Hydroquinone toxic in Canada?

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
All of the pyro developers are more toxic by far than HQ. HQ is known to cause dermatitis in some people and kidney problems if injested. It has not been known as a carcinogen.

OTOH, table salt is a carcinogen if applied repeatedly to open skin wounds. Remember the old adage "rubbing salt into a wound?" This comes from the pain it causes, but a secondary effect is repeated irritation which can lead to cancer.

EDTA is listed as very toxic and a potential carcinogen by some, but it is used as a remedy (intravenously) for heavy metal poisoning. We use it in color processes, and as a sequestrant in many process chemicals.

Arsenic and selenium used in digital equipment is far more toxic than HQ in all ways. Where are the comments about them?

PE
 

Sparky

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
2,096
Location
Los Angeles
Format
Multi Format
yeah- funny- I watched a chemistry show on tv the other night (very late at night, i might add!) - and they actually mentioned the arbitrary nature of selenium dosing.... in so far as it is considered an ANTI-carcinogen at a low enough dose (i.e.. we NEED it) and a carcinogen at higher doses... all compounds/elements are like that though... the body prefers a similar environment to that which it evolved within.
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Photo Engineer said:
Arsenic and selenium used in digital equipment is far more toxic than HQ in all ways. Where are the comments about them?

PE
Click to expand...

We'll have to wait a 150 years or so for the government to decide.
 

toadhall

Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
54
Location
Saskatoon, S
Format
35mm
Given the speed with which the Canadian Gov't moves on most things, I think the advice about don't worry is appropriate.

Hell, if the rumours of another Federal Election come true, this will get put away in some remote corner of some unused room to collect dust for years.

Or, am just cyncial?

John
 

Ryuji

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
1,415
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Multi Format

I agree with your analysis. Hydroquinone was already listed to some class of hazardous chemicals in many regions, including the US, EU and Japan. How did it affect our darkroom life?

If they would significantly tighten the regulation for hydroquinone, they would ban RA-4, C-41 and E-6 developers first.

Also, even if the worst thing happens to hydroquinone, that's not the end of the story, except for the classic lith developers. If Phenidone and its derivatives (Dimezones) are banned, that would be a much bigger damage.
 

rmolson

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
327
Location
Mansfield Oh
Format
Medium Format
Toxic Hydroquinone

Is there anything some bureaucratic agency will not find that is bad for us. How about water, If inhaled it leads to drowning Also air, one wag in the health industry suggested that the reason we age is oxygen .And if we would all stop breathing we would not age, of course not, we would be dead
I am sick unto death of government hacks thinking they know more about everything than the people who really do I spend 9 years in military photo labs developing batches of prints by hand in trays of D-72. 24 years in Graphic arts shops developing large sheets of lith film by hand in large trays, Gloves were simply never an option .I have never heard of a single case of hydroquinone causing illness. Metol poisoning now that something else!
 

Paul Verizzo

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
1,643
Location
Round Rock, TX
Format
35mm
mhv said:
Good Ol' Canada: start worrying when the problem is vanishing...
Click to expand...

Without picking on Canada, it seems that we have gone from "There seems to be a problem here and we need to do something about it," i.e., chlorinated hydrocarbons and bird eggs, to "There might be a problem if we can align the planets just so and use a bit of cold fusion.....just in case." Common sense has vanished.

It's not just regulators, it's our society. Remember Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs? I have one, but it's Paul's Inverse Pyramid of Priorities. Roughly, it's once you have a full belly and are "self actualized", you start fretting about the inconsequential. When I lived in LA a group used to get leftover gourmet food from Wolfgang Puck's and other chi-chi establishments and feed them to the homeless. Some folks with way too much self actualization decided that the homeless have the right to know what the ingredients are. The took the first group to court! Whereupon, of course, they said "Forget it."

Kodak had a problem at it's Windsor, Colorado (near Greeley) plant with silver discharges exceeding the maximum allowed back when they made paper there. Well, the real problem is that the water coming from the Rocky Mountains going into the plant had too much silver!

Why don't we just all go have a nice cold beer?
 

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
About 70 years ago I developed my first roll of Verichrome by see-sawing it through a tray (soup dish) of MQ developer. I did not wear gloves, nor was there ever any instruction that indicated that I should. I still have my fingers and most of my brain. I can remember the walk-in closet that was my darkroom, and the red safelight, and the wonderment that I experienced at seeing the images emerge. We all know that MQ meant Metol and hydroquinone. If hydroquinone is toxic, then Metol will certainly be. I'm sure pyrogallol is toxic. We would not want an investigating child, as all of mine have been and yours too, to have access to any of our chemicals, but neither would we want them to have access to prescribed medicines.

Where the environment is concerned, since all animals, at least mammals, excrete hydroxy-benzenes which their bodies manufacture, I don't see how we can prevent its "pollution". Have you ever seen a cow piss? The urine from 6 billion or more humans has to go somewhere.
 

Shelly Grimson

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
71
Location
Toronto Cana
Format
Med. Format Pan
If I might bring us back to the issue of caution with chemicals...My personal attitude is to avoid what should be avoided by means at my disposal. I always wear thin latex or nitrile gloves in the darkroom. I find it cheap, convenient (I can quickly wash off one chemical from the glove with a quick rinse many times without drying out my hands.etc) and I have a towel that dries the gloves off quickly. I mostly use liquid chemicals like DD-X, Rodinal, HC-110 but am prepared to mix powders safely by immersing the packets of D-76 or Perceptol into water and cutting them open so as to avoid any dust in the air. It might be a little more time consuming but hell, I'm doing darkroom to avoid the busy world anyway. The only concern I have is spilling chemicals on the floor and proper cleanup. This hazard is always on my mind so I try to clean up any wet spots immediately with a paper towel which I disgard. I don't think that we should pretend that we know all the answers with chemicals. Each person might react differently to exposure. Who is to say that someone that gets a skin reaction ( I never have personally) doesn't react internally in some way. Just be safe and get back to enjoying this wonderful hobby...
 

Andrey

Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
299
Format
35mm
Photo Engineer said:
EDTA is listed as very toxic and a potential carcinogen by some, but it is used as a remedy (intravenously) for heavy metal poisoning. We use it in color processes, and as a sequestrant in many process chemicals.
Click to expand...
It's also in your Mayo and in your Shampoo... among other foods.

As a biochemist and cell/molec guy I can say this:
1) Accurate MSDS data start to appear about 30 years after the chemical has been used.
2) A lot of substances that have a benzene ring on it are not received well by the body.
3) Gloves and ventilation. In organic labs we used the hydroquinone powder in the fumehood.
4) In terms of the environment, there are other organisms than humans - plants, bugs, fungi which have different reactions to HQ, so that's also a concern.

I'd rather they ban aspartame. I can't find gum without it.
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,314
Location
Regina, SK, CA
Format
35mm

nixuser23

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
6
Location
Hamilton, On
Format
Multi Format
Just a note for everyone interested.

This is part of the batch 1 challenge (of 6 batches) of chemicals. I sent comments in regarding photographic uses and have been on their mailing list since.

The final decision is due to be released on July 5th. (see bottom of the page in the link);
http://www.chemicalsubstanceschimiques.gc.ca/challenge-defi/batch-lot_1_e.html

They reference it bay CAS 123-31-9 or 1,4-Benzendiol.

It also notes for the US folks out there that the US FDA and other organizations don't see it as a serious risk, it's only seen that way internationally. In the US, they are banning the use of over-the-counter skin lightening creams using hyrdroquinone only.
 

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699

I quote myself because that statement was ill considered. If the body passes hydroquinone as waste, there is the possibility that the body treats it as an indicator that one or more of its tasks has been performed. If it senses the presence of hydroquinone, it may treat it as a sign that the task that normally produces it has been done even if the Q was not the result of a body process. I don't know if such things do happen, but I do know that they could reasonably be expected to happen.
 

CBG

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
889
Format
Multi Format
BradS said:
According to the MSDS, a relatively small dose (29g/Kg) of Hydroquinoe taken orally has caused death in at least one human.
Click to expand...

29g/Kg ... a "relatively small dose"????? May I disagree? That's a big dose.

No, I take that back. That's an enormous dose. Vast. You'd have to be deranged or at least seriously unlucky to ingest that much. Thats shoveling a substance down as if it was food.

If it takes something like that much hydroquinone to be lethal, hydroquinone is downright tame. I find the above dosage statement rather reassuring.

I'm weary (and wary) of the exaggerations and fearmongering of various governments about toxicity. I am a artist / painter and use oils in tubes, a very few of which have pigments toxic enough to need moderate care in handling. Many more though are forced to be sold with labeling that states that the "State of California knows" such and such "to be toxic". The number of items the State of California is trying to save me from is quite large indeed.

All this puts me in a mood for a rant, but you're in luck since I'll spare you a predictable ramble.

Sure. Yes, I know they are doing all this for my own good, but I am most afraid of those who have my own good in mind. I'll take care of myself. Thank you.

Years ago, a friend referred to "hostile do-gooders". I've never forgot that phrase, and it seems more relevant as time passes.

C
 

Mark Layne

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
967
Location
Nova Scotia
Format
Medium Format
I really don't know what to advise a young fellow to take up as an avocation.
Woodworking is out as I believe sawdust is already banned, and how is one going to emulate Michaelangelo without Cadmium Yellow and Prussian Blue.
And I'm having a hard time finding the lead wire for the fuses in my house.
Mark
 

Aurum

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
917
Location
Landrover Ce
Format
Medium Format
As has been mentioned above, HQ is an ingredient of skin lightening creams. Its popular in darker skinned cultures, and has the advantage, that unlike the natural equivalents such as bearberry or other Melanogenasis inhibitors which work by interfering with melaning synthesis, it gets straight to the point and bleaches the melanin in the skin.
Its been banned by the EU for this use, as its not overly skin friendly and can result in a greater risk of skin cancer. Not necessarily by itself, but by the fact that the user has reduced thier natural protection, and is more at risk from sunburn.
In developers and the like, if you're not following what is termed as GLP or Good Lab Practice, which means don't dip your mitts in it like it was pure water then eat a sandwich after, the risk is minimal to non existant. I've handled stuff MUCH MUCH worse when I worked in a pharmaceutical lab, and all I needed to keep me safe was an ounce of common sense and a pair of gloves occasionally.
For photographic chemicals, the smell and how it lingers on the skin should be enough discouragement. Fixer for instance reeks when you get it on skin.
The risk with all these materials comes down to quantity and exposure. If you're a pro-lab handling gallons of the stuff daily, you'll be using tighter controls to what an occasional user will be doing in his basement.
Or if you're in my industry, a bottle of baby lotion is safe enough to be used on infants. Its not such a laugh when an idiot puts a forklift through the side of a 1 Tonne container, and its all over the floor
 

Tom Hoskinson

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
3,867
Location
Southern Cal
Format
Multi Format
Hydroquinone is toxic in all countries - so don't eat it, drink it or take a bath in it.

TF-4 and other Ammonium Thiosulfate based Fixers are redolent of ammonia.

Most of the Sodium Thiosulfate Acid Fixers contain Acetic Acid - and smell like it.

Don't drink them or take a bath in them.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format

There are a number of odorless ammonium thiosulfate based fixes. My own Super Fix posted here is one of them. I don't suggest drinking it or taking a bath in it though.

PE
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm

Yes, yes. We've already covered my momentary lapse of intellect back on page 2, I think...but, thanks for bringing it up again.
 

CBG

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
889
Format
Multi Format
BradS said:
Yes, yes. We've already covered my momentary lapse of intellect back on page 2, I think...but, thanks for bringing it up again.
Click to expand...

Sorry - my intent was not really to take you to task, but to make the point that there seems little distinction made between the really nasty items one must take very very serious care with, and the more common and less scary items that merit just basic good sense. The federal govt and the states seem to be "crying wolf" by declaring everything "chemical" to be a grave hazard. The inflated fear ratings make it hard to avoid the really nasty stuff. Hydroquinone is the perfect example. Generations of darkroom workers have used hydroquinone with no harm, but now governments seem intent to declare it dangerous.

C
 

Aurum

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
917
Location
Landrover Ce
Format
Medium Format
If you want to put the toxicity data in perspective, here are the LD50's and the like for a chemical that is in every home

Toxicity data

ORL-RAT LD50 3000 mg kg-1
ORL-MAN LDLO 1000 mg kg-1
ORL-MUS LD50 4000 mg kg-1
IPR-MUS LD50 2602 mg kg-1
ICV-MUS LD50 131 mg kg-1
SKN-RBT LD50 > 10000 mg kg-1

Any guesses?



Well chips don't taste the same without it, and the doc says I should cut down on it to reduce my blood pressure, and most of the water on earth is contaminated with it


its Salt, Sodium Chloride, NaCl

In the same vein, google "Dihydrogen Monoxide" for a good going over of irrational chemical scare stories
Don't breathe it in, mind, 'cos that will kill you

(Note not ripping on any one here, just putting Government Civil Servants in perspective)
 

Mark Layne

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
967
Location
Nova Scotia
Format
Medium Format
You fellows worrying about a mere chemical! Haven't you heard about tomatoes lately?
Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…