Posted By The toecap I stand to be corrected but surely the coshh assessment is there to prove that the measures you have in place demonstrate you have been duley diligent in proving it doesn't constitue a danger

Posted By Chris Packham How do you define a substance hazardous to health? COSHH states that it can be any substance depending upon its toxicological and chemical properties and the way it is present or used at the workplace. (See regulation 2(e)) Thus irrespective of what appears on the safety data sheet you need to include ALL chemicals in your COSHH assessment. Of course, many you can rule out immediately, either due to their limited toxicity or limited exposure, but you cannot ignore them. After all, wet work, i.e. exposure to water, is the most common cause of occupational contact dermatitis. Remember also that WELs only refer to inhalation exposure. It is perfectly possible to be below the WEL and to elicit a contact dermatitis reaction due to airborne exposure, e.g. to the face. When it comes to skin exposure you need to look beyond the MSDS to what you are actually using in the workplace and the hazards that this represents. These can be very different from those on the safety data sheet for the individual products you have brought into the workplace. Relying upon risk phrases can result in risk assessments that are simply wrong and in working practices that (a) would be putting your workforce at risk and (b) represent non-compliance with COSHH. Chris

Posted By MP Just out of interest, what is the preparation? MP

Posted By Chris Packham Geoff I didn't think it was Friday! Chris

Posted By Chris Packham Geoff I can understand your feeling. My problem is that as someone who has concentrated on skin problems in the workplace now for nearlly 30 years, I still see situations where people have simply not recognised some of the basic facts that I keep expounding on this forum. (It can be incredibly frustrating when people just don't want to face up to reality because it doesn't fit their pre-conceived ideas.) Take the case of a food processing plant with 200 workers and 20 cases of dermatitis, many of which were sufficiently serious that they were off work (10 % of workforce!). HSE jumping all over the employer. No chemicals with risk phrases in that workplace. Causes of dermatitis were an extremely cold working environment (3-5 deg C), very low humidity, hands either wet or in occlusive gloves for most of the working day and frequent hand washing. Client had simply assumed as no risk phrases, then no problem! Incidentally, I ran the scenario through COSHH essentials. You get zero risk! This is just one example. I could give you many more. Chris

Posted By Chris Packham Chris The problem is that you cannot separate environmental and chemical effects when considering skin. For example, increases in temperature, and especially humidity, will increase the rate at which chemicals penetrate the skin, and hence the potential for systemic effects. Low temperature and humidity will reduce skin barrier properties, making the skin more susceptible to irritant contact dermatitis. When considering risks from workplace exposure of the skin we need always to take a holistic approach. Even psychosomatic elements must be included, particularly when investigating a suspected case of occupational skin disease. Chris