The official investigation into the air quality of a Beijing primary school involved in a public health scandal has raised widespread public doubt, as its conclusion was different from the one made by a third-party laboratory, the China Youth Daily reported.

A parent checks the running track at the Baiyunlu campus of Beijing No 2 Experimental Primary School. [Photo/China Daily]

The investigation came after dozens of students in the Baiyunlu campus of Beijing No. 2 Experimental Primary School reportedly got sick in May after running on the school's new synthetic running tracks.

The official investigation report issued on June 8 by the China National Environmental Monitoring Center (CNEMC) with the authorization of the People's Government of Xicheng District found that the air quality in most sample classrooms met national standards.

According to the official investigation, the air quality in 15 classrooms out of 16 sample rooms was up to standard, with only a music classroom containing slightly higher amount of poisonous substance formaldehyde, which was determined to be 0.2mg per cubic meter of air, two times higher than the standard.

However, the Shenzhen EMTEK Co., Ltd., a third-party laboratory hired by the parents of the sick students, drew a different conclusion after testing the air quality of 16 classrooms in the school. Six of the rooms chosen by the Shenzhen laboratory were the same rooms chosen by the CNEMC.

The Shenzhen laboratory found that all the 16 sample classrooms contained excessive amount of formaldehyde, with the worst situation found in the music classroom that the official report claimed to have slightly higher amount of formaldehyde. In the music classroom, the Shenzhen laboratory found 2.283 mg of formaldehyde in every cubic meter of air, 11 times that of the official test result and 22 times higher than the standard.

The differences in conclusions were caused by the testing institutions' different choices of testing methods and references, but why the official institute chose an old regulation unfit for the case has puzzled many people.

Wei Wenfeng, who has 17-year experience in toxicology and safety tests, said that most indoor formaldehyde tests now follow the Methods of Environmental Tests in Public Venues that was enacted in 2014, while the CNEMC chose a technical method of determining the amount of formaldehyde in the air that was established in 1995.

Ren Jun, the chief engineer of the Shenzhen Institute of Building Research, also felt the CNEMC's choice was unsuitable. "Classrooms are public venues, but not workshops in factories, so the Methods of Environmental Tests in Public Venues should be adopted," he said.

In response to the doubts, an anonymous employee of the CNEMC said that the two regulations are both referenced in the National Standards of Indoor Air Quality, so a testing institution can choose either one according to the specific conditions of a case.

The Baiyunlu campus removed the track on June 17 although the official test result suggested it was safe.

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)