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).

October 26th, 2017

Lufthansa and the topic 'Underreporting'  

We had given up on it: to document when and how often so-called fume events happen. After three months (1.1 - 31.3.2017) of regular reporting of (only) known incidents we realized that there is systematic underreporting. A continuation of such documentation would be inefficient since there are other’s who do that. For example Aviation Herald’s Simon HRADECKI

Today we are making an exception and are picking up Aviation Herald’s report of the day : 2 incidents’ that are closely related: Lufthansa flight LH-447 with Boeing 747-400, registration D-ABVW, on the 20th. / 21st October.  On the way from Denver to Frankfurt a fume event happened even before the aircraft  took off: when the engines were started. "Technical problems", they said, plus an hour waiting time, resp. delay. Passengers noticed, that all doors remained open during this time - apparently to 'air' the plane. 

Straight after take-off the typical smell appeared again - the flight was continued. As one knows by now: upon beginning of descent the unmistakable smell appeared again. Members of the crew, but also passengers complained about typical symptoms: neausea, headaches, irritation of the eyes or vision issues.  

Upon Aviation Herald’s inquiry, the BFU had to admit that – as so often -  they knew nothing of this incident. Nobody had reported it.  It became known, that on the same aircraft, on October18./19. , two days before  this incident, a fume event had already occurred. With the same consequences for passengers and crew. This fume event however, had become known to the BFU.  But as usual in these cases: because the passengers had not been informed about the actual reason, apparently no one had gone to see a doctor - not even the crew. 

So the airline can be 'satisfied': there is no medical documentation for either incident which the Aviation Herald classifies as "accident" (rather than incident). So no medical proof of any consequences. 

More about that at Aviation Herald.

October 20th, 2017

"Fume Events: Airlines in state of alert"

This is the heading of an article on the DocCheck news site, which now is also dealing with the problem. It seems that the topic has now also arrived at this medical network.

October 19th, 2017

fuProblem now also on FOCUS ONLINE

After the airing in "Markt" by German TV NDR at the beginning of the week, in which contaminated cabin air was a topic (see entry of October 16) and DIE ZEIT who reported today, FOCUS ONLINE is now also present and has an anonymised affected flight attendant report about several such incidences: Toxic fumes on board: a flight attendant who already experienced this.

Apparently the subject is picking up momentum ( a little). 

October 19th, 2017

The weekly newspaper DIE ZEIT is dealing with the topic

Freelance journalist Petra SORGE published a detailed report on fume events and the consequences for those affected, in particular flight attendants and pilots, in issue No. 43/2017 (pages 30 and 31): "Poison in the cabin?" (Gift in der Kabine?)

SORGE was able to interview several pilots and flight attendants, all of whom reported similar symptoms summarized by the term "aerotoxic". This term was coined in 1999 by three independently working research scientists and physicians from France, the USA and Australia, who got together to find a fitting terminology for the symptoms.  (more about this in 'Health problem becomes certainty: Chronology of 'Aerotoxic Syndrome' - actually in German).

Many airline employees,  especially those who are affected by it know about the problem. Passengers not. The pilots are instructed not to inform the customers in case of an incident. Whoever does it anyway must probably expect "personnel measures", Petra SORGE quotes Jörg Handwerg,  the spokesman for the Association Cockpit (VC).

This is also due to the fact that the airlines would not only shy away from the conversion costs, but also possible litigation, which for example in USA, where high claims for damages are standard could be expensive. "That is why airlines, but also manufacturers, professional cooperatives and politics will continue to express their doubts, deny facts and produce studies." the journalist quotes the speaker of VC.