Monona,
I have always appreciated, respected and at times, disagreed with the conclusion of your perspective and over the years, I believe we have agreed to disagree at times.
BUT, I believe you are wrong bringing religion and politics into this issue of performing hazardous laboratory demonstrations to 3-5 year olds with "teachers" that have not adequately been trained on the hazards.
I didn't even know this was a "religious school" until you pointed it out. Nowhere did I assume or reflect that "all regulations are an evil devised by liberals and should be repealed" and how does that come into play?
OSHA and EPA were signed into law by a Republican, nor that regulations were enacted to correct severe deficiencies. But, these distractions/refractions are totally IRRELEVANT to this discussion.
How does that come close to addressing the root cause of the proven accident history?
The point of my e-mail was to define who is responsible and/or accountable for the accidents AND how they can be prevented. I think that is simple enough.
You were correct to point out that teachers with no safety training are able to order/receive hazardous chemicals without adequate supervision and that OSHA training is not required for teachers. OSHA applies to workplaces, not classrooms. My mistake.
But, could that be the root cause or is it lack of training for those educators? The OSHA Lab Standard excludes those chemicals used in labs from the HazCom Standard and YES my error was assuming someone approves the purchases. Noted.
You disregarded answering my point of identifying who is responsible and/or accountable to provide protection to these 3-5 year old students while performing the rainbow experiment, while interjecting religious and political motivations, which I find totally unacceptable. I find your religious implications disturbing and offensive. I'm tempted to ask where those assumptions/accusations come from, but won't.
But I think you may have identified an opportunity that could be successfully utilized. Although OSHA does not apply to teachers, teachers must complete annual proficiency/career training days to maintain CEUs.
What is preventing us from developing a training program (hopefully mandatory) into the annual CEUs required of those teachers?
Just some thoughts, but it would address who is accountable while implementing preventative practices, but it may address the root cause.
I'm hesitating to ask, but Monona what do you think? I really do want to hear and respect your opinion.
Sincerely,
BruceV
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU] On Behalf Of Patricia Redden
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:44 AM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Likely Rainbow experiment injures 12 three year olds at Houston daycare
I found the comments made by Monona about the religious aspect of the school disturbing. The egregious ignoring of safety principles and of warnings by professional organizations had nothing to do with the nature of the school as a "religious school." Other incidents of the same experiment having dire consequences were done in public schools and science museums, which certainly do not advance the idea that "the world is only a few thousand years old and will end soon." Neither do the non-sectarian Christian schools my daughters attended (given the extremely poor nature of the local public schools) nor the Catholic university where I am on the faculty. Finally, if you don't believe in prayer for the injured students, that's fine, but it certainly does no harm.
Please let's focus on ways to avoid such incidents in the future and on educating teachers, particularly those with a minimum of science and safety training, on how to carry out experiments safely.
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**lists.princeton.edu> wrote:
Bruce. Such an interesting response. Read over again what you wrote. All the way through there is an assumption that is in error. And it comes from your being employed in a science lab rather than a grade or high school in the South.
The error is: you assume someone's permission must be sought to order products, use them or plan classroom experiments. Technically, there are administrators and principles, but they know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about chemicals, acceptable practice or standards of safety. All they want is to be left alone by the teachers who they incorrectly assume know what they are doing. This is an odd assumption considering it is the administrators themselves who also are responsible for the failure to provide even the most basic required OSHA training for any of their staff. Most schools I'm called into where there have been accidents or problems have NEVER had hazcom or lab safety training.
Your eloquent answer doesn't factor in the firm conviction that all regulations are an evil devised by liberals and should be repealed. And that science should wake up and face the fact that the world is only a few thousand years old and will end soon. Remember, this was a religious school. The school official interviewed by the TV station said they were praying for the victims, which probably will even satisfy the parents of the injured students.
And whatever I say here goes DOUBLE for Texas (except for Austin which everyone knows is not really in Texas).
So grade and high school teachers in most states, and more particularly in the Southern states, feel they have the freedom to plan lessons and materials without interference from anyone. That's the really big picture and there is absolutely no "fix" for it. You can fight ignorance with facts. But facts are powerless in the face of religious and political conviction.
Even when lack of simple inventory regulations resulted in blowing up an entire town in Texas and killing half of their emergency responders, not one damn thing has changed. And it won't.
Monona Rossol, M.S., M.F.A., Industrial Hygienist
President: Arts, Crafts & Theater Safety, Inc.
Safety Officer: Local USA829, IATSE
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Van Scoy <bvanscoy**At_Symbol_Here**TWC.COM>
To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU>
Sent: Wed, May 17, 2017 9:59 pm
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Likely Rainbow experiment injures 12 three year olds at Houston daycare
We are in complete agreement on this perspective. But I think we are looking at this from different viewpoints.
I can't disregard the teacher's absolute stupidity in trying to display this to 3-5 year olds.
I just can't justify how this could, would or should have been approved.
Was approval even sought/obtained?
Which leads to my point, if approval was sought/obtained, where does the responsibility lie?
At what level or degree of incompetence is needed to ensure these injuries are not repeated?
How many proven examples/injuries need to re-occur and what is the mechanism we can enact to ensure they are not repeated?
The bottom line is, who is responsible/accountable?
Yet, these accidents continue to occur, so where is our responsibility and how can we prevent?
Maybe I'm looking at this from a bigger picture, yes the chemicals used are toxic, but maybe the question we should be demand answer is why are these chemicals allowed to be used in the first place, especially at this education level.
I fully understand that the fire hazard is primary, but damn, how dare they bring methanol, and perhaps toxic lithium or barium soluble salts into a freaking grade school class? Lithium is toxic and mind altering in milligram amounts and soluble barium compounds are highly toxic in similar amounts causing death with symptoms similar to those of a heart attack. Methanol is toxic and exposure can be both by inhalation and skin contact. None of these chemicals should be anywhere near children.
Even copper chloride and boric acid should not be present in this form around very young children. And if you watch and listen to the 5 year old interviewed and the reporter's comments it appears the slightly older children were "participating" in the experiment being done for the crowd of 3 year olds.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission has some good guidelines about children's products that should apply to this project as well. The chemical products allowed for grade six and under are those that are both acutely and chronically nontoxic by definition (LD/LC50s for acute plus any chronic data). Only starting in grade 7 can toxic products be used WITH SUPERVISION. Supervision of a crowd of 3 year olds is an oxymoron and an inappropriate precaution.
The bottom line: The methanol, some of the color chemicals and the emissions to the air from burning them indoors are not appropriate in a classroom full of preschoolers.
However, don't let your knickers get in a twist over this one. Nothing will happen since the school is both religious and in the state of Texas.
Monona Rossol, M.S., M.F.A., Industrial Hygienist
President: Arts, Crafts & Theater Safety, Inc.
Safety Officer: Local USA829, IATSE
"Fire was changing colors and the last one wasn't working, so we put it a little bit more, and then it exploded," said Kate Earnest, a 5-year-old who was part of the group that participated in the experiment. "That's how the other kids got burned, and they were crying."
I hope the Houston prosecutor doesn't give this teacher a free pass. He or she should be criminally prosecuted for wanton endangerment which is, apparently, in most jurisdictions defined as "conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person." It's time to stop calling these injuries "accidents"
======================================================
Safety Emporium - Lab & Safety Supplies featuring brand names
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional secretary at secretary**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional secretary at secretary**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional secretary at secretary**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
