Indoor Air Quality and Chemical Exposure

We spend approximately 90% of our time indoors. The quality of that air shapes health, participation, and accessibility — especially for people living with MCS, asthma, and other chronic conditions.

90%

of time Canadians spend indoors — home, work, school, healthcare

2–5×

more polluted — indoor air vs outdoor air (EPA, Health Canada)

~70%

reduction in TVOCs in fragrance-free office spaces

77%

of occupants support fragrance-free workplace policies

Why Indoor Air Quality Matters

The Built Environment as a Health and Accessibility Issue

Indoor environments are where Canadians spend the vast majority of their time. Yet indoor air can contain significantly higher concentrations of pollutants than outdoor air — from VOCs emitted by cleaning products, personal care products, building materials, and furnishings, to biological contaminants like mould spores.

For people living with MCS, asthma, COPD, or rhinitis, these exposures can determine whether a person can enter, remain in, or meaningfully participate in a space. Climate change is increasing reliance on indoor environments, while energy-efficient building design reduces natural air exchange — concentrating pollutants in tighter spaces.

Shared Environmental Resource

Indoor air is shared by all occupants. Product choices made by one person affect everyone who breathes the same air.

Energy Efficiency Increases Risk

Airtight buildings reduce natural ventilation. Without source control, pollutants from products accumulate to higher concentrations.

Climate Change Intensifies Exposure

Wildfires, heat events, and extreme weather increase time indoors and worsen outdoor air that infiltrates buildings.

An Accessibility Issue

For people with MCS, poor indoor air quality is a disability access barrier — determining whether they can use a space at all.

Governance Has Not Kept Pace

Indoor environments are now central to public health, but regulations remain inconsistent and often inadequately enforced.

ASEQ-EHAQ Research

The Accessible Air in the Built Environment Project

Canada’s first mixed-methods IAQ study focused specifically on accessibility — combining product testing, quantitative building measurements, and qualitative focus groups with people living with disabilities. Funded by Accessibility Standards Canada.

Accessibility Standards Canada · Mixed-Methods Research

Accessible Air in the Built Environment: Scent/Fragrance-Free Policies, VOC Emissions, and Accessibility in Canadian Workplaces

Funded by Accessibility Standards Canada · Ethics approval: Women's College Hospital REB · Collaborating researcher: Dr. Arthur Chan, University of Toronto

Product Testing

VOC emissions tested from 15 commonly used products — conventional (fragranced) and fragrance-free/ECO-labelled. Results compared to product labels.

Building IAQ Testing

IAQ testing across 32 Canadian buildings (16 with fragrance-free policies, 16 without). Measured TVOCs, 35 specific VOCs, formaldehyde, PM₂.₅, CO₂, CO, temperature, and humidity.

Qualitative Focus Groups

10 focus groups on Zoom with 60 participants living with disabilities. Anonymous discussions capturing lived barriers, impacts, and solutions.

buildings tested across Canada

products VOC-tested

focus group participants with disabilities

~70%

TVOC reduction in scent-free spaces

Key Study Findings

✅ Source Control Works

Fragrance-free buildings kept TVOCs at or below the 500 µg/m³ guideline
Non-fragrance-free spaces averaged over 1,200 µg/m³ — more than double
Statistically significant TVOC reduction in meeting rooms (p<0.05)
Acetone, toluene, and xylenes 2–7× higher in non-scent-free offices

⚠️ ECO Labels Still Emit Hazardous VOCs

Fragranced products: 190 VOCs detected; fragrance-free/"green": 90 VOCs
Both categories contain neurotoxins, carcinogens, and TRP sensitizers
Most product labels disclosed 0–3.8% of detected VOCs
Misleading terms like "unscented" do not guarantee freedom from emissions

🔬 TRP Receptors & MCS Mechanism

Several detected VOCs are known activators of TRPV1 and TRPA1 chemosensory receptors
Repeated exposure may contribute to receptor sensitization — amplifying future reactions
This mechanism may help explain heightened reactivity and the development or worsening of MCS

📋 Policy Gaps Are Significant

72% of focus group participants were dissatisfied or extremely dissatisfied with indoor environments
67% of occupants in scent-free buildings received no education on the policy
Policy adaptability scored 0% across all 17 fragrance-free buildings surveyed
Monitoring and enforcement each scored only 27%

TVOC Levels by Space — With Policy vs. No Policy

Source: Accessible Air in the Built Environment, ASEQ-EHAQ. Guideline: 500 µg/m³ (Cleary et al., 2017)

Meeting Room — With Policy~500 µg/m³ ✓

Within guideline

Meeting Room — No Policy~1,200 µg/m³ ✗

Exceeds guideline

Office — With Policy~500 µg/m³ ✓

Within guideline

Office — No Policy~1,300 µg/m³ ✗

Exceeds guideline

With fragrance-free policy

No policy

Difficulty Accessing Built Environments (Focus Groups, n=50)

Source: Accessible Air in the Built Environment qualitative component, ASEQ-EHAQ

Shopping Centres74%

74%

Hotels68%

68%

Hospitals & Medical Facilities62%

62%

Public Transportation60%

60%

Workplaces58%

58%

Schools & Universities52%

52%

Healthcare facilities — which people with MCS need most — are among the most inaccessible, at 62%.

Volatile Organic Compounds

What's Actually in the Air — and in the Products

The study detected dozens of hazardous air pollutants across tested office spaces and products — many not listed on labels. Several are classified as carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, neurotoxins, or TRP receptor sensitizers.

VOC	Found In	Health Classification	Detected (spaces)
Ethanol	Glass cleaners, laundry, air fresheners, hand soap	IrritantTRP Sensitizer	96 (100%)
Acetone	Carpet cleaner, disinfectants, all-purpose cleaners	IrritantTRP Sensitizer	95 (99%)
Toluene	Disinfectant wipes, bathroom cleaners, laundry	TeratogenEDC	91 (94.8%)
Acetaldehyde	Laundry products, disinfectants, hand soap	Carcinogen (EPA)TRP Sensitizer	83 (86.5%)
D-Limonene	Air fresheners, laundry, ECO disinfectants	TRP SensitizerForms formaldehyde	77 (80.2%)
Benzene	Unscented hand soap	Probable CarcinogenEDC	50 (52%) — mostly no-policy
Formaldehyde	Building materials, furniture — also in personal care products as byproduct	Known Carcinogen	Both policy groups
D5 Siloxane	Personal care products — found in scent-free spaces despite policies	Probable EDCPersistent environmental impact	Detected in scent-free hospitals

The Label Problem

Most products disclosed 0–3.8% of the VOCs detected during testing. Terms like "fragrance," "parfum," and "unscented" can hide dozens of undisclosed chemicals. An ECO label does not guarantee freedom from hazardous air pollutants. Product selection should be based on emission characteristics and third-party certification — not label claims alone.

"People think it's about disliking a smell. But for me, breathing in perfume is like breathing in pure chlorine. That's the problem — the confusion between the two."

Participant 011-FR — Accessible Air in the Built Environment Focus Groups, ASEQ-EHAQ

Accessibility Barriers

Four Types of Barriers to the Built Environment

Focus group participants — 90% women, 62% unemployed, most aged 36–64 — described four overlapping categories of barriers. The most common conditions: migraines (47%), MCS (37%), chronic fatigue (32%).

🧠

Attitudinal Barriers

Widespread belief that sensitivity is about "disliking a smell" — not a health response

"Scent equals clean" — the misconception that chemical odors mean thorough cleaning

Skepticism and stigma from healthcare providers, employers, family, and colleagues

Refusal to accommodate — personal attachment to scented products framed as personal freedom

Nose-blindness: repeated exposure reduces one's own perception of scent load

🏛️

Systemic Barriers

Fragrance-free signs posted but never enforced

Burden placed on the affected person to approach non-compliant colleagues directly

Employment contracts and onboarding that do not include fragrance-free policy education

Only 25% of scent-free buildings reported actively monitoring their policy

Policy adaptability scored 0% — no buildings adapted policies based on feedback

🏷️

Informational Barriers

Product labels disclose almost none of the VOCs actually emitted (0–3.8% in testing)

“Fragrance” on a label can represent hundreds of undisclosed chemicals

“Unscented” still contains masking agents — only “scent-free” means no fragrance ingredients

ECO-labelled products still emit hazardous air pollutants including TRP sensitizers

Ingredient labels hidden inside packaging — a barrier for people with visual or mobility disabilities

🏗️

Physical Barriers

Lack of ventilation in windowless meeting rooms and shared spaces

Shared HVAC systems circulate VOCs throughout buildings

New building materials and furnishings off-gas VOCs during and after renovation

Spray application of cleaning products aerosolizes particles into shared air

Laundry product VOCs off-gas from occupant clothing throughout the day

Most Challenging Physical Barriers (Focus Groups, n=50)

Multiple selections permitted. Source: Accessible Air in the Built Environment, ASEQ-EHAQ.

Cleaning products100%

100%

Perfumes and personal fragrances94%

94%

Laundry products82%

82%

Paint and renovation materials66%

66%

Mould and water-damaged buildings62%

62%

Furniture and carpets (off-gassing)50%

50%

Fragrance-Free Policies

What Works — and Where Policies Fall Short

Fragrance-free policies are the most effective source-control strategy for improving indoor air quality. The research is clear: well-implemented policies significantly reduce VOC concentrations. But most existing policies have critical gaps.

Average Implementation Level Across 17 Fragrance-Free Buildings

Based on CCOHS criteria. Source: Scent-free policy survey, Accessible Air in the Built Environment, ASEQ-EHAQ.

Scope88%

88%

Communication70%

70%

Accountability55%

55%

Education & Training45%

45%

Complaint Mechanism41%

41%

Monitoring27%

27%

Enforcement27%

27%

Adaptability0%

What effective fragrance-free policies include

✓Clear scope covering all product types and subcontractors

✓Education provided to all staff before implementation

✓Multi-channel communication including signage and onboarding

✓Anonymous complaint mechanism and clear response process

✓Regular monitoring, enforcement, and policy review based on feedback

Critical Healthcare Finding

One healthcare facility had a fragrance-free policy in place — but TVOC levels reached 26,000 µg/m³: over 50× the recommended guideline. Occupants reported bothersome odours, air freshener use, and multiple adverse health events including asthma attacks and cardiovascular problems. TVOC levels above 3,000 µg/m³ are associated with occupant complaints and sensory irritation (Bernstein et al., 2008).

Mould & Microbiological Agents

Mould as an Indoor Air Quality and Health Issue

Mould is a fungus that grows where moisture and organic material meet. When colonies form, they release invisible spores into the air — triggering health reactions in many people, and particularly affecting those living with MCS, asthma, or allergies.

Mould was identified by 62% of focus group participants as a challenging physical barrier. Indoor air can be contaminated by mould even when growth is not visible — spores migrate through HVAC systems and accumulate in dust.

Common Health Symptoms

Irritation of eyes, nose, and throat

Runny nose, sinus congestion, cold-like symptoms

Wheezing and coughing

Increased frequency and severity of asthma attacks

Chronic fatigue and headaches

Worsening of MCS symptoms due to compounded exposure

Source: Gouvernement du Québec — Quebec.ca

Who Is Most at Risk

People with MCS

Asthma or COPD

Allergies

Infants & children

Seniors

Weakened immune system

Remediation Levels (CCIAQB Guide)

Small isolated areas <1 m² — trained building staff with basic PPE
Mid-sized areas 1–3 m² — containment required; limited access during remediation
Large areas 3–10 m² — full containment; professional remediation recommended
Extensive contamination >10 m² — specialist contractors required; occupants must vacate

Source: CCIAQB Guide for Indoor Air Quality, Module 10 (2015)

Prevention Priorities

Inspect regularly for water damage and repair within 24–48 hours. Ensure adequate ventilation in high-humidity areas. For people with MCS, even small-scale mould remediation can trigger significant reactions — advance notice and temporary relocation are important accommodations.

Evidence-Based Recommendations

What Needs to Change

Education was the most frequently named solution by focus group participants (60%), followed by environmental improvements and scent-free policies (35% each).

Source Control First

Implement and properly enforce fragrance-free and lowest-emission product policies in workplaces, healthcare, schools, and public buildings. Source control is more effective and economically efficient than relying on ventilation.

Education as the Foundation

Education must come before policy — and must address chemical exposure, not just fragrance. People need to understand what "scent-free" means, why chemical emissions matter, and how to identify genuinely lower-emission products.

Transparent Product Labelling

Mandate full ingredient disclosure on all consumer products. The term "fragrance" should not be permitted to hide hundreds of undisclosed chemicals. Third-party certification should be based on emission testing, not label claims.

Improved Building Design

Update building codes to reflect IAQ as a public health and accessibility requirement. Improve ventilation standards, particularly for high-occupancy meeting spaces. Require low-VOC materials in publicly accessible buildings.

Policy Enforcement

Fragrance-free policies without enforcement are ineffective. Organizations need designated accountability, anonymous complaint mechanisms, regular monitoring, and clear consequences for non-compliance.

Equal Access to Alternatives

Fragrance-free and lowest-emission product options must be equally accessible and affordable. Regulatory support for broader market availability is needed — not just specialty stores at higher prices.

Guides & References

Key Resources on Indoor Air Quality

Practical guidance on IAQ, mould, and chemical exposures for building occupants, managers, healthcare providers, and individuals living with MCS.

Accessible Air in the Built Environment

ASEQ-EHAQ's first-of-its-kind mixed-methods study on IAQ, fragrance-free policies, VOC emissions, and accessibility in Canadian workplaces. Funded by Accessibility Standards Canada.

➡ Read the Full Report

Health Problems Caused by Mould — Québec.ca

Official guidance from the Gouvernement du Québec on mould-related health effects, symptoms, at-risk populations, and prevention strategies.

➡ View Québec.ca Guide

Mould — CCOHS Workplace Resource

The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety provides fact sheets and guidance on mould in workplace environments, with occupational health and safety context.

➡ View CCOHS Resource

CCIAQB Guide — Module 10: Mould

The Canadian Committee on Indoor Air Quality and Buildings guide for building managers on mould assessment, remediation levels, prevention, and HVAC management.

⬇ Download Guide (PDF)

Fragrance-Free Health Care

Resources from ASEQ-EHAQ on implementing fragrance-free practices in healthcare settings — provider guidance, signage, and accommodation frameworks.

➡ View Resource

Eco Living Guide

ASEQ-EHAQ's partner guide to healthier, lower-emission daily alternatives — covering cleaning, personal care, and home products, with ecolabel guidance.

➡ View Eco Living Guide

Continue Learning

What Is MCS?

Condition, mechanisms, and recognition

Symptoms & Triggers

Multi-system responses and exposure sources

COVID-19 & MCS

How pandemic measures affected people with MCS

Impacts on Daily Life

Employment, health, income, and community