I don't know what happened CC but I've worked construction all my adult life ,I couldn't count the times our work envirment became compromised because of toxic fumes, just like high co2 levels you're no wimp for haulin A out of there and even getting checked out.My pop was chem engineer for Dow , he told me in his latter years that stuff is bad for you.
On Wednesday, July 25, 2012, Louise Power wrote: > My personal experience has been that folks who don't work in industry or > in a government agency which has a hazmat specialist on board have never > heard of an MSDS. Wouldn't know what it meant if they had one. At BLM, > we're required to take hazmat training once/year. It's especially critical > here in Oregon and other states where meth labs and dumps are so prominent > on public lands. > > :-( Louise > > > There is an almost sure prevention for this form of stupidity. It is > called the M.S.D.S., the Material Safety Data Sheet. I is supposed to be > read BEFORE you open the container or apply the stuff! > > E ^v^ > > *From:* Louise Power > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 25, 2012 11:24 AM > *To:* Geary Schindel ; Bill Mixon ; Texas Cavers > *Subject:* RE: [Texascavers] fumes in CC visitor center > > Wait!!! You mean I sent them all my canaries for nothing?! After all, > Gary, it's really not a mine anymore. > > > From: gschin...@edwardsaquifer.org > > To: bmixon...@austin.rr.com; texascavers@texascavers.com > > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 10:20:57 -0500 > > Subject: RE: [Texascavers] fumes in CC visitor center > > > > Folks, > > > > I agree with Bill, when using solvent based paints (or for that matter, > any hazards material) in a confined space, it is much quicker, easier and > cheaper to use humans to determine if you've exceeded any health related > chemical thresholds verses real time air monitoring or canaries. Most of > the time, most folks become violently ill before they actually die. While > this is not the recommended method by the American Council of Governmental > Industrial Hygienists, it seems to be the technique most often used by > industry. When employees get sick, it is probably time to give them at > least a 15 minute break. You don't have to worry about long term exposures > such as an increased risk of lung or blood cancers as those folks probably > won't be working for you in 20 years anyway so not your problem. > > > > Matter of fact, with substances such as asbestos or silica dust, by > allowing humans in a contaminated work area without respirators, they > actually help clean the air as the lungs retain some of the asbestos fibers > or silica (good for the room, bad for the lungs). If you would like to see > an excellent presentation on silicoses and the Hawks Nest Tunnel in West > Virginia and the largest industrial accident in US History, you may want to > visit Helen Lang's web page > http://www.geo.wvu.edu/~lang/Geol484/HN-shorter.pdf > > > > I'm sure that the contractor read and followed all of the warning labels > and safety precautions for use of the product and that it was really safe > for use in a confined environment and that the manufacturers warning about > using the product only in well ventilated areas was just to protect them > from lawsuits. > > > > Using canaries for air monitoring has fallen out of favor in recent > years as they are cute and folks get attached to them. In addition, there > are a number of powerful animal rights groups that help protect their > interests (wonder how that would work for humans). The correct method would > be to develop a health and safety plan that would require proper > environmental controls such as ventilation, selecting appropriate > chemicals, using protective equipment, closing down the facility, and air > monitoring. However, that all costs time and money. > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mixon Bill [mailto:bmixon...@austin.rr.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 9:40 AM > > To: Cavers Texas > > Subject: [Texascavers] fumes in CC visitor center > > > > The fact that a few staff "had to" be taken to hospital does not prove > that there was any real danger or there were any real inju >
