Gavin Stairs on wed 8 jan 03
here)
At 09:11 PM 06/01/2003 -0600, Karl wrote:
>The topic that won't go away...
>...The point being that there's no point to the endless hysteria into
>which these topics appear to be doomed. All you need to know is on the
>MSDS, and to not wallow in your work, eat your work, smoke (anything)
>while working and to follow one's natural anti-Darwinian inclinations by
>avoiding being downwind of anything dusty or fumey as a matter of
>course....and, of course, to bathe. ...
Hi Karl,
Nice to hear your dulcet, reasoned tones again. These base level common
sense precautions are all things we now take for granted, but were unheard
of a scant few years ago. The MSDS is the most recent of these personal
protection practices, and it's only a couple of decades old. There are
plenty of people still living, though often with diminished capacities, who
would have laughed at your list while they were working in industry. And
there are still no doubt a few smokers who haven't heard about the
synergistic damage of smoking and other damaging practices.
While we're glad you will be outliving all the rest of us, we are still
struggling to get it all right. Lead was a hazard virtually all of our
ancestors lived with for several generations, and it was only recognized as
a true hazard recently. Does that mean it would be right for to us to
ignore current knowledge about this risk? Smoking was once thought to be a
health promoting habit. Do you still think so?
Just because a risk is not acute does not mean it is meaningless or should
be ignored. I would be grateful if you would permit the rest of us to
struggle along in our ignorance, trying to make the best of our limited
grasp of the truth, without being flamed for it. Please simply delete any
mentions of risks you deem unworthy.
Thanks, Gavin
Vince Pitelka on wed 8 jan 03
here)
> The topic that won't go away.........
No surprise there. Your tirade is directed at the general level of
potter/artist paranoia about dangers in the studio, and I have to agree with
you about that there is a great deal of individual hysteria and
corresponding over-the-top warnings about the great studio toxic threat. As
you say, it just takes solid safety precautions and common sense to keep the
studio safe. Of course, in order to LEARN about those materials and safety
precautions, it is necessary for this subject to not go away. These things
need to be repeated ad infinitum.
You seem to direct your tirade at our resident Clayart toxicologist Edouard
Bastarache, and if so, your condemnation is entirely misplaced. If
anything, Edouard has been a voice of reason and moderation in showing us
scientific documentation proving that most ceramic materials are not
dangerous in studio use. Do you really believe that your years of studio
and lab experience are somehow more valid than that?
> Look, I'm not dead or even in slightly poor health because of my work,
which
> has to do with tons of these vile substances of which the blithering
idiots speak.
> On the contrary, who's ever been more alive.
Hmmmm. How do you define "more alive?" In your case, does it have
something to do with self-satisfied wallowing in arrogant posturing and
insulting diatribes?
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Home - vpitelka@dtccom.net
615/597-5376
Work - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 ext. 111, fax 615/597-6803
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
bnsaijim on thu 9 jan 03
here)
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 21:11:57 -0600
From: Karl Platt
Subject:
The topic that won't go away.........
"physicochemical characteristics such as molecular weight
and
hydrophilic and lipophilic characteristics of the material.
Altough small molecular weight lipophilic compounds can be
extensively absorbed, volatilization from unoccluded skin
tends
to reduce their absorption."
>"e plomb inorganique est absorb=E9 par les poumons et le
tractus
>gastro-intestinal.
>L'absorption cutan=E9e est g=E9n=E9ralement faible......"
Qua, qua, qua, qua, qua.
What the hell does this have to do with potting in the 21st
Century?
Less than nothing.
"Having fooled around with the most commonly used ceramic
raw
materials for more than 35 years, I do not think any of them
present
a threat of poisoning following skin contact."
Agreed.
"I will send this information to a friend who is an
occupational hygienist
and who recently obtained a masters degree in
toxicology...."
", organophosphates and chlorinated hydrocarbons
(pesticides), cyanides, amino and aromatic nitro compounds,
mercury, tetraethyl lead... A good starting point would be
if the chemical has an ACGIH Skin notation..."
Say what?! Does this have something to do with why old glaze
smells funny?
Why shy from lead silicates (stable enough to amuse the
archaeologists of the next
civilization, they are), potassium bichromate (lovely
brushed over soft white),
antimony (Enamel White), selenium (Pink, Red, Orange, or
barium (buttery matte, high
chemical durability, fusion). I admit to having used some
tons of these materials
and, well, have all my teeth, all my neurons, a very sturdy
heart, robust luings, I
don't drool uncontrollably nor forget what I just said as a
result of having made
batch.
On the contrary. It's hard not to look a little bewildered
in the face of tortuous
polysyllabic medispeak that gets bandied about as though it
were meaningful because
the words were spelled correctly in the midst of a lot of
pedantic claptrap with
footnotes from nowhere relevant to what you or I did this
afternoon -- even in the
very
abstract.
Any modern studio worker who ever took ill from raw
materials in a ceramic or glass
studio did so because they were stupid -- and they are
*extreeeeemly* rare.. Fact.
Anyone who got sick licked brushes, worked in a pigpen,
smoked in the batch room,
smoked while glazing stained glass or picked their nose
while dipping raw glaze
daily for a decade or something else similarly dumb in the
extreme. Most people
reading this list are working at an extremely limited scale
where the concentration
raw
material is exceedingly small. It could seem a lot while
standing at a gram balance
making-up a recipe copped from Clayart. Although in context
it's not like working at
a mine, the frit factory, a color house, a beer bottle mill
or a window plant. Places
where huindreds of tons of raw materials might pass in a
day. Tons of things like
SiLiCa (insert startled *gasp* and terse diminished minor
9th chord here).
Look, I'm not dead or even in slightly poor health because
of my work, which has to
do with tons of these vile substances of which the
blithering idiots speak. On the
contrary, who's ever been more alive.
The point being that there's no point to the endless
hysteria into which these topics
appear to be doomed. All you need to know is on the MSDS,
and to not wallow in
your work, eat your work, smoke (anything) while working and
to follow one's natural
anti-Darwinian inclinations by avoiding being downwind of
anything dusty or
fumey as a matter of course....and, of course, to bathe.
Normal people practicing reasonable hygiene have more to
fear from a sneeze.
KPP -- wishing the that the blithering hysterics would go
back in their respective
holes and leave us to our honorable and healthy work.
bnsaijim on thu 9 jan 03
here)
Karl Platt,
>What the hell does this have to do with potting in the 21st
Century? Less than nothing.
It has everything to do with one's ability to do pottery far
into the 21st centurey.
>"Having fooled around with the most commonly used ceramic
raw
materials for more than 35 years, I do not think any of them
present a threat of poisoning following skin contact."
>Agreed.
also.
", organophosphates and chlorinated hydrocarbons
(pesticides)...A good starting point would be
if the chemical has an ACGIH Skin notation..." Say what?!
Does this have something to do with why old glaze smells
funny?
No. The original question to which I responded asked what
chemicals might be absorbed by the skin. It was a plea for
general information to help understand the process and how
to obtain this information.
>On the contrary. It's hard not to look a little bewildered
in the face of tortuous
polysyllabic medispeak...
Glad you are sound and healthy. Hope you enjoy continued
health for many more years. Perhaps it's just luck. I'd be
glad (as would any one of the other writers, I'm sure) to
explain and elaborate for anyone "bewildered" by the
language. In fact, I tend to oversimplify (which is why I
get corrected by Mr. B on some detail or other) since I
figure most readers of the List do not have a lot of
chemistry, toxicology, etc.
>Any modern studio worker who ever took ill from raw
materials in a ceramic or glass
studio did so because they were stupid -- and they are
*extreeeeemly* rare.. Fact.
Is it? I would suspect minimal data compared to the
industrial trades given the nature of most potter's lives-
small scale, solitary, inconsistent access to healthcare...
Any reporting would be at the discretion and ambition of the
physician, assuming he's sharp enough to realize that a
potter's given condition is/was "work-related".
>Anyone who got sick licked brushes... smoked in the batch
room,
smoked while glazing stained glass or picked their nose
while dipping raw glaze
daily for a decade... Most people
reading this list are working at an extremely limited scale
where the concentration
raw
material is exceedingly small... it's not like working at
a mine...
Gee, and what about those "dumb folks" who simply weren't
taught proper work practices? In some cases the limitted
quantities do truly limit one's dose. In other cases this
is not applicable. They may not get immediately sick.
There's this thing called chronic exposure, which I believe
you alluded to. It means your exposure in the workplace
potentially combines with any number of exposures/lifestyle
factors to get you sick later on....
Just because one does not see industrial-grade incident
statistics does not mean zero risk. Your "data" is
anecdotal. The truth is, only limitted data is available on
the small-scale studio potter. In light of that we are
forced to extrapolate from industrial studies and other
sources...
>Look, I'm not dead or even in slightly poor health because
of my work, which has to
do with tons of these vile substances
You would like to extrapolate your experience to the entire
population. You may not be the physiological norm. Without
knowing your personal data, not that I have any desire to,
perhaps your exposures have not caught up with you yet.
Would you deny the incidence of musculo-skeletal disorders
simply because you don't have any? Seems to me in the 10
months or so on this list this has been a frequent topic-
sore backs, carpal tunnel, etc... Unfortunately this too
would be considered "anecdotal" as no valid study has been
made.
>All you need to know is on the MSDS,
Bull crap. At least half of the MSDS out there are
worthless drivel watered down, if not written completely by
corporate lawyers who are simply looking to CYA. Here's
where you find either your hysteria or simply "Trade Secret"
or N/A.
>and to not wallow in
your work, eat your work, smoke (anything) while
working...and, of course, to bathe.
All true. Hygiene is the number one simplest protective
measure one can take. I've said this in previous posts, as
have others.
>"Blithering idiots", "blithering hysterics"...
Seems the best response you can come up with is name calling
and whining. There's probably more combined years of
experience and education responding to these queries than
your years on the planet.
I believe this is an open, though moderated, forum. None of
those providing toxicology information launched into
unsolicited lectures- these were in response to questions.
While it may not interest you it obviously does others.
Most email programs have filtering functions, or perhaps you
need to discover a small button, usually located to the
right on one's keyboard, called the "Delete" key...
Sincerely,
James Stone, MSPH, CIH, CSP
Industrial Hygienist
| |
|
