SDSs also tend to be written to cover all possible situations. I have an SDS for sucrose that calls for full Level A containment to clean up a spill. This might actually be reasonable if you'd spilled a unit train full of the stuff, and there was a lot of airborne material (though it still looks like overkill). Of course, I've got another SDS for water that instructs me to rinse the affected area for 15 minutes, with water. Sometimes, there's just no excuse for what you find in a SDS.
I must say that I see both sides of this debate. As Chris suggested, perhaps the picture was not the best choice simply because it causes professionals in the field to have spirited discussions about the safety of what is portrayed. The fine points we are discussing will be lost to the member of the public who is the target audience.
So perhaps we should look at it from his or her point of view: as-is, he or she gets the idea that mucking about in a chemistry lab is safe without eye protection. With eye protection added, he or she gets the idea that chemists are nut cases who wear goggles into the shower in case they get soap in their eyes. I'd replace the photo if possible, and if not, just move forward and resolve to do it differently next time.
I do think that the folks at ACS (was it Publications or Education who did this photo?) should take a look at this whole email chain just to see what they can take away from it for the future. I'm sure Marta has that already in-hand.
Regards,
Dan
Daniel Reid Kuespert, PhD, CSP
11101 Wood Elves Way
Columbia, MD 21044
410-992-9709
As has been mentioned before, context matters. Perhaps, as Marta's colleague said, there was a better thumbnail that would have conveyed how engaging this video series is without prompting safety questions when removed from the context of the presentation.
As for the idea that safety glasses are warranted when pouring molasses from a glass beaker, I'm going to have to disagree. While the SDS for molasses that John shared does call for eye and hand protection, Section 2 of that document states that molasses is non-hazardous. Manufacturers that recommend PPE for handling non-hazardous substances may be motivated more by liability fears than by reasoned risk assessments. And, while I can't claim that Jim's scenario is impossible, it doesn't seem any more likely than getting glass in one's eye while washing dishes after dinner.
Chris
________________________________
Christopher M. Kolodziej, Ph.D.
Chemical Hygiene Officer
I think there's a question of consistency here from the ACS.
Years ago, with the ACS Silicon Valley chapter, our college hosted a "Teach the Teachers" workshop involving candy chemistry. We were working with water, skittles, m&ms, etc. Nothing that I would consider toxic. Because the workshop was designed for teachers working on a non-existent to limited budget, their "beakers" and "lab glassware" were recycled soda cans and other household items. My ears are still ringing with the shouts of "you need to wear your safety glasses! ACS needs you wearing your glasses in the photos!"
Would I wear PPE when handling maple syrup in my kitchen? No. Would I if I were going to be on a promotional poster for the ACS? If you asked me last week I would have said the ACS standards dictated it.
Dear All:
What I always appreciate about our ACS safety community is that we lift each other and enable our mutual learning. We all have been working hard to educate, provide resources, build partnerships, understand, listen and suggest solutions to grow safety culture around us. If we want to grow people, I think the feedback we deliver should teach and inspire, and research tells us that shaming and blaming are indicators or poor safety culture. Let walk our talk! I am embracing this discussion as a teachable moment and I appreciate all off -line and on-line messages. I am in communication with my colleagues in charge of the newsletter.
Marta Gmurczyk
Marta U. Gmurczyk, Ph.D.
Safety Programs Manager| Scientific Advancement Division
1155 16th St., NW | Washington | DC 20036
T 202-452-2105 | F 202-872-8068
www.acs.org
---------------=E2=80"----
ACS Chemistry for Life
American Chemical Society
[Actual Sender is owner-dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**princeton.edu]
I couldn't agree more with Jim here. The ACS is supposed to show true leadership not Pooh Pooh something important. If indeed they actually performed any hazard analysis they would come to the conclusion Jim did. Shame on them.
Farmingdale State
=EF=BB=BF
They are badly mistaken.
The young woman is holding a glass beaker. If she drops it, she could have glass in her eyes. She should be wearing safety glass with side shields.
Please ask them to reconsider. ... Jim
PS. "There's more to lab safety than just labs!"
James A. Kaufman, PhD
Founder/President Emeritus
The Laboratory Safety Institute (LSI)
A Nonprofit Educational Organization for Safety in Science, Industry, and Education
192 Worcester Street, Natick, MA 01760-2252
(O) 508-647-1900 (F) 508-647-0062 (C) 508-574-6264 Skype: labsafe; 508-401-7406
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post
