Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 17:23:35 -0600
Reply-To: Diane Amell <Diane.Amell**At_Symbol_Here**STATE.MN.US>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Diane Amell <Diane.Amell**At_Symbol_Here**STATE.MN.US>
Subject: Re: Working with chemicals and anosmia
Comments: To: heinz and inge trebitz
I'm afraid I'm with Steve; the reason being that you could be at risk
long before you can smell some chemicals:
Example 1: Odorless carbon monoxide. Up here we have a few fatalities&
nbsp;each winter from malfunctioning furnaces, heaters, etc. I have a
long list of examples where our investigators found CO overexposures; some
high enough to require evacuation of the facility (which is why all our
safety, as well as our health, investigators have their own CO
monitors).
Example 2: Methylene chloride. The odor threshold is approximately
200 ppm and the OSHA PEL is an 8-hour TWA of 25 ppm. (And no, I don't wish
to get involved in a debate regarding the merits of the OSHA standard.)
Example 3: Hydrogen sulfide, which causes olfactory fatigue.
On the flip side, we regularly have to explain to people that, just
because you can smell something, doesn't necessarily mean you are at
risk.
- Diane Amell, MNOSHA
>>> heinz and inge trebitz
<iht63**At_Symbol_Here**VALLEY.NET> 2/10/2009 6:58:44 PM >>>
Comenting on Samuella Sigman's questions as
well as the responses posted:
Whether exposure to a
chemical is harmful or not, or whether the volatiles
released into the
lab environment are non combustible or present a physical
hazard
(explosion, fire), the affected person lacking olfactory
capabilit
ies is at increased risk. As mentioned by Steve in his 2/07
comment,
you can minimize that risk through moving operations with volatiles
into
a tightly controlled hood. But Steve's suggestion to not allow the
work
er to do solo work acknowledges that these controls are not fail safe.
<
BR>
I disagree with Steve when he states that "Safe conditions
should not
require that a person needs to be capable of smelling the
reagents". Humans
are provided with the sense of smelling for selection
purposes. It helps us
searching for good tasting food. It provides
warnings to keep away from
decaying carcasses or the presence of
hazardous gases. Public safety relies
on warnings through odor, for
example by putting an ethylmercaptane tracer
into propane or natural
gas. Odor threshold data are used to provide a
preliminary measure for
the concentration of volatiles in a given
environment.
I
am not suggesting that a person with anosmia should be banned from all
lab
work. But a careful evaluation of the type of work performed in the
lab and
the available safeguards against chemical exposure should
govern the work
assignment for the person. The affected person must be
an active and
informed participant in that evaluation. An open
discussion of all the
issues will help the person to better understand
the risks involved. As a
result the person may agree to a transfer into
a field of work where the
risk of exposure is much lower. The discussion
will also increase the person
's awareness of potential risks during
daily life and how to avoid exposure
hazards.
To
Samuella's philosophy "Don't always believe what you think" I would
add:
Don't think that all exposure problems can be solved through
engineering.
Heinz H. Trebitz, Ph.D.
480 Colby Road
N
Thetford Center, VT 05075
Tel: 802-785-2129
Fax: 802-785-2124
e-mail: iht63**At_Symbol_Here**valley.net
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post
