Hi,

What would happen if a customer walks into one of these salons or nail bars and then suffers severe breathing issues leading to fatality?

I walked into one salon last weekend and could hardly breathe yet there were children of different age groups and the elderly waiting. The air was so thick and foul I wonder if anyone remembers any fatality linked to such polluted indoor air ever. 

It may not be too long before such an event is recorded and yet I don't seem to recall ever reading anything associated with this industry previously. This include nail bars too. Who regulates this industry? CIEH? Local Authority? HSE? 

It may be helpful to provide some guidance to this industry to avoid an accident fatality.

The HSE website has some free info on the issues you raise. They also did some research.....;;

http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr623.htm

Salons and nail bars would come under the jurisdiction of the Local Authority with respect to H&S legislation

As others have stated plenty of guidance to these activities is available

As a workplace the Health and Safety at Work Act definitely applies to nail salons and the like.  The HSE has guidance on the sector including http://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/industry/beauty.htm and as said salons come under local authority jurisdiction rather than the HSE.

From what I understand about nail bars, I would also seriously question the safety of some of the techniques they use, and if/how these are regulated at all.

“Common sense” tells us if something smells bad it must be bad. “Common sense” is, of course, wrong. You can’t smell asbestos or detect low oxygen levels, but both a real killers. On the other hand at times I have spent days, trying to reassure people that the smell from newly fitted carpet tiles is not a serious risk. Ask them for their risk assessment under COSHH.

Firstly with regard to 'common sense' I rather like Prof. Brian Cox's statement in his book Human Universe that 'Common sense is completely worthless and irrelevant when investigating reality.'

With regard to hairdressing salons the most common form of occupational ill health is contact dermatitis to, of all things, to excessive contact with water (exacerbated by the presence of detergents) and the wearing of thin, occlusive gloves resulting in irritant contact dermatitis. Then there are the sensitisers such as para-phenylene diamine, a notorious sensitiser found in hair dyes, particularly the ones that are for black hair. There are numerous other chemicals in the various treatments, etc. that are known to be hazardous, but how many small hairdressing salons with either have looked at the relevant safety data sheets or having done so will have understood the contents and taken the appropriate action?

The masks they use may provide some protection against the particulates but usually are totally inefective against the solvent vapour, usually acetone, that is used in the nail polish/adhesive remover. Also the thin, single-use (??) gloves provide only a few seconds protection before the acetone will have permeated and, with the hyperhydrated skin inside the glove, will absorb this more quickly than normal. Yet it is often this type of glove that the instruction documentation indicates they should wear.

Chris

As general rule in this country things are permitted until there is evidence that they cause some harm and only then are rules introduced to regulate them. As result of this regulators are playing catch up with new products and services.  The alternative (which some people seem to be endorsing) is that everything that is new is banned until it is “proven” safe by the government or some similar central body. This is a long opened ended process and of course holds back innovation etc.

Robens in his report noted this was an issue and therefore he placed the onus on innovators to assess the risk from innovation in work practices themselves. He did not call it risk assessment but that was what he was talking about. Unfortunately too many people are waiting for “rules” to emerge from the HSE and other regulators rather than doing their own risk assessment.