My son would probably say that I am out of touch since I don't twitter,
tweet, etc. Speaking from the perspective of someone who has implemented
safety practices for working with t-butyl lithium, I can't believe that if
she would have been provided minimum training on what engineering,
administrative or PPE controls would have been protective. The training
could have been covered in 5-10 minutes. I've seen multiple reports, some
focusing on if her training was documented or not, regardless if the
training was documented or not, if she simply would have actually known of
the obvious hazards that she was working with, she could have followed
rudimentary safety practices based upon the risks of the compound being
handled. Instead, I think multiple researchers will be placed in very
similar positions due to the root cause not being recognized or addressed.
Ignorance is bliss, but the risks are real.
Our obligation is to ensure they are educated enough to protect themselves
and their co-workers.
My opinion only. I really hope significant lessons are learned and prove me
wrong over time, but I'm willing to bet a steak dinner that I'm right.
P.S. My previous (and highly respected supervisor) still owes me 2 out of 2
that we bet against steak dinners.
From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf Of
Secretary, ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 7:37 AM
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Follow up reporting on the Harran settlement
Those who don't follow Jyllian Kemsley's Safety Zone blog at
may want to check out a couple of her follow up posts this week on reactions
to and myths associated with the case and settlement. She's making a valiant
effort to maintain a connection between the twitter-verse and reality. I
suspect that similar misconceptions are arising in the lab rumor-verse as
Division of Chemical Health and Safety
American Chemical Society
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post