The Aerotoxic Logbook (ATLB) in English (EN)

The problem has been known since the 1950s - roughly 70 years and nothing has ever been done about it.  The air in the cabin is still ‚bled off’ (the engines) in airplanes - with the well-known possible consequences for flight safety and health, in particular that of  flight crew. We have the cultural history on 'Flying is safe' and the ongoing problems investigated at (EN).

Although the cabin air is 50% re-circulated in modern aircraft types, the basic problem remains unsolved. With one exception: the Boeing B787.  This is/was also the state of knowledge at the first big conference on this topic in London in September 2017. The presentations can now be viewed here:  

There are many reasons why no solutions are found: the targeted influencing of scientific discussions, the airlines’ economic interests, the links between politics and air transport industry and other reasons.

The ‚Aerotoxic Logbook’, launched in January 2017, is a first comprehensive documentation addressing the problem of potentially contaminated cabin air ( - German) and documents what is happening in this area.  Or, what is not happening. And why not. This German language blog ( is now also available in English and can be accessed directly via this permalink:

The information we collect in German is translated by Bearnairdine BEAUMONT who operates the network  and the blog

With the ‚Aerotoxic Logbook’ we want to achieve international networking,  bringing together all initiatives and activities to communicate about this unsolved problem and to initiate solutions. At the same time it is a scientific experiment: What must happen before a problem is addressed?

Other initiatives providing information on the contaminated air issue you can get here (right side).

30 July 2020

Fly? Or not flying?

That's what William SHAKESPEARE would ask himself these days. But he is no longer alive, unfortunately. Therefore Prof. Dieter SCHOLZ answers this question. Now in English.

See the article below.

3 July 2020

"All 3 arguments given by the Aviation Industry are wrong"

Prof. Dr. Ing. Dieter SCHOLZ explains in an interview with journalist Markus STEINHAUSEN for 3Sat „Kulturzeit“ (German TV). The airlines advertise with the harmlessness of flying and the cleanliness of the air "like in an operating theatre" – as they want to get their planes full again.

The following are the refutations by the aviation professor, who is not paid by the aviation industry, but teaches and researches at a state-financed university (see entry below):

The  much praised HEPA-filters do not filter the cabin air from all viruses or aerosols and therefore the cabin air is not as "clean as in a hospital operating room" (where completely different filter systems are used).

The air in the aircraft is not completely replaced every 3 minutes (which is not possible because 50% of the air is recirculated).

The air does not only circulate from top to bottom because this statement does not take into account the thermal turbulence caused by the body heat of the passengers.

The film also shows an example from 2003, when the SARS virus was raging: The University of Purdue/USA proved in a study that 1 (single) passenger infected a total of 20 other passengers sitting over a total of 12 rows of seats, within three hours.

 We highly recommend this film (only 7 min)! The video is available until July 3rd, 2025.

Early June 2020

Summer(holiday) & COVID -19: To fly or not to fly?

Many rules apply in the meantime: mandatory wearing of masks in shops and other facilities, safety distances and lots more.

For the aviation business it’s only recommendations that exist with which the airlines can do what they want. Because of their economic and political power, they have been able to enforce this.

This is a problem for passengers who have to or want to fly because they can't really protect themselves very well even if they want to. The airlines set the tone: seat allocation on the plane, the ventilation, boarding and disembarking and everything else. The legal situation is unclear, as is the individual health risk.

This is the conclusion reached by Prof. Dr.-Ing. Dieter SCHOLZ from the University of Applied Sciences (HAW) in Hamburg, who is one of the very few people in the world to conduct research into the problem of contaminated cabin air in aircraft, from a technical point of view. Now he has published a small documentation with real recommendations: Sommer 2020 Covid-19, Fliegen: Ja oder Nein? (Summer 2020, COVID-19: Flying: yes or no? English version to follow soon).

27th May 2020

Use the standstill in aviation to do something about the contaminated cabin air. And not just against CoVid 19

This is the fundamental demand that the Patienten-Initiative is directing not only at airlines, especially Deutsche Lufthansa, which is now to be kept alive with governmental money but also at politicians.

In total there are 6 specific demands. Some of them have - actually - been legally stipulated for a long time, e.g. that a) there must be no pollutants whatsoever in the cabin air and that therefore b) sensors must be installed.

But no authority is taking this seriously. Neither the BFU nor the LBA, not even the EASA. Politics certainly don't.

How the majority of the members of the CDU/CSU and SPD in the German Bundestag deal with the problem of preventive measures and, in the absence of such measures, the subsequent development of occupational illnesses, was just recently demonstrated by politicians (see the entry of 7th May). And how seriously it takes the problems of around 50,000 people every year.

The Open Letter to the German Chancellor, the responsible ministries, the EU Commission and Lufthansa can be read and/or downloaded here.

CW 19 - 4 May 2020

Occupational Diseases Reform Act: 2nd and 3rd Reading in 1 Go

This is what it will come down to next Thursday, May 7. Votes are scheduled to begin at 4.15 p.m.

Originally, a public hearing was planned. This was cancelled due to the Corona measures and the statements were submitted in writing by the requested associations, which were then put online. There was no longer any discussion in the Committee for Labour and Social Affairs.

The committee summarised the positions of the associations as follows: "Public Hearings". Also included there are the individual statements. With the exception of the employers' associations, all the others regard the abandonment of the so-called injunction as positive. The latter means that if a BK (Berufskrankheit = occupational disease) is suspected and reported to a BG (Berufsgenossenschaft = Federal Employers' Association), the person concerned must give up the work due to which he or she has (allegedly) became ill. For many, this is often not possible if there is no other job alternative. This provision will now be dropped. Instead, other workplace solutions will be sought.

This is of course a thorn in the side of the Employers' Association of the Metal Industry and in its statement complains about the additional costs incurred as a result; these costs are "unacceptable".

The only positive change we ourselves see is the now, finally, planned official institutionalisation of the "Medical Expert Council 'BK' at the BMAS (Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales = Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs). There are now to be scientific experts appointed; The aim is to create 10 scientific staff positions in order to be able to advance the work and the discussions in this relevant body more quickly. It remains to be seen whether scientific staff will then be able to compensate for the structural imbalance of know-how and the preparation of meetings. We will keep an eye on this.

The draft of the DIE LINKE group will be polished off smoothly, the Greens have not even put forward a position of their own - the problem obviously does not play a special role in this party in the Bundestag.

If the bill is waved through on Thursday, it could only be stopped via the Bundesrat. There, the states of Hamburg (SPD/GREENS) and Schleswig-Holstein (CDU/GREENS/FDP) had already attempted to bring in other proposals; NRW (CDU/FDP) had likewise tried to do the same.

However, the corona seems to overshadow everything at present.