Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Workplace, chemical exposures

Occupational Physicians, with the exception of the few that see have se a market opportunity and set up EXYPPs, scarcely bother to take initiatives on workplace chemical exposures. [Pg.259]

HS(Gjl67 Biological monitoring m the workplace - a guide to its practical application to chemical exposure... [Pg.576]

EH56 Biological monitoring for chemical exposures in the workplace. [Pg.369]

When organizations focus on the root causes of worker injuries, it is helpful to analyze the manner in which workplace fatalities occur (see Figure 1-4). Although the emphasis of this book is the prevention of chemical-related accidents, the data in Figure 1-4 show that safety programs need to include training to prevent injuries resulting from transportation, assaults, mechanical and chemical exposures, and fires and explosions. [Pg.12]

R. Craig Matthiessen, Estimating Chemical Exposure Levels in the Workplace, Chemical Engineering Progress (April 1986), p. 30. [Pg.88]

The quality of life experienced by people with MCS is shaped, to a great extent, by the level of awareness of environmental health issues where they live and work. Some are recipients of workplace accommodations in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act others are harassed and ostracized at work, or fired from their jobs. Some disabled by chemical exposures in the workplace receive workers compensation the majority of chemical-illness claims are denied. Some cities, schools and other institutions have adopted fragrance-free policies and Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs to reduce chemical barriers and dangers in public places others still resist despite all the prevalence studies and research indicating that MCS is a serious threat to public health. [Pg.11]

Barbara met me in San Francisco for the interview. By the time she arrived her voice was a raspy whisper because of chemical exposures she encountered on her way. Her story illustrates some of the challenges and chemical barriers faced by many people with MCS in their workplaces. [Pg.137]

HFC-134a is a relatively new chemical, and only the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA 1991) has developed a workplace guideline. The AIHA Workplace Environmental Exposure Level (WEEL) of 1,000 ppm is an 8-h time-weighted average. The German MAK and Dutch MAC are also 1,000 ppm (German Research Association 1999 Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment 2000). [Pg.169]

From 6 April 2005, the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulation 2002 has been significantly updated. There is now a new focus on good practice to help employers prevent their employees health being harmed by workplace chemicals, and a change to the way limits are set for exposure to chemicals in the workplace. An outline of the updated regulations is given. [Pg.29]

A number of effects from breathing phenol in air have been reported in humans. Short-term effects reported include respiratory irritation, headaches, and burning eyes. Chronic effects of high exposures included weakness, muscle pain, anorexia, weight loss, and fatigue effects of chronic low-level exposures included increases in respiratory cancer, heart disease, and effects on the immune system. Virtually all of the workplace exposures associated with these effects involved exposures to other chemicals, thus it is difficult to determine whether these are solely due to phenol, or are the result of mixed, multiple, or other chemical exposures. [Pg.25]

In work-aggravated asthma, a worker with preexisting asthma has worsening of asthma symptoms due to exposures in the workplace. These exposures may be irritant chemicals, cold air, or allergens to which the worker was sensitized prior to hire. The diagnosis is made if the asthma was not active within 2 years before the hire date and there is (1) worsening of asthma symptoms on workdays and (2) serial spirometry tests and /or repeat PEER measurements suggesting a work-related pattern. [Pg.177]

Phthalates in general, as well as their substitutes, became large volume workplace chemicals and further ubiquitous environmental contaminants. Their impact on organism s health was relatively intense tested through several exposure experiments ([142, 305]). However, it seems that in general they display low toxicity [305], their effects being recorded only for high dose exposure levels... [Pg.261]

Industrial workers make up the segment of the population that is most vulnerable to chemical injury. To protect them from occupation-related harm, the American Conference of Governmental and Indnstrial Hygienists publishes annually revised threshold limit values (TLVs), guidelines for permissible chemical exposure at the workplace. http //www.acgih.org/Resources/press/HAL.htm... [Pg.202]

TLV refers to concentrations of substances in parts per million or milligrams per cnbic meter in the air to which most workers can be exposed on a daily basis without harm. These values apply to the workplace only. They are not intended as guidelines for ambient air quality standards for the population at large. TLVs should be treated as guidelines only and not as fixed standards. The recommended goal is to minimize chemical exposure in the workplace as much as possible. [Pg.202]

Regarding styrene, the variety of controlled human oral and inhalation studies that relate dose to urinary concentration and the existence of a pharmacokinetic model (Droz and Guillemin 1983) could facilitate interpretation of mandelic acid concentration in urine. A caveat in this regard is that other chemical exposures can produce mandelic acid in urine, such as ethyl benzene, acetophenone, and phenylglycine (ACGIH 1991). Those background sources would be more likely to confound low-level general-population biomarker results than workplace end-of-shift results. [Pg.289]

TLY Threshold Limit Value guidelines suggested by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists to assist industrial hygienists with limiting hazards of chemical exposures in the workplace. [Pg.581]

World Health Organization, Biological Monitoring of Chemical Exposure in the Workplace, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1996. [Pg.423]

The American Industrial Hygiene Association s (AIHA) Workplace Environmental Exposure Level Committee gave HFC-134a an occupational exposure limit (8-hr time-weighted average) of 4,250 mg/m3 (AIHA 1991, as cited in European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) 1995). [Pg.170]


See other pages where Workplace, chemical exposures is mentioned: [Pg.547]    [Pg.112]    [Pg.547]    [Pg.112]    [Pg.2169]    [Pg.573]    [Pg.573]    [Pg.58]    [Pg.156]    [Pg.31]    [Pg.2]    [Pg.12]    [Pg.257]    [Pg.171]    [Pg.171]    [Pg.282]    [Pg.351]    [Pg.169]    [Pg.44]    [Pg.46]    [Pg.242]    [Pg.32]    [Pg.25]    [Pg.134]    [Pg.22]    [Pg.496]    [Pg.322]    [Pg.765]    [Pg.1113]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.2 , Pg.21 , Pg.25 , Pg.29 , Pg.30 , Pg.55 , Pg.56 , Pg.61 , Pg.62 , Pg.63 , Pg.105 , Pg.109 , Pg.118 , Pg.137 , Pg.186 , Pg.192 , Pg.200 , Pg.210 , Pg.228 , Pg.230 , Pg.231 , Pg.232 ]




SEARCH



Chemical Exposure

Workplace Exposure

© 2024 chempedia.info