Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 19 March 2007 08:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Karen Hodkin I'm doing a COSHH assessment for a dental practice and they use household cleaning products - I know I have to assess the hazard labelled products, i.e. Bleach but do I have to do anything with the other products i.e. washing-up liquid? Anybody know any good website to get further info on these products?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 19 March 2007 08:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tracey C Hi Karen If you go to a search engine like google and type in the company e.g. Johnson and Johnson find the address and give them a call they will usually fax or post you the safety data sheets. I have done this several times with our cleaners that prefer certain products. I have also got a lot of COSHH info and check sheets if you are interested. Give me a call if you want 0161 909 3462. T
Admin  
#3 Posted : 19 March 2007 08:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By garyh COSHH is of course for Substances Hazardous to Health. Hence, washing up liquid will not be included in the real world. I would make a list of materials like this - list the hazards, briefly describe exposure, conclude it is low risk, then state that a full assessment is not required. If you really do want to assess fully, contact the supplier / manufacturer and ask them foe a safety data sheet which would assist in doing you assessment.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 19 March 2007 08:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Peter Leese Don't forget mercury! Well, if you are going to consider washing up liquid, then of equal risk is the mercury being pulled out of mouths of patients! A pity there are no little smilies on this site.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 19 March 2007 09:25:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian Cook I would disagree with Gary - I would say that washing up liquid could be hazardous - doesn't it cause all sorts of problems for people with sensitive skin (myself included?) - so that would be classed as an irritant?!
Admin  
#6 Posted : 19 March 2007 14:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Packham Washing up liquid can definitely be covered by COSHH, as are ALL substances, depending upon how they are used. The definitions in COSHH of what constitutes a "substance hazardous to health" includes the following: ========== “(e) which, not being a substance falling within sub-paragraphs (a) to (d), because of its chemical or toxicological properties and the way it is used or is present at the workplace creates a risk to health” COSHH Regulation 2 (1) Interpretation ========== Thus even water can be a substance hazardous to health, given sufficient exposure. Actually, water is one of the most common causes of occupational contact dermatitis (wet work). Remember, also, that COSHH is concerned about "control", i.e. about what you do with the substance and not the substance itself. If you mix, dilute or otherwise change the properties of the substance, then you will have to determine whether this changes the risk. Chris
Admin  
#7 Posted : 19 March 2007 14:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By J Knight Hi Folks, I wouldn't under most circumstances carry out an RA for using washing-up liquid, although it does cause irritation for particular people (me included). The thing with COSHH is that you shouldn't think about the substance primarily, your first thought should be about the work to be carried out. It's not so much the detergent which should or should not be assessed, its the task of washing the pots, or whatever you're doing with it. Looking at it this way is on the one hand closer to the intention and spirit of the regs and more likely to lead to a sensible but safe approach to the task, John
Admin  
#8 Posted : 19 March 2007 14:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Raymond Rapp I have always taken the view that normal household products do not constitute a hazardous substance and therefore do not require a COSHH Assessment. I think this is a case of sensible safety management. If others wish to do COSHH Assessments for 'washing up liquid', so be it, but I would prefer to use my time for more pressing issues. Regards
Admin  
#9 Posted : 19 March 2007 14:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By J Knight Hi Raymond, Agree entirely. I was once informed that we had to risk assess washing up liquid following a very nasty incident where somebody drank a cup-full and aspirated on his vomit. He nearly died. However, this was deliberate self-harm by an intelligent person, and if Fairy hadn't been available there is no doubt he would have used any other available means. I refused to either ban(!) or assess washing-up liquid in the circumstances even though the care regulators insisted, and they eventually accepted our reasoning and changed their minds, John
Admin  
#10 Posted : 19 March 2007 15:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By halesowen Baggie Check out the following HSE guidance, go down to page 3 http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg136.pdf
Admin  
#11 Posted : 19 March 2007 15:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Packham At the European Society of Contact Dermatitis conference in Berlin last September two papers were presented showing that wet work, i.e. exposure to water, with and without washing up liquid, detergents, etc., is the largest single cause of occupational contact dermatitis. Is the health and safety profession really suggesting that on the basis of this we can ignore these chemicals? What argument would you then present when a worker develops irritant contact dermatitis from the washing-up liquid and then claims compensation? In fact, wet work is well recognised. For example, in Germany a special regulation (TRGS401) deals with this problem and with the similar problem of damage to the skin from wearing occlusive gloves. I come back to the definition of a substance hazardous to health in the COSHH regulations. When it comes to skin forget risk phrases. There are literally thousands of chemicals capable of causing dermatitis that do not carry a risk phrase. Ignore these at your peril. The HSE inspector almost certainly won't. Chris
Admin  
#12 Posted : 19 March 2007 16:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By J Knight Chris, I quite agree, though I stick by the point that assessing the task is the way forward; this will imply evaluating risk to the individual. By the way, I don't know if you remember but I posted a query late last summer about irritant contact dermatitis caused by water at one of our Care Services. This is just to say thanks for the timely and excellent advice; we have taken steps (PPE & safe system of work) and the problem has resolved, John
Admin  
#13 Posted : 19 March 2007 16:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Pete48 Hazard is not the same thing as risk, is it? I think the point here is that given the environment outlined in the original post, then the message seems to be "keep it simple." I don't think anyone would say ignore it; but some things just do not need writing down. As one who gained a whole two per cent at O level chemistry, (one for my name and one for my exam number), I might not have the confidence to dismiss any substance as low risk without assessment. However, a moments thought and I think I could outline the hazard and risk controls relevant to these household substances as long as they are used as expected when retailed to the public. A few notes in my COSHH assessment file and on to the next and potentially much higher risk.
Admin  
#14 Posted : 19 March 2007 19:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Packham John Many thanks for your kind words. I will always try to help. I always strive to provide objective information based on my concentration on issues pertaining to skin and the (working) environment. I entirely agree with your comments re task not substance. This is why I do not like the name "risk phrase", since what is being referred to is the hazard. The risk only comes when we use the substance. In another thread I suggested that COSHH would have been better named: "Control of Work Done using Substances Hazardous to Health", putting the emphasis on work not substance. Assessing the exposure of the skin in a particular task and the risk that arises therefrom is a much more complex and uncertain process than many assume, however. And identifying the true cause of a possible occupational skin disease offers even more pitfalls for the unwary. On our last course we had a German occupational dermatologist as participant. He agreed that many "diagnoses" by dermatologists were little more than educated guesses! Chris+
Admin  
#15 Posted : 19 March 2007 19:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Andrea Kay Could anyone give me some guidance on how risk and safety phrases were developed. Alternatively, point me in the direction of any relevant documentation. Thankyou in anticipation.... Kind Regards
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.