Our pediatrician asked if we burned wood ...

[jb6l6gc]

I think this thread has brought up allot of valid points and discussions. Not all topics are cut and dry grisu.

 

[bwells794]

I think this thread has brought up allot of valid points and discussions. Not all topics are cut and dry grisu.

pun intended? lol

 

[jharkin]

I agree with Grisu, lets get back on topic. This is hearth.com, not conservativepolitics.com. Lets drop it before this gets locked.

 

[Huntindog1]

I think wood burning can be an issue but can be helped with proper burning technique (use dry wood and fast start ups)
Plus keeping your house cleaner from the dust and debris. There are all kinds of other contributing factors also.
I hope people spread the word to people who dont get on this board that using dry wood is important and what is dry wood.
So many people think they know what dry wood is. 20% moisture or less measure with a moisture meter from a fresh split piece of wood.

We can buy an expensive stove with high efficiencies but if the wood is sub par you wasted that money buying the stove with better specs.

Using kindling and fire starters (Super Cedars) at start ups heats the stove up quicker and less smoke on start ups.

 

[jatoxico]

I think wood burning can be an issue but can be helped with proper burning technique (use dry wood and fast start ups)

Exactly right. By using good techniques and the right equipment you can lower the "dose" which lowers the risk.

 

[branchburner]

the topic of this thread which is to determine if woodburning is a health hazard for children

I wouldn't define it so narrowly. The issue is WHICH woodburning is potentially a health hazard for children... there is no doubt that SOME woodburning is a health hazard for children. Just as importantly, the issue is also: whose business is it?

If a doctor is treating a child with respiratory problems and is looking for potential causes and cures, there is no reason he should not ask an extensive series of question regarding environmental factors, which could include potential chronic exposure to any kind of smoke (including what the neighbors are producing). There is also good reason that doctor should assume woodburning is a statistically UNLIKELY cause... but unlikely does not mean impossible. There is no reason he should assume woodburning is not possibly a contributing factor, whether in terms of dry and dusty air or the actual smoke particulates.

And I'm afraid that governments deciding to increase regulation and intervention based on extremely rare occurrences IS a legitimate concern, and a legitimate sub-topic of this thread. For better and for worse, the nanny-state is a reality for stove-owners as well as gun-owners, car-owners, home-owners, and just about anybody who owns anything.

 

[jatoxico]

governments deciding to increase regulation and intervention based on extremely rare occurrences

It's not an issue in my area but I'm not so sure its extremely rare. Several states/regions I've heard of issue burn bans regularly based on particulate measurements and atmospheric conditions.

I think the gov't would have to step in when the "bad" burning affects people outside the household (neighbors) due to irresponsible burning. And maybe even in the house when those affected can't fend for themselves like kids. But that's a tough one there. There's a lot of things you don't have a right to do to your kids, is exposing them to levels of particulates that have been shown to cause disease OK?

In any case responsible burning in an EPA stove should in most cases reduce the risk in all but a few cases.

 

[Andy S.]

Maybe we can stop talking about other websites/institutions and concentrate on the topic of this thread which is to determine if woodburning is a health hazard for children? There are always PMs if you feel the need to discuss something else.

Refer to post #14. I was fine with it then and am fine with it now but it sure seems like to pretty flimsy foundation from which to urge focused commentary. At the end of the day we all scan the posts and reply as our interest is piqued or we think we have something to add. I think you and the rest of the members here contribute fantastically and do a great job "policing" yourselves.

Having a wife that suffers from allergies who passed them (and with exercise-induced asthma) along to all four of our kids I've been keenly aware of indoor air quality for years now. This being our third year supplementing with wood in our insert I can report not a single complaint. Thanks to the strategies I've learned here from the start (opening the air for a few minutes prior to reload and opening the door very slowly) I've had no backpuffing issues and the only time I've smelled any smoke in the house is the rare time I forget to turn the blower off.

I honestly believe the bigger concern from wood smoke is outside even with our neighbors with the EPA stoves and would disagree strongly with anyone that thinks there is no pollution, even when the stove is running at peak efficiency. If you smell it at all outside there you are smelling particulate pollution, dioxins and a whole host of other human health hazards, a large percentage of which will find their way around closed windows and doors in the neighboring homes. As such, I'd be more concerned with my neighbor to the west of me running a smoke dragon and the air in my family room running my insert. Cheers!

 

[branchburner]

I'm not so sure its extremely rare. Several states/regions I've heard of issue burn bans regularly based on particulate measurements and atmospheric conditions.

I was referring to the specific (rare) cases of modern wood stoves causing illness, not burn bans in general. I agree, there's a lot of things you don't have a right to do to your kids, or to your neighbors, and preventing/punishing such wrong action is a proper function of government. But over-regulating EVERYONE in an attempt to prevent the unpreventable is not proper, IMO.

What concerns me is the extrapolation by bureaucrats from the rare exception to over-generalization, such as a single case of exposing a kid to high levels of particulates that might lead regulators (and/or doctors) to leap to the conclusion that ALL wood stoves are a pervasive health risk.

 

[jatoxico]

What concerns me is the extrapolation by bureaucrats from the rare exception to over-generalization, such as a single case of exposing a kid to high levels of particulates that might lead regulators (and/or doctors) to leap to the conclusion that ALL wood stoves are a pervasive health risk.

Any actions should be based on measured data not guess work as you said. I'm surprised the manufacturers are not doing more to educate on good wood burning practices on their own and through their dealer networks. After all its their industry that may be over and unnecessarily regulated.

Dealers do not explain or possibly even understand what kind of wood is needed to run these stoves correctly. Probably afraid to scare off a sale. IMO though education regarding firewood processing and use would do more to reduce particulate exposure across the board than the introduction of new lower standards. No matter what any given EPA stove is capable of, it will still only be as good as the fuel its fed.

 

[Smoked]

One of the issues with government is they do make bad decisions for good reasons. Forgive me in advance, this is entirely from recollection but I think last year, UT was proposing a burn ban including wood stoves during most of the heating season because of air quality. I am sure there are more than one side but the study I read said only 5% of particulates were coming from wood but yet they were going to indiscriminately ban all. Then stupidly, for people who could not afford to pay for other fuels, they we doing to subsidize their heating bills.

So instead of an exchange program that is one time to get rid of the offenders, were gona give people cash month after month forever?? I know 80% is not great compared to 95% or better in some more traditional forms of heat, but when you add more demand, the price goes up for all and most are not going to get help from the state. From recent visits out there, they also have a a substantial standing dead fir population, so you may as well use it.

If you are going to pay peoples heating bills month after month to eliminate particulates, A. leave the clean EPA burners alone and B. just buy the somke dragon guys a new Blaze King and get it over with now!

P.S. anyone know how much cleaner an oil/propane/gas boiler or furnace is than one of the cleaner EPA stoves?

 

[jatoxico]

P.S. anyone know how much cleaner an oil/propane/gas boiler or furnace is than one of the cleaner EPA stoves?

From memory I think oil was on the order of 0.5 g/hr and NG was more like 0.1 g/hr. EPA somewhere around 2-5. Not to beat a dead horse but to a much greater degree oil is oil and NG is NG, Naturally wood varies much more so stove output changes a lot in and out of the lab compared to the others.

 

[Ashful]

Maybe we can stop talking about other websites/institutions and concentrate on the topic of this thread which is to determine if woodburning is a health hazard for children? There are always PMs if you feel the need to discuss something else.

Do you know how much it pains me, every time I have to like one of your posts, Grisu? [emoji14]

 

[Ashful]

"A new study I saw on PBS 2 nights ago showed that Amish farm kids have almost no allergies at all. About 1/100th of the normal! Their environments were clean but not overly sanitized. The theory is that dust and dirt exposure at an early age substantially reduced allergies in children. It seems counter intuitive but the stats are very clear...."

Actually, the stats are not very clear. Allergies are hereditary, and so are the Amish. You would have to introduce a foreign population into their environment, to even begin taking any conclusions from this casual observation. One could more easily argue that anyone with a hereditary disposition for allergies fell out of the population years ago, due to their lifestyle choices.

I grew up with cats in the house, from infancy to age 5... it didn't stop me from developing severe allergies to cats later in childhood. Same with grass, trees, and all the other stuff I was exposed to, living in a house where we almost never closed the windows. My grandfather and father suffered from allergies, so I do too. Specific allergies are not always handed down, but the propensity for allergic reaction, and severity thereof, usually is.

 

[jharkin]

Refer to post #14. I was fine with it then and am fine with it now but it sure seems like to pretty flimsy foundation from which to urge focused commentary.

But yet your response to what you perceived as unfair criticism of that institution was to throw out an opposing snipe at Planned Parenthood, which could have had no other purpose than trying to bait further political argument. I think Grisu made a valid point and we should drop it.

 

[Huntindog1]

Coal burning is hard on kids lungs.

Here in Indiana the electric in rural areas is still gotten from coal.

They say coal really pollutes the air.

I am sure my stove is cleaner than coal.

Plus the Rural Electric companies have started a extremist program of butchering peoples valuable trees in their front yards.
Even if you trees are not touching their lines they are taking 20 feet on each side of the lines. They tell you they will do it and you have no say in it.

 

[Andy S.]

But yet your response to what you perceived as unfair criticism of that institution was to throw out an opposing snipe at Planned Parenthood, which could have had no other purpose than trying to bait further political argument. I think Grisu made a valid point and we should drop it.

In fact, the reference to post #14 had nothing to do with any political organization. It was simply supporting a civil and respectful reply I made to a critical post that I thought deserved a reply. Regarding the charge of "baiting," my experience tells me that it is always a mistake to assume motive of someone I don't know. Allowing that your own experience may be different, I'll simply say that it did not serve you well in this case. You're clearly not alone in your view that Grisu made a good point (Grisu makes a lot of them) but it should be noted that your call for it to be dropped came after it had been dropped. Happy heating, Jeremy.

 

[krav51]

[QUOTE="BrotherBart, post:
. This site isn't the wood version of the NRA.[/QUOTE]

As a member and NRA safety instructor ,i take offense to that comment.Lets keep our personal political agendas out of this shall we?

 

[Andy S.]

[QUOTE="BrotherBart, post:
. This site isn't the wood version of the NRA.

As a member and NRA safety instructor ,i take offense to that comment.Lets keep our personal political agendas out of this shall we?[/QUOTE]
I'm a member as well. I, too, commented on that but didn't take offense. I just viewed it as an opportunity for some friendly banter.

 

[Jags]

In the weeds, hit the kill switch.