About This Archive  |	DCHAS-L 2015 Index   |	DCHAS-L Yearly Index
Search All Posts:   Advanced Search     Disclaimer

Check out Safety Emporium for your N95, N99, and face shield needs.

Previous by Date: Subject: Fwd: [DCHAS-L] How to Avoid Lab Mistakes! Date: Monday, January 5, 2015 3:54:28 PM Author: Frankie Wood-Black <fwblack**At_Symbol_Here**CABLEONE.NET>

Next by Date: Subject: [DCHAS-L] C&EN Safety Zone [New post] Lawsuits detail injuries from rainbow demonstration fire in New York school Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 07:55:06 -0500 Author: "Secretary, ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety"

In light of this thread, anyone interested in the early use of radium in the
US might want to look at a post on my blog at
http://meteoritemanuscripts.blogspot.com/2011/05/early-use-of-radium-in-us-george.html.
It deals with George F. Barker's notable lecture at Columbia University in
1903.

Mark Grossman, CIH, CSP
Briarcliff Manor, NY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Zavon"
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2015 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] C&EN SafetyZone blog: 'Oops‰?? is never good
occupational health policy

> In a documentary on PBS about the radium dial painters (broadcast more
> than 15 years ago, I think) a short black and white movie clip of the
> actual dial painting activity was included. It was absolutely clear to me
> that they were pointing the brush AFTER dipping in the paint and BEFORE
> applying paint to the dial. That clearly gave the best point for
> painting, but, in my opinion, increased the likely radium ingestion as
> compared to pointing after painting the dial and before dipping in the
> paint for the next numeral.
>
>
> Peter Zavon, CIH
> Penfield, NY
>
> PZAVON**At_Symbol_Here**Rochester.rr.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf
> Of Ralph Stuart
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 8:25 AM
> To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU
> Subject: [DCHAS-L] C&EN SafetyZone blog: 'Oops‰?? is never good occupational
> health policy
>
> http://cenblog.org/the-safety-zone/2014/12/oops-is-never-good-occupational-health-policy/
>
> ‰??‰??Oops‰?? is never good occupational health policy‰??
> by Jyllian Kemsley
>
> The headline is from Deborah Blum, author of "The Poisoner's Handbook," as
> quoted in an NPR story about Mae Keane. Keane was briefly one of the
> "Radium Girls" who painted glow-in-the-dark wristwatches in the 1920s.
> Here's a bit more context, plus the full quote:
>
> In order to get the numbers small enough, new hires were taught to do
> something called "lip pointing." After painting each number [with radium
> paint], they were to put the tip of the paintbrush between their lips to
> sharpen it.
>
> Twelve numbers per watch, upwards of 200 watches per day ‰?? and with every
> digit, the girls swallowed a little bit of radium.
>
> "Of course, no one thought it was dangerous in these first couple of
> years," explains Deborah Blum, author of The Poisoner's Handbook.
>
> ...
>
> Deborah Blum says the radium girls had a profound impact on workplace
> regulations. By the time World War II came around, the federal government
> had set basic safety limits for handling radiation.
>
> And, she says, there are still lessons to be learned about how we protect
> people who work with new, untested substances.
>
> "We really don't want our factory workers to be the guinea pigs for
> discovery. 'Oops' is never good occupational health policy."
>
> Searching C&EN archives, it seems that it took a while for people to
> embrace those basic radiation safety limits. From a 1951 story from the
> American Industrial Hygiene Association's 12th annual meeting:
>
> Unsafe working conditions were found in the handling of radium, x-ray, and
> fluoroscopic equipment in every one of 12 hospitals surveyed recently,
> William LaRocque, of the Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., told a mixed group
> of scientists and medical specialists at this meeting. In some cases, he
> said, radiation in excess of maximum permissable doses was detected in
> hospital offices as well as in laboratories and operating rooms.
>
> LaRocque found physicians handling radium sources with virtually no
> protection whatever. Between uses radium was stored in everything from
> water glasses to tin cans. Because of the value of the radium it was often
> stored in office safes which afforded little resistance to the radiation.
> Some dental x-ray equipment surveyed irradiated the operator to a maximum
> permissable dose after as few as five exposures had been made.
> Fluoroscopes and diagnostic x-ray apparatus were often inadequately
> shielded or were used in a dangerous manner. In one case reported, the
> lead glass on a fluoroscope screen had not been replaced although it had
> been cracked "for years."
>
> Contrary to experience reported by earlier investigators, LaRocque said
> that the medical men and roetgenologists involved seemed anxious to learn
> about these hazards and to take steps to correct the dangerous conditions.
> LaRocque attributed the situation to ignorance rather than lethargy. He
> said that in none of these cases had there ever been any planned system of
> health protection in connection with radiation hazards and he made a
> strong plea to the assembled industrial hygienists to take positive steps
> to overcome the present complacency about these hazards.
>
> Jyllian Kemsley | December 30, 2014 at 8:30 am |
> http://cenblog.org/the-safety-zone/2014/12/oops-is-never-good-occupational-health-policy/
>

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post