Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Am I the only one who feels a little uncomfortable that the contents of the HSE report do not quite match the press releases?
Reading the report there is no clear evidence for either being the source - only for both being potentially responsible. The releases however, including the HSE's, seem to indicate that the likelihood is Merial even though no specific reason for this statement can be found, at least from my scanning, in the report itself.
The report is so brief however that one has to ask why it should have been published so quickly with little firm findings.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By mrs.seed
I suggest the report being published so quickly is pressure from number 10. with our prime minister cancelling his holiday because of this, he obviously wants it to be seen as if some-thing is being done quickly - maybe he wants to get back to his holiday!
From what I have heard so far it seem that they cant find evidence of breaches in either so are assuming it was 'human error'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
To alleviate political pressure and possibly start to deflect potential liability from HM Gov.
Regards Adrian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
I suggest you read "Ten Questions About Human Error: A New View of Human Factors and System Safety" by Sidney Decker. There are some thought provoking views on human error.
Regards Adrian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Adrian
It is a good bet as it is reckoned 94% of accidents are down ultimately to human error.
But am I stupid - How can there be no breach of bio-security if a person was able to leave the laboratory with contaminated clothes/footwear/tools etc etc?
H&S are looking poor cousins to politics and the real cause is likely to be fuzzed out of the discussion.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By garyh
Is it just me but why is HSE involved when F&M is pretty harmless to humans? Surely DEFRA or EA should lead??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jonathan Breeze Gary, Sean Fraser asked the sake question on: http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...um=1&thread=29827&page=1So it's not just you. The answer is a breach in bio-security for one disease might highlight breaches for other diseases they hold which are dangerous to humans (e.g. CJD, Bubonic Plague etc.) That said, I have no information as to what the labs hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Because these laboratories also contain cat 4 human zoonoses as well as the cat 4 animal pathogens.
The breach could just as easily have been far more serious to humans.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jonathan Breeze
Bob, can you give some examples of Cat 4 Zoonoses for the uninitiated, or would that be alarmist?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rob T
Sorry guys - there are only 2 Cat 4 level labs in the country (Porton Down being one) and the other isn't in this area.
Cat 4 is the highest risk i.e. Ebola,Marburg, SmallPox etc.
Unless there is a catastrophic event, these labs are almost impenetrable with air locks, showers, BA, double layering etc.etc. Please don't worry about that sort of level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
I am on my limits here but my view is that anthrax is strictly a cat 4 zoonosis as it it primarily a disease of lower vertabrates that also can affect humans.
I agree with Rob T that this is not what happened here and such labs wrt humans are not involved but I think the HSE are trying to establish if there are any lessons to be learned for all such high security bio-hazard establishents. I personally have no issue with this. It is the seeming statements made by spokespersons to the press and the lack of evidence for the press etc assertions that concern me and hence the HSE reputation for impartiality.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jonathan Breeze
Thanks Rob T, your clarification and correction is always appreciated.
Bob, I must admit that I too have felt 'unease' at the lack of evidence in current HSE statements, but the same was said following initial statements with the Buncefield & Greyrigg incidents.
So I think we need to wait a bit for the full picture to emerge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
Anthrax is cat 3. Cat 4 is a disease with epidemic potential and with no known treatment.
Regards Adrian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Many thanks Adrian - it was an informative diversion:-)
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GT
Bob,
Not strictly my field (excuse the pun) but I am sure I heard it intimated by the media that the release maybe through the waste disposal systems or drainage??
Anyone other forum members heard this?
Regards
GT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Yes, I heard this as well but bearing in mind that the Merial site is but one corner of the overall Pirbright site and the IAH is the remaining 75% approx one wonders how this relates. Merial also discharge only through the IAH effluent system.
I wonder if this is going to come down to either inadequate contract/lease arrangements where the drain maintenance was overlooked or a case where the organization charged with maintenance decides that certain parts belong to somebody else without proper checking.
A third alternative is possibly that the procedures of each company were good in themselves but there was a mismatch at the interface of the final waste treatment.
Of course it still is possible that the drains were not at fault and the HSE have yet to discover the ultimate cause. Politically it is probably best if no conclusive evidence is found against either lab.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ddraigice
OK, have I missed something? A few posts here have said that the HSE report and press release are biased. I cant see it. The report I have seen does not mention Merial without mentioning IAH. Of course, the other press releases may do but it seems unfair to claim bias on the part of th original enquiry.
OK, I read it late last night in between a glass or two while listening to Tom Waits but I don't think that addled my brain. I would think that any bias would be swooped upon by any lawyer and it wouldnt be just left to the IOSH chat pages to highlight any pro-government agenda. Happy to be pointed in the direction of the bias in the report....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
dd
The report itself is I agree very balanced but as I said it is the press releases that are spinning the information. Even the release on the HSE site seems to imply something not contained in the actual report text.
This was my concern.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.