Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 08:18:43 -0500
Reply-To: Phil Anderson <panderson**At_Symbol_Here**AQUASCIENCE.COM>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Phil Anderson <panderson**At_Symbol_Here**AQUASCIENCE.COM>
Subject: Re: Visorgogs
Comments: To: Gordon Miller

OK, I've heard enough! Chemical eyewear is simple. It must protect the eyes in all cases of exposure. So this means that it must be chemical splash protective. This means GOGGLES. Nothing else is acceptable. The ANSI standard is for all forms of eye protection, and the Z87.1 standard really indicates that it is intended to be protective eyewear, and not that it is (even) all that effective against a specific hazard. But in THIS area we need to have GOGGLES that also meet the Z87.1 standard, which means that they are not simply "decorative" eyewear. We would be far ahead of the game were we to see separate dstandards for different types of eye protection, this is certain, but the fact is that there are/would be plenty of standards available, and almost noplace on the glasses to place the coded seal. In fact, how many USERS can/could tell us what the correct seal mark should be? Almost none, and it will remain so forever. The selection of protective eyewear is in the hands of the users, yes, but in our hands as well. And it is OUR responsibility to select the correct type of protection, and inform the users what to use. If this makes it difficult or not is not an issue. If we are going to get upset over ANYTHING let it be contact lenses. They should NEVER be worn while handling chemicals to which there is even a chance of exposure. But people do it all the time. Phil -----Original Message----- From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Gordon Miller Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:36 AM To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU Subject: [DCHAS-L] Visorgogs I ran into them in the 1970s and it's interesting to see they're still around. I agree with other commenters that the Z87.1 mark should have a suffix letter or letters to denote intended use(s). It will add costs for manufacturers to design the markings and include them in the assembly process. The bottom of the wraparound lens does open a gap, as has been mentioned. I'd see these as almost being the filtering facepieces of protective eyewear, easy to wear and popular, but not thoroughly protective. Gordon Miller Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory P.O. Box 808 (L-379) Livermore, California 94550 (925) 423-8036 Fax (925) 422-5176 miller22**At_Symbol_Here**

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.