Document xjKV7Dy016j98bZ6KQQBG0DEE

greed on at The Safe Handling of Chemicals in Industry and in the Home D. D. IRISH Biochemical Research Department The Dow Chemical Company scattering of radiation by 'iation as measured on the body was arbitrarily as : thirds of the permissible on in the working area, as made to the exposure nd forearms in that the case was permitted to be in the working area, greed upon for several of nonly used radioisotopes, eights of the body organs, ion and elimination were the Standard Man. These Id standardize the calculaof maximum permissible y various persons making he three countries. :s were taken at the meet>e available for publication re. per Week DO Kv X-rays and compari- ; Basal Layer e Epidermis of Exposure of dy Hands Only 1.5 1.5 0.15 0.075 0.15 0.3 should be assumed when s or forearms. ; injury is to be expected sible exception of pregnant Chemical injuries are actually a small deadly poison and those from which the part of our total picture of accidental animals show no discomfort, we will classify injuries. However, like other types of acas entirely harmless. When two of the an cidental injury they are unnecessary. In imals die we examine the record and find ^ * other wofds, we can do something about that they received the two deadly poisons, them. Your problem, like my own, is the table salt and baking soda. The other two responsibility for many people who may animals who lived happily and contented handle chemicals. Our problem is then large were given the innocuous substances known ly one of inducing people to handle them as strychnine and white arsenic. Now there Isafely that is the heart of my topic today is no trick or magic to this experiment, it rather than the details of safe practice. You is just a matter of amounts. We gave the remember the old saying "You can lead a animals more table salt and baking soda horse to water but you can't make him than we gave of strychnine and white drink." Our greatest problem is to induce arsenic. This is not a matter of a substance him to drink. being a poison or not a poison, but it is a If we are to discus `chemical substances,' matter of whether or not the substance gets we should consider what they are. We can into the animal body in excessive amounts. certainly not rely upon the popular idea that You*can readily kill an animal by an ex a chemical is a `dangerous stuff which cessive amount of table salt or baking soda, stinks.' Broadly, everything we use is of a but there is no reason in the world why chemical nature. We are really dealing with you should. In the same way, we can readily practically any individual substance which kill an animal with an excessive amount may be used in industry or in the home. of strychnine or white arsenic or nearly But, you may say, we are of course inter any other material, but there is no reason ested only in hazardous substances. Let us why we should. We realize of course that then consider what a hazardous substance is. the smaller the toxic dose the easier it is n general, the term poison conjures up to get a toxic amount and the more careful lurid visions of witches' brew and black must be the handling precautions. agic. In such matters we must realize that we are dealing more often with emotional ^ chemical substance is not of malicious thinking than with rational thinking, intent. It will not, with malice of fore f Let me give you my own definition of the thought, reach out and bite us. It has con term poison: "A poison is too much." Now sistent and definable properties. If we ig | assure you I am not being facetious, I nore these properties and misue the sub am very earnest in this definition. Let me stance, we can expect trouble. We see that illustrate by describing a very simple ex we ourselves, in our own acts, contribute periment which time does not allow me to an essential part of the pattern leading to 'perform for you. We are frequently asked, injury. Therefore, with more knowledge, |Is this substance a poison or is it not a and less disregard for the knowledge we poison?" If we were to ask the individual have, we can eliminate to a large degree, Sfyvhat he means, he would simply say, "Why the hazards of misuse. /&* give it to an animal, and if he dies it is There are three basic modes of contact f-'^ytpoison, if he doesn't, it is not." Let us out- to be considered in the practical problem .-7 1 line a simple experiment by taking four of handling a substance. The breathing of y-^.-.mice and giving them by mouth one of an air dispersion (dust, vapor, mist, etc.), .'^fefour different substances. Those substances contact on the skin or eyes (with either ir j||bWhich kill the animal we will classify as ritation or absorption), and entrance by mouth. The practical hazard of breathing Presented at the Gulf Coast Safety Conference, Houbv ton, Tdxaa, October 7, 1949* air dispersions is not determined solely by Page 118 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE QUARTERLY June, 1950 IVol. 11, No. 2 the toxic concentration. The ease of obtain ing a toxic concentration is just as impor tant, and this depends not only on the physical properties of the substance but also on the circumstances of use. Whatever the mode of contact and entry to the body, the ease with which excessive amounts may by contacted is more important than the toxicity alone. In other words, the toxicity is not a measure of the "practical hazard." The "practical hazard" is determined by the physical, chemical, and physiological properties of a substance plus the circum stances of use. The subject of interest to us is actually the "practical hazards" of our contemplated use. So far I have emphasized the toxic haz ard. We should never forget the fire hazard. It has been by all means more damaging to life and property. As a friend of mine ex pressed it in a general discussion on hazard warnings, "We will blow more people through the windows with carbon disulfide than we will ever poison with it in spite of the fact that it is a highly toxic sub stance." ' In one way we are a step farther ahead in considering fire hazards than we are with toxic hazards. Most people are more realistic and less emotional in considering a fire hazard. We are in general more cognizant of the fact that something can be done about them. However, be it fire hazard or toxic hazard, the basic fault is in misuse. It is obvious then, that our problem is one of eliminating misuse. In order to do this, we must recognize what constitutes misuse of any particular substance and we must define what is proper use. Even after we have this information, it is neces sary that we diseminate this information to the individuals who may handle the substance and convince them to apply safe handling practice. WfHlLE there are certain basic similarities between the problems in industry and the problems in the home, there are also certain differences which make it desirable to consider each one separately. Let us then turn our attention first to our industries. In considering industries please remember that the agricultural industries are our important industries, and should not be neglected by those people whose responsi- bility it is to concern themselves with in-!-> f. i We often a, \ chemicals, a observe respect dustrial health and public health. ,V. a disagreeable charai If you are faced with a decision in regard`d V" Although there are no to the design and operation of a process! :.{U its use. At the same t entirely new to your organization or area,-*; *^j ; for the hazards of you will probably want to investigate the* _ disagreeable character known information as it appears in the , * .warning has been g literature. Let us then examine a typical jig sfchealth hazard. In a lil case of a particular substance. Uk'Vis often concerned ov I quote in part from an abstract con-* jijl'rritation which is cerning the use of this particular substanc&l ; while apparently unct we will call X--"Onychia Due to Handlinj ""potential internal inj X." "All but two finger nails of a womajj be physically obvious t working with X were affected... Somt nails were stripped off, others were splii and lifted from the bed. Granular tissul could be broken away when the nail plaft was lifted... The condition cleared up whej the woman stopped her work." I quote in part from another abstrs concerning the industry manufacturing "Usually the disease begins with sligl fever, chills, and malaise. A localized ij filtrated patch appears in the healthy skp which in a few days develops the characf istic of an extremly painful boil, witi lymphangitis and adenitis... Laborers i| the X manufacture usually present a squi mous dermatitis between the fingers a; on the back of the hands... X causes gii givitis...In extreme cases the teeth fa! out." In considering the facts presented this abstract, you might readily consid^ that you would be faced with some serioi health problems in operating such a plahj However, we note that the substance X `sugar.' This puts a rather different ligl on our interpretation of the fact. In anal; ing our own thoughts, then, we realize thf we may be as much affected by a somewh$ emotional consideration by which we ignoj the problems associated with a familij substance and greatly overemphasize tj problems associated with the use of a su) stance with which we are not familiar. T1 is not entirely unjustified because we hai more reason to be confident of the infoi tion on a familiar substance. Too oft however, we find to our surprise that have more information on a new substan? than on some old familiar ones. Many of ot older materials are accepted just becaug we are getting by. IN APPROACHING the ^process in industry formation we can fror pie toxicological laboi Sjological effects of th fctain as much detail In about the physical fes of the substances Re operations in a pro picturing or using tl gpis information we ; Bgether a picture by Bine the possibilities Operations and from jjprmation determine potential exposures i Kzard. This is of co Kate in a few senter H? than it is to aco jscussion of the detai Ijpblem are beyond th Mailable today. Let us __ccomplished this sun jjMpod comprehension c may encounter ar I s-p^andling of the mater implement that in are successful in e I/l 'misoperation ? The first and mos ^'.Industry is to get oi l?and designing engine 'Ithe potential hazards 1 fracture and handlinj a .as much a part of t |np& operation of a pis properties of the su i-thatter, the load on tl gitf his building. If we fflpgineer and the buil RLY June, 1950 VOL. 11, No. 2 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE QUARTERLY Page 119 lose people whose responsi;oncern themselves with inand public health. :ed with a decision in regard and operation of a process your organization or area, aly want to investigate the .tion as it appears in the us then examine a typical ular substance, art from an abstract conof this particular substance -"Onychia Due to Handling vo finger nails of a woman We often observe in people handling chemicals, a respect for a substance with a disagreeable character such as an odor although there are no serious hazards from its use. At the same time we see disregard for the hazards of a substance without disagreeable characteristics although verbal warning has been given of its potential health hazard. In a like manner a workman is often concerned over a small superficial irritation which is an obvious nuisance while apparently unconcerned over serious potential internal injury which may not be physically obvious to him at the moment. X were affected... Some pped off, others were split l the bed. Granular tissue i away when the nail plate ie condition cleared up when iped her work." >art from another abstract industry manufacturing X. lisease begins with slight id malaise. A localized inippears in the healthy skin, days develops the character:tremly painful boil, with nd adenitis.. .Laborers in ;ure usually present a squas between the fingers and the hands... X causes gintreme cases the teeth fall :Tn approaching the problem of a new IS, process in industry, we obtain what injfprmation we can from literature and from ||he toxicological laboratory as to the phy siological effects of the substances. We also ijbtain as much detailed information as we jlfin about the physical and chemical properflies of the substances and the mechanics of the operations in a proposed plant for manujpicturing or using these materials. From |his information we should be able to put ftogether a picture by which we can deterIftiine the possibilities of exposure in the Operations and from the toxicological ing|i>rmation determine whether or not these fpotential exposures represent a practical Hazard. This is of course much simpler to te in a few sentences as I have stated ig the facts presented by mu might readily consider be faced with some serious in operating such a plant. Htr than it is to accomplish in fact. The Jjscussion of the details of working out this feoblem are beyond the time which we have Available today. Let us assume that we have )te that the substance X is its a rather different light .ation of the fact. In analyzrnghts, then, we realize that tuch affected by a somewhat ieration by which we ignore issociated with a familiar greatly overemphasize the ated with the use of a subch we are not familiar. This unjustified because we have accomplished this survey, and have a pretty flood comprehension of the problems which j||e may encounter and the means of safe andling of the material. How are we going p implement that in our industry so that Jjfce are successful in eliminating misuse and jllmisoperation ? The first and most important step in Industry is to get our chemical engineers |nd designing engineers to recognize that Slhe potential hazards involved in the manu- Hbe confident of the informs- iliar substance. Too often, id to our surprise that we -mation on a new substance 3 familiar ones. Many of our are accepted just because ifi-acture and handling of the materials are much a part of the problem of design -.U/f^and operation of a plant as are the physical ^properties of the substance or, for that ** ^matter, the load on the structural members his building. If we can get the designing by. ir^-^'t-ngineer and the building engineer to take these factors into account in the original layout of his apparatus, we are making the most important step towards safe operation at a minimum cost. The second main object to be attained in the industry is to convince the operator that the proper use and handling of a material in his operations is just as im portant as the control of temperature and pressure in his process, or the productive output of his plant. When the operator accepts the health problems of his operation as part and parcel of the regular operating duties, then we have a good chance of eliminating injuries due to exposure to the substances in his process. The final answer to our problem in indus try comes from the success we have in putting across an understanding of the problems to the people in design and in operation. The attainment of the proper knowledge of the subject is just the begin ning. . Please excuse me for a great over-sim plification of the problem in industry. But as I want to leave these two main ap proaches with you, T do not want to go into further detail in discussing the industry's problem. The two factors, first, of accepting toxicological properties of a substance as a logical part of the problem of basic de sign; and secondly, of accepting problems of exposure as part of good operating tech nique, are fundamental to the elimination of health hazards in industry. "VTOW LET us turn to the home. The greatest ^ difference we have between the industry and the home is the fact that in industry supervision has some control over both the engineering of a process and the individuals in operation. In the home we have no di rect control and very few channels for passing on information concerning the safe use of materials. Recognizing the possibilities of over simplification, I want to reduce the problem as it occurs in the home to the three factors that I feel are the greatest contribution to accidents with chemicals: We will recognize that the label, con taining the information on the proper use of a substance and any warnings as to certain misuses of the substance, is our most direct channel for informing the in- Page 120 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE QUARTERLY June, 1950 dividual in the home. Our first great dif ficulty is the fact that people neither read the labels nor apply the information con tained theron. An attempt to get people to pay attention to the information contained on the package within which they receive the material would be a very great step forward in avoiding misuse of the material in the home. Our second difficulty is created by im proper storage. Mother brings home the groceries including a can of rat poison and dumps them all out on the kitchen shelf with the intention of putting them away later. Meanwhile, little Johnny explores to see what he can find. 'All substances which are not to be eaten should be stored away from food stuffs and out of the reach of children. The third major factor is of the greatest importance by far. I refer here to the ten dency to transfer various substances to common containers around the house, such as a drinking glass or a pop bottle, which are then left readily available to children or other adults. This is probably the source of the greatest problem in handling sub stances in the home. Very much in the same category will fall the individual who purchases a small amount of material in the corner store and has it poured out into a pop bottle or other unlabeled, unidenti fiable container, which he then proceeds to take home and leave where it is easily available to people who are not at all famil iar with its content. Tet's examine but one result of such proLl cedure. You will recognize immediately that it is not the most hazardous substance that causes the most difficulty in the home. Such a common material as kerosene which in itself is certainly not a highly toxic material, accounts for many of the serious poisonings in children throughout the United States every year. Practically all of these cases are completely inexcusable in that mother or dad poured some kerosene into an ordinary drinking glass and then left it where a child could pick it up. This is certainly the most common pattern. Kerosene is not singled out here as a toxic substance, actually, just the reverse. Nearly any other organic fluid under the same circumstances would represent just as much of a problem and many of them vastly more,' Actually, kerosene emphasized my point" that the toxicity of a substance is not by; any means the important part of the prob|; lem. Kerosene is among the least toxic o|r the organic fluids with which we would bg,: concerned in the home. The problem is that'l it is one of the most common available ancbiprobably the most carelessly handled. Think of the almost unlimited number of common substances used around the home; washing compounds, household insecticide^ agricultural chemicals, disinfectants, dr cleaning materials, common solvents, n" tural gas, gasoline, turpentine, and mat others. They vary in flammability an toxicity from potentially highly hazardoi to almost innocuous, yet every one of the can be misused in some way. At the sar time there is not one of them, no matt how hazardous it may be, that cannot'? used with safety, if its properties are derstood and it is handled with due CO sideration to its properties. I could have given you a long dissertati on the detailed hazards of individual che ical substances and a tabulation of t various ways in which we could avoid (j Acuities. Practically all of this informati has been published in some form. It appe in brief form on package labels and in m detail in the general literature. Much this is already known to you. In analyzi the whole picture, it seems to me thl while this information is important, the is still the matter of convincing the peo. directly concerned to actually eliminSj misuse. I have tried to discuss for you sor of the more obvious angles of this probig of inducing people to apply some sirot common sense to the handling of chemif* substances in the industry and in the hor We all recognize that it is possible wit the proper knowledge and care to handj practically any substance, no matter Kg toxic or flammable. We also recognize tK| we can misuse nearly any substance so th| there may be hazard to the health of dividuals concerned. Our aim is not eliminate materials from our industries from our home because they may be fla mable or toxic, but our aim is to elimina, careless or ignorant misuse so that ^ and I and everyone else can enjoy all advantages of these substances.