Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Ian D
I have issued advice for lab staff not to wear contact lenses in the laboratory, the company will pay for prescription safety glasses. This is due to chemical splashes being difficult to treat i.e washing the eye out and that a chemical splash or vapours may well cause the contact lenses to fuse onto the eye.
Has anyone got any information that can confirm my suspision, any references etc, as this advice is being questioned.
regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bryn Maidment
Ian
I think you need to take a step back and look at the problem again. If there is a risk of chemical splashes to eyes, all staff should be issued with the protective glasses.
As for the fusing of contact lenses that's another urban myth!
Regards
Bryn
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
- - - and surely prescription safety spectacles are not suitable for chemical splash (ie don't meet EN166-3) so you would have to wear goggles or face shield over the prescription specs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian D
Thanks Bryn
All laboratory staff do wear safety specs and the ones with contact lenses wear safety specs over the top. I agree that it is a myth, but there's a problem with chemical absorbtion into soft lenses that are generally made up of 40-70% water.
Thanks again
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Diane Warne
In response to Jack, prescription safety spectacles ARE available that comply with EN166.
However - my opinion is that anyone in an eye hazard area should be wearing eye protection in any case; the risk of eye injury is thus minimised. The question is then whether a person who gets an eye splash despite wearing eye protection, and is wearing contact lenses, is at greater risk. Some people do assert that contact lens wearers are more at risk from chemical splashes to the eye, but I've never seem any firm evidence to support this. As has been mentioned, the idea that lenses can fuse to the eye is a myth.
The modern soft lens is a very thin film of high-water-content plastic floating on the tear film. In the event of a chemical splash to the eye, an eyewash would wash it straight off. If it didn't get washed off immediately it can just be pulled off the eye very easily in a second, and washing could then be recommenced. Even if the lens did not get removed from the eye quickly, would the eye be exposed to the chemical more than a "bare" eye would have been? I very much doubt it.
My priority is to persuade all workers that they should wear eye protection in labs. Compliance is not likely to be improved if contact lenses have to take the trouble to remove their lenses and put prescription specs on before they work in the lab - and as I've said, I can see no safety benefits from doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
Yes prescription specs are available to comply with EN 166S (ie general purpose) and EN 166 F (ie Impact Grade 2) but it is my understanding they are not available for EN 166-3 (ie the grade for protecting against chemical splash). If I have got this wrong I would be interesed in knowing who supplies prescription specs which meet EN 166-3.
Jack
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian D
Thanks Diane you are correct in your assumptions
The standard PPE for all laboratories is safety specs, if they are involved with higer risk work they upgrade to safety goggles
The question was are they at an increased risk from wearing contact lenses behind the safety glasses then not wearing them, the answer I agree with you is NO.
(I have also had this confirmed witht he eye clinics at the two local hospitals)
As for prescrition safety specs the option we use states that they "fully" compy with BSEN 166
Thank you all for your input
Regards
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Diane Warne
Sorry Jack, I missed the fact that you were referring to "3" rated eye protection. Like you, I'm unaware of prescription safety specs with a chemical resistance rating.
In a normal lab environment the chemical hazards are not substantial ones, so we don't bother with eyewear that is specifically marked as "chemical" resistant. We believe that basic safety specs with grade 1 or 2 impact resistance are OK to control residual risks in our labs, including providing an adequate physical barrier against splashes with the chemicals likely to be encountered (which will generally be small quantities.) If nasty chemical hazards are present we would recommend goggles, not specs.
I believe prescription goggles are available that conform to EN166-3 (Bolle make them I think, and maybe Dalloz too?)
Many goggles can of course can be worn over normal prescription glasses, but I still wouldn't make the contact lens wearers change to glasses in the lab!
Regards
Diane
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.