From: Monona Rossol <actsnyc**At_Symbol_Here**>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Waiver Form Example
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 08:46:17 -0400
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 14f9864a7d1-1ca-17f99**At_Symbol_Here**
In-Reply-To <007201d0e701$98be5b60$ca3b1220$**At_Symbol_Here**>

Ben,  Well, you've just about excluded every physician in the country.  Even the really top Occ Docs will not be familiar with the reproductive hazards of all chemicals you use.   

Of vastly more concern to me is the fact that the majority of the chemicals you use have never been evaluated for reproductive and developmental effects.  When you get those nice Sigma Aldrich SDSs, go to Section 11 and see what you find under:

(e) germ cell mutagenicity;
(f) carcinogenicity; and
(g) reproductive toxicity.

Check these for all the chemicals in your experiments. Notice, that these SDSs do not include tests for damage to the fetus. None of the occupational standards do.  Then add to this that all neurotoxic chemicals such as the solvents almost surely can affect brain development in the fetus at any stage. 

We're flying blind here and talking like we are far sighted.

I shall continue my policy of advising women to make choices between being pregnant and doing tasks which expose them to potentially toxic chemicals. 

So shoot me.

If you want to do this in a way that works, set up a data base of Section 11s on each of the chemicals used in the entire semester.  Give students access to this so they can see how very little is known about most of the chemicals. Explain the Precautionary Principle (as opposed to chemicals are innocent until proven guilty) and some of the students will have the brains to see the implications.

I know, because I have just done this for the 8 theatrical special effects smoke, fog and haze chemicals.  Very sobering when you see that there is almost no data by inhalation and that is the route for these chemicals.  Even non-chemists can get it when you do it this way.

Monona Rossol, M.S., M.F.A., Industrial Hygienist
President:  Arts, Crafts & Theater Safety, Inc.
Safety Officer: Local USA829, IATSE
181 Thompson St., #23
New York, NY 10012     212-777-0062


-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Ruekberg <bruekberg**At_Symbol_Here**CHM.URI.EDU>
Sent: Fri, Sep 4, 2015 7:19 am
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Waiver Form Example

                An ethical question occurred to me.
                Assuming a student wishes to consult their physician regarding which experiments they should ask to be excused, would it be ethical to insert in the information an experiment which will not be performed but which calls for the use of a teratogenic, mutagenic or allergenic compound?  If the physician fails to identify this "experiment" as proscribed, their competence to advise should be called into question.  This could be valuable information.  On the other hand, it involves deception.
                Does this fall under the rubric of human experimentation without proper informed consent, taking the physician's time unnecessarily, or simply a bad idea?
                Any thoughts, politely stated, would be welcome.
                Thank you,

Avast logo
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

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.