DCHAS-L Discussion List Archive
Previous by Date:
Subject: Re: H2S Antidotes
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 11:37:53 -0400
Author: bill.galdenzi**At_Symbol_Here**BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM.COM
|
|
Next by Date:
Subject: Re: H2S Antidotes
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:40:22 +0000
Author: Wayne Wood
|
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 11:38:54 -0400
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**med.cornell.edu>
From: "Secretary, ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety"
Subject: Re: new set of rules kick in
X-To: dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**med.cornell.edu
From: "Margaret Rakas"
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] new set of rules kick in
Date: October 3, 2011 11:23:43 AM EDT
CSHEMA is a fine group BUT is concerned with a whole lot more than lab safety, i.e., dormitory safety, cross-walk safety, natural (and other) disaster preparations, smash-an-auto-for-frat-recruitment safety, etc.
When I want laboratory safety info, specifically chemical-related, I turn to DCHAS. (For biosafety, there is another group I belong to; same with radsafety). Disclaimer: I used to belong to CSHEMA but with limited funds and my job being focussed on academic safety issues, I dropped my membership.
If the working group to 'develop general guidelines for universities' is concerned primarily with laboratory safety, then I think DCHAS is the right 'host'.
As I have said before, given the burgeoning fields of molecular biology and neuroscience, and the fact that those scientists generally have less chemical background than chemists, I think DCHAS needs to find a way to understand the bread-and-butter safety issues of those fields as well..
My 2 cents worth of my personal opinion....
Margaret
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post
