Please look at the information that has come out in the last few years.
There is no reason if people are wearing their goggles why contact lenses
should be banned.  In fact, banning them may create additional hazardous
consequences.

http://pubs.acs.org/hotartcl/chas/97/mayjun/con.html

Barbara

Barbara O'Keeffe
Director, Environmental Health & Safety
University of Texas at Tyler
email:   bokeeffe**At_Symbol_Here**uttyler.edu
voice:  903-566-7011
fax:      903-565-5829
web site: www.uttyler.edu/safety/


             Phil Anderson
                                                              To
             Sent by: DCHAS-L          DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
             Discussion List                                            cc
                                                              Subject
                                       Re: [DCHAS-L] Visorgogs

             11/12/2004 07:18
             AM

             Please respond to
               Phil Anderson
             




OK, I've heard enough!  Chemical eyewear is simple.  It must protect the
eyes in all cases of exposure.  So this means that it must be chemical
splash protective.  This means GOGGLES.  Nothing else is acceptable.

The ANSI standard is for all forms of eye protection, and the Z87.1
standard really indicates that it is intended to be protective eyewear,
and not that it is (even) all that effective against a specific hazard.
But in THIS area we need to have GOGGLES that also meet the Z87.1
standard, which means that they are not simply "decorative" eyewear.

We would be far ahead of the game were we to see separate dstandards for
different types of eye protection, this is certain, but the fact is that
there are/would be plenty of standards available, and almost noplace on
the glasses to place the coded seal.  In fact, how many USERS can/could
tell us what the correct seal mark should be?  Almost none, and it will
remain so forever. The selection of protective eyewear is in the hands
of the users, yes, but in our hands as well.  And it is OUR
responsibility to select the correct type of protection, and inform the
users what to use.  If this makes it difficult or not is not an issue.

If we are going to get upset over ANYTHING let it be contact lenses.
They should NEVER be worn while handling chemicals to which there is
even a chance of exposure.  But people do it all the time.

Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of
Gordon Miller
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:36 AM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Visorgogs

I ran into them in the 1970s and it's interesting to see they're still
around.

I agree with other commenters that the Z87.1 mark should have a suffix
letter or letters to denote intended use(s). It will add costs for
manufacturers to design the markings and include them in the assembly
process.

The bottom of the wraparound lens does open a gap, as has been
mentioned. I'd see these as almost being the filtering facepieces of
protective eyewear, easy to wear and popular, but not thoroughly
protective.

Gordon Miller
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
P.O. Box 808  (L-379)
Livermore, California 94550
(925) 423-8036
Fax (925) 422-5176
miller22**At_Symbol_Here**llnl.gov

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post