www.luntacunt.fora.pl

Luntacunt project

www.luntacunt.fora.pl Forum Index -> Snapshots -> abercrombie milano Exposure to chemicals, which is
Post new topic  Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic 
abercrombie milano Exposure to chemicals, which is
PostPosted: Sat 23:35, 26 Oct 2013
xyrva0h5

 
Joined: 06 Aug 2013
Posts: 11453
Read: 0 topics

Warns: 0/5
Location: England





Dale Allen develops systems and online software to help you succeed in HSE CoSHH compliance. Find out more about how to effectively manage and produce [url=http://www.mxitcms.com/abercrombie/]abercrombie milano[/url] a compliant CoSHH assessment free with the UK's leading CoSHH compliance authority, COSHH365.
In the early days of occupational health, safety and hygiene it was assumed that inhalation exposure was the most significant route for many toxic chemicals to gain [url=http://www.thehygienerevolution.com/hollister.php]hollister france[/url] access to the body? internal organs and systems. It was also recognised that the surface area of the gas exchange region of the lung was extremely large, much larger than the surface area of the skin. Furthermore, the skin was considered a relatively impermeable barrier preventing chemicals from gaining access to the body. Also the idea that one might breathe in a toxic substance raises much higher emotive concerns than the idea that some might land on the skin.
So [url=http://www.agentparadise.com]woolrich outlet[/url] effort tended to be concentrated on preventing inhalation of toxic gases, aerosols, vapours, fumes and dust to protect the workforce and to meet the stringent requirements of the [url=http://www.agentparadise.com]woolrich sito ufficiale[/url] CoSHH regulations. Much research and many studies resulted in clear occupational exposure limits that employers must ensure are not exceeded in the working environment, techniques for [url=http://www.teatrodeoro.com/hollisterde.php]hollister deutschland[/url] measuring airborne exposure, etc. The need for regulatory compliance placed emphasis on inhalation exposure, such that skin exposure tended to be [url=http://www.tagverts.com/barbour.php]barbour deutschland[/url] accorded a much lower priority.
Does this really reflect present day reality?
If one studies the statistical and epidemiological evidence that now exists, then some interesting facts come to light. In those countries where effective data collection on the causes of occupational health exist, there is clear evidence that damage to health due to skin exposure remains, if not the, then certainly one of the most significant factors.
Let's take a look at some of the evidence.
Both the number of cases and the rate of skin diseases in the U.S. exceed respiratory illnesses. In 2006, 41,400 recordable skin diseases were reported by [url=http://www.thehygienerevolution.com/hollister.php]hollister[/url] the Bureau of Labor Statistics at a rate of 4.5 injuries for 10,000 employees, compared with 17,700 respiratory illnesses with a rate of 1.8 illnesses per 10,000 employees.
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Authority, Technical Manual, Section II, Chapter 2
In other words skin diseases exceeded respiratory disesease by at a ratio of 2.36:1!
Similarly, in a study by dermatologists in Denmark, the significance of skin disease is clear.
Compensation claims - Principal diagnosis
2853 - Skin diseases (36%)
1640 - Muscular skeletal disorders
791 - Respiratory system disorders
320 - Circulatory system disorders
278 - Poisoning
2078 - Other
7960 Total
Halkier-Sorenson C, Occupational skin diseases, a case study from Denmark, Contact Dermatitis, 1998, 39, 71-78
And from the European [url=http://www.teatrodeoro.com/hollisterde.php]hollister[/url] Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Fact Sheet no. 40:
Occupational skin diseases are estimated to cost the EU 600,000,000 euros each year, resulting in around 3 million lost working days. They affect virtually all industry and business sectors and force many workers to change jobs.
Note that these statistics relate only to the incidence and prevalence of occupational skin disease. There is almost no data on the contribution that skin contact and skin penetration plays in the development of systemic disorders. However, what evidence there is indicates that this has to be significant. With certain chemicals skin contact and uptake is almost certainly at least, if not more, significant than uptake due to inhalation.
We need to keep in mind that it [url=http://www.marrakech-hotel.fr]hollister france[/url] is the dose that reaches the target organ that is critical for the potential systemic effect, irrespective of the route of uptake. Thus when considering systemic effects we must take the sum of the three routes of uptake (inhalation, ingestion and [url=http://www.fibmilano.it]woolrich outlet[/url] dermal) as our exposure, rather than consider each in isolation.
The consequences of skin uptake can be every bit as serious as for inhalation, as the case of Prof. Karen Wetterhahn demonstrates. A minute exposure to dimethyl mercury on her gloved hand resulted in body uptake (due to permeation through the glove) and her untimely death several months later. Furthermore, it is possible for airborne exposure of the skin, for example of the face, to result in contact dermatitis. Airborne contact dermatitis has been well documented in scientific literature and it has been shown that in someone already sensitised it is possible for a reaction to occur at below the legally defined inhalation exposure limit.
So perhaps it is time that those concerned with health and safety and the prevention of damage to health of workers due to chemical exposure [url=http://www.fibmilano.it]woolrich[/url] started to devote more time to the issue of skin exposure and its consequences.
Unfortunately, the way in which such exposure occurs can be complex as can the consequences. The reality is [url=http://www.rtnagel.com/airjordan.php]nike air jordan pas cher[/url] that this is actually far more complex than for inhalation exposure and requires a considerable knowledge of how the skin interacts with the workplace environment, how the skin reacts to contact with chemicals, the nature, extent and location on the body of the contact, and the consequences that can arise from this.
So in answer to the question in the title, all three routes of exposure are important, the relative importance being determined by the chemical and the nature of the exposure. In many cases relative importance will be irrelevant, as it is the total exposure that will determine the potential for damage to health.
相关的主题文章:


[url=http://www.czbysw.com.cn/zl/guestbook.asp]giuseppe z[/url]

[url=http://www.astxx.com/wygkcn_GuestBook.asp]hollister[/url]

[url=http://classic.jotwell.com/welcome-to-jotwells-classics-section/comment-page-1/#comment-75316]Mail Redirection The Modern Nomad's Solution[/url]


The post has been approved 0 times
View user's profile
abercrombie milano Exposure to chemicals, which is
www.luntacunt.fora.pl Forum Index -> Snapshots
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT + 2 Hours  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Post new topic  Reply to topic  


fora.pl - załóż własne forum dyskusyjne za darmo
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2003 phpBB Group
Theme created by Vjacheslav Trushkin
Regulamin