Are you looking for work then? If not, what is the reason for your topic? LB

What is the issue? If doing a COSHH assessment the assessor should know what he is doing, and logically that includes the name and any commonly used alternate names for the substance being assessed. And once assessed, the assessment should be presented in a manner that can be properly understood by all of those who may need to refer to it, and should thus include those commonly used alternate names if they too are in use in the establishment or referred to by users. Communication skills are important in COSHH and other RAs. If those who rely on them cannot find their way through the technical fog then those assessments are unlikely to serve their purpose and need to be revised as a matter of urgency. PS. I like a little vinegar on my chips, but even a splash of concentrated acetic acid would be way too much - I would hope someone would make absolutely certain that the two were properly labelled in a way that is clear and easy to understand in order to communicate the vastly different properties.

There will indeed be confusion if you insist on calling it ethanoic acid! If you want to communicate the risks of using a material you need to refer to it by the name the user knows it by. Materials are often known by a range of different names (including informal abbreviations) and then you may need to do some careful cross-referencing - for example if the name the user knows the material by is different from the one on the msds.

Health and Safety Witney, Could you please call the UN Economic Commission for Europe and tell them that their "ADR09 European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road" is wrong. Phone: +41 (0) 22 917 44 44 ADR09 clearly states Acetic Acid Solution, UN 2789 or UN 2790 as the proper name. There is no reference to Ethanoic Acid. Therefore any company transporting Acetic Acid, and call it Ethanoic Acid on their vehicles Placarding, are committing an offence under the Carriage Reg’s 09.

Health & Safety Witney, are you being serious or merely taking the Diaminomethanal? I think that while IUPAC nomenclature must be used among among professional chemists and in learnéd journals, there is a serious risk of losing public support if you impose such a decision. Just look at the metric martyrs.

Yes, I read that after I posted, but it depends on which source of reference you choose (no I don't have the IUPAC book to hand). While it does somewhat ruin the joke, it emphasises the point that IUPAC nomenclature is not as simple a solution as initially proposed.