toxic/non-toxic acrylics?

Toxicity is relative; in other words, it's all about the dose and the associated effects the dose has on the body. Some materials take less volume than other materials to achieve similiar bodily responses. Hence, they are more toxic. Straight lacquers and enamels are more toxic than acrylics because of the organic solvents that are used as the vehicles for the pigment. However, many of the new acrylics are using various alcohols, including glycols, and glycol ethers (also organic solvents) that can have just as severe effect on the body under similar concentrations as lacquers and enamels---GENERALLY SPEAKING. I haven't seen ingredients lists on all the new acrylics, so I can't say specifically which ones are worse or better than others from a potential health hazard standpoint, but what is important to remember is just because the bottle says "acrylic" on it, doesn't mean that precautions shouldn't be taken when using the material to prevent inhalation and/or skin contact.
Does this make any sense to anybody at all? Sometimes I write faster than I think....

Gip Winecoff

Gip,

While we are on this subject of toxicity, what does it mean when the paint "conforms to ASTM D4236 non-toxic?"
My bottles of ImagineAir paint have that printed on the front of each bottle.

Mike

QUOTE: Originally posted by MikeV Gip, While we are on this subject of toxicity, what does it mean when the paint "conforms to ASTM D4236 non-toxic?" Mike

From poking about ASTM's site, it looks as though the answer to that question will cost you $33.00 US to get the full testing details and criteria. Presumably, in this day and age of product liabilty lawsuits, something labeled non-toxic must be pretty darned safe.

Andy

http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/DATABASE.CART/REDLINE_PAGES/D4236.htm?L+mystore+tsdw8157

Well Andy, hopefully Gip won't charge us that much for his information.

Mike

OK, here's what I could find (so far) in answer to the ASTM question:

Most art supplies are labeled with the voluntary hazard rating, (Conforms to ASTM D-4236), which requires a warning on art materials that pose a chronic hazard. Conforming to this standard means that the product has been tested and that the labeling will say whether or not the product contains toxic substances. If the labeling says "rated non-toxic" or lacks any warnings, it is suitable for use by children. If the labeling contains the words "warning" or "caution", it is not suitable. When a company hasn't opted to use the rating system, it's safest to consider the material toxic, or contact the company for more information.


And also this:


Under the U. S. Labeling of Hazardous Art Materials Act (LHAMA), all art materials sold in the U. S. must be evaluated by a qualified toxicologist and labeled, if necessary, for chronic toxicity according to the chronic hazard labeling standard, ASTM D 4236. LHAMA, which went into effect November 18, 1990, amends the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) to require art and craft materials manufacturers to evaluate their products for their ability to cause chronic illness (such as cancer) and to place labels on those products that provide health and cautionary information and safe use instructions. FHSA already required manufacturers to evaluate and label for acute toxicity.

Hope this helps a little.
Gip

P.S. That'll be $75, please!
GW

the check's in the mail...

way I look at it, if it is something I wouldn't feel safe drinking or eating I will take some precautions...

40 yrs ago Asbestos was not a concern... now?

Good info, styrene. Thanks.

Gip is the man on chemicals, and most generous with the info when he isn't mixing up batches of lysergic acid diethylamide in the bathtub.

Thanks again Gip. I'm so used to using enamels I may just stick with them

Dave

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hatewall Gip is the man on chemicals, and most generous with the info when he isn't mixing up batches of lysergic acid diethylamide in the bathtub.

You obviously know nothing about Gip.

Mike

Thanks for the info guys. It does clear up a few issues, as every time I deal with toxic/non-toxic issue, it just seems to get more convoluted..

The way I look at it is like this, if it is not air going into your lungs then wear a respirator as anything else is potentially harmful.

Mike

Good point. At this point, I AB in my basement. I wear a normal painter's face mask, and a wide open window creates plenty of circulation, so I think it should not be a problem.

Zokissima, you really should use a respirator when airbrushing. I believe the kind you should get is a two phase respirator. (Can someone verify this?) With it you should not be able to smell the fumes of airbrushing.

Dave

I would assume the painter's face mask Zoran mentions, and the two phase respirator Dave mentions to be the same thing, just different terminology, if by two phase (or stage) you mean the first phase is particulate removal, and the second stage is vapor removal--which is the way painters' respirators [are supposed to] work.

Gip

I would agree with what Tom said earlier, if you can't eat or drink it take some precautions