Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Cutting off the nose to save the penis

what a title! Definitely not the ordinary work hazard. One expects reproductive hazards from radiation or chemical exposure. I never would have thought of bicycle riding. NIOSH bicycle saddles and reproductive health prolonged riding with certain types of bicycle saddles (the seat) results in higher pressure to the urogenital area (crotch) for male cyclists, reducing male reproductive function. These studies focused on police departments with a bicycle patrol as part of the force. Changing the style of seat for 6 months improved the man's function. The title is from the "nose-less" bicycle seats which were studied.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Mercury increase in Great Lakes

Levels of mercury in pike and walleye increasing from: Minnesota Public Radio
February 17, 2009

St. Paul, Minn. — Mercury levels are increasing in pike and walleye in Minnesota. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency scientist Bruce Monson studied data from the past 25 years.

Monson found that from the 1980s through the mid 1990s mercury levels decreased, but since then they've been on the rise. Monson says that corresponds to an increase in global mercury emissions from 1990 to 1995.

"We're affected by global emissions. 90 percent of the mercury that gets deposited is actually from outside the state." [READ: China]

Minnesota has already greatly reduced its mercury emission levels, and it will cut emissions again by 93 percent by 2025. The state is also working with other states to push the federal government into take action to cut mercury pollution globally.

Sunday, February 8, 2009

100 pounds of Hg

largest mercury spill in 20 years the fact that this isn't simply the largest is scarier. Reading the idiocy posted by idiots reading the papers is even scarier. "He said he was unaware of any damage to workers' health." It's amazing what you can be unaware of, simply by not being told. No one could possibly know within 24 hours whether or not the workers' health is impaired. Still ... I had a job once where I was explicitly told to "take your time getting back here", so that the corporate president could go on TV and say "we don't have that information yet". Of course not, I had it. So, I'm not really impressed anymore with "I'm unaware of ...." He added he did not know which company employed the supervisors who gave his employees their instructions. -- this is just a prime example of failure to stay on top of your employees' safety. If anyone is giving my employees directions involving their health, I damn well want to know who they are. I might now know what was said/done, but I would at least know who ran my safety program. ...notified the state's Office of Emergency Services about a spill of one pint of mercury - equal to 14 pounds. About three weeks later, the company amended its report to 90 pounds. ... reported the [second] spill to the state as six pounds and about a week later amended that amount to 90 pounds do you think someone might have checked into this, after the first amendment? Changing it to a larger amount doesn't surprise me - once you have a better idea of what happened, I would expect the number to increase. But from 14 to 90? That's not just a little blip, that's a 500% increase. Under laws effective last year, any company failing to notify the center promptly about a reportable spill could face a fine of up to $32,500 a day, EPA officials said. come on ... does ANYONE actually think the EPA will even try to fine these people? He added that the law now requires a professional survey assuring asbestos has been removed from a site, but "there is no similar requirement to have a professional survey for mercury and other hazardous materials." I might understand this, in a general sort of way. Tearing down the Gustavus Adolphus building on 16th & Lake really wouldn't warrant one's attention for hazardous materials. But a manufacturing site, which is known to have used hazardous chemicals in large quantities? Anyone who has ever dealt with older companies and especially older facilities in disrepair knows that it is almost a sure-fire guarantee to find 'unexpected' items. (I could tell you horror stories about cleaning a deep freezer which had, at one time, belonged to an infectious disease laboratory.) Hazardous materials assessment should precede demolition or major construction activities at any facility. That could be as simple as "looked around, it was an office, no asbestos, no radon, check" - or in the case of an old pesticide plant, like the one just west of me in the Philips Neighborhood: "um, old pesticide manufacturing plant, no one owns it anymore, it's a Brownfield, there's arsenic all over the neighborhood ...".

Sunday, February 1, 2009

questions for noise monitoring

As I progressed with this project, I realized that I should ask more questions. Sure, these are patently obvious, and are probably mentioned in any text on the topic. But, hey, this is why the first time doing something is educational. And of course, some of these I realized ought to have been asked after getting data I didn't want. Do you move to other tasks in the day? If so, find out which ones & how long they are at each station. How long do you stay at this work station? If the answer is less than a full shift, find out where else they are (& what they're doing). Is this a normal day for you? Do you normally run this (gizmo) more? less? Is production running faster or slower? Are you doing more tasks than usual? How long have you been doing this task, i.e., years, months, weeks You should establish how much experience the worker has with this task, which might be different than their seniority/time-in-grade might indicate. 30 years with the company might mean she's been doing this task for 6 months. Are you working overtime today? Often? Will you need to set the measuring instruments to accommodate a longer measurement? When you do calculations, you'll need to know what their normal exposure is, if today is different. Who else does this task or works at this station? Do you have someone who just helps out occasionally? This might be different than the answer you get from the supervisor. You're more interested in finding the perhaps unofficial or unknown "helpers", to make sure the helpers get included in your surveillance program. Is this task done every day? If this isn't a routine task, find out how often it is done. You might manage to catch someone doing a quarterly or annual task. And, if you miss the infrequent/irregular jobs, find out when they happen so that you can catch it next time.* As with anything else, have a pre-printed sheet with all of these questions. If you expect to have standard answers, put the standard answer with the question, so that you can easily circle it, rather than write it. E.g.: How long have you been doing this task? less than 6 months 1 year 5 years more than 10 years How long are you at this work station? 8 hours 4 hours 2 hours other ________ The easier it is for you to gather information, the more relaxed the employees will be. If it's quick and painless, it won't interrupt their work (as much). * Especially with irregular jobs, I find it much better to be able to approach the Supervisor and ask for a very specific thing: "Please contact me the next time you shut down Machine 5 for cleaning?" If you already know what you want (because you got the information from the worker), the manager will be either a) impressed that you know what you want and hopefully b) more likely to do it, because she knows what you want. This will also benefit your relationship with the worker: Asking them for information indicates your respect for their professional competence.