

[seveej]

LET US BUYERS OF THESE EXPENSIVE PRODUCTS WORRIE MORE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO PRODUCE AND ASSEMBLE IN FORREIGN COUNTRIES LIKE CHINA!!!!! Talking about health problems in this regard is for us buyers a luxery problem! I rest my case!

Good point, and the shouting is not necessary. And let's not be fixed on a single problem: let's worry about both.

RGDS,