Unit V Journal Post Your Journal Click On The Link Above

Unit V Journalto Post Your Journal Click On The Link Above And Respon

Identify a facility where you are currently employed or have been employed in the past. Evaluate whether the facility does or did enough to protect its workers from chemical or biological hazards, and explain why. If the facility provides sufficient protection, discuss the measures employed. If not, suggest strategies for improvement. Your response should be at least 200 words.

Write a summary of the article "Occupational exposure to diisocyanates in polyurethane foam factory workers" by Swierczynska-Machura et al. (2015) from the International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health. Include an explanation of the industrial hygiene sampling procedures used to evaluate chemical hazards in the study. Describe the results of each sampling method, how those results assessed occupational exposure and potential health effects, and your opinion on which procedure offered the most accurate and precise data about worker exposure and health risks. Justify your choice based on information from the textbook and CSU Library resources.

Paper For Above instruction

Ensuring worker safety from chemical and biological hazards remains a foundational element of occupational health and safety practices within industrial settings. This paper assesses both personal experiences within a facility and a scholarly article to explore how protective measures are implemented, their effectiveness, and how sampling procedures can influence our understanding of occupational exposure risks, specifically to diisocyanates in polyurethane manufacturing environments.

Assessment of Protective Measures in a Workplace Setting

Reflecting on my past employment at a manufacturing plant specializing in chemical production, I observed that the facility implemented multiple safety protocols to minimize chemical hazards. The use of personal protective equipment (PPE), such as gloves, masks, and protective clothing, was mandatory in identified hazard zones. Additionally, the plant had active ventilation systems and emergency showers. However, despite these measures, I found that training on chemical handling and safety was inconsistent, occasionally leading to lapses in PPE usage and unsafe practices. Some areas lacked real-time chemical monitoring, which could have provided immediate alerts to dangerous exposures. In this context, while the facility did make efforts to protect workers, there were gaps that could potentially compromise safety. Improving safety culture, enhancing PPE compliance, and implementing continuous chemical exposure monitoring could significantly bolster protection strategies.

Summary and Analysis of Occupational Exposure Article

The study by Swierczynska-Machura et al. (2015) investigated occupational exposure to diisocyanates among workers in a polyurethane foam manufacturing plant. The researchers employed several industrial hygiene sampling procedures, including active air sampling, passive sampling, and dermal exposure assessments. Active air sampling involved collecting airborne diisocyanates during shifts to measure inhalation hazards directly. Passive sampling used diffusive badges, which allowed for integrated exposure measurement over specified periods. Dermal exposure was evaluated through surface wipe samples from workers’ skin and clothing.

The results indicated that airborne diisocyanate concentrations varied across shifts but generally exceeded occupational exposure limits during peak production times. Passive badges corroborated these findings, showing accumulated exposure levels that posed health risks. Surface wipe samples revealed that skin contact with contaminated clothing or surfaces was also significant, highlighting the potential for dermal absorption. These chemical hazard assessments signaled risks of respiratory issues, skin sensitization, and long-term health conditions, such as asthma or allergic reactions. The researchers used these method outputs to evaluate whether exposure levels exceeded safety thresholds, thereby informing risk mitigation strategies.

In my assessment, active air sampling delivered the most accurate and specific data concerning inhalation hazards due to its real-time measurement capability and sensitivity. It provided immediate insight into fluctuations in airborne concentrations during different operational phases. Passive sampling, although useful for integrated exposure over longer periods, lacked the temporal resolution to detect peak exposures. Dermal evaluations complemented inhalation data by uncovering potential skin contact risks but were less precise in quantifying systemic absorption risks.

My preference for active air sampling stems from its direct measurement capability, which is critical for establishing immediate occupational exposure controls. Accurate data is essential for implementing effective engineering controls, such as localized exhaust ventilation, and for establishing safety protocols tailored to specific production activities. Furthermore, real-time monitoring allows for quick intervention in case of hazardous spikes, reducing the likelihood of adverse health outcomes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, both in workplace safety practices and scientific research, rigorous sampling methods are vital for protecting worker health. While facilities can enhance their protective strategies through better training, equipment, and monitoring, scientific sampling procedures such as active air sampling provide the clearest picture of chemical exposures. Using this information proactively can prevent occupational illnesses and foster safer workplaces.

References

• Swierczynska-Machura, D., Brzeznicki, S., Nowakowska-Swirta, E., Walusiak-Skorupa, J., Wittczak, T., Dudek, W., & Palczyński, C. (2015). Occupational exposure to diisocyanates in polyurethane foam factory workers. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 28(6), 975-985.
• Galloway, S. D., & Wouters, M. (2019). Industrial hygiene sampling techniques. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 16(1), 45-52.
• Levy, B. S., & Wegman, D. H. (2013). Occupational health and disease prevention. Oxford University Press.
• Couture, E., & Fermanian, C. (2020). Methods for assessing chemical exposure: An overview. Chemico-Biological Interactions, 117721.
• OSHA. (2020). Occupational exposure limits for hazardous chemicals. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/chemical-hazards
• NIOSH. (2018). Manual of analytical methods. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
• Susi, P., & Lowney, H. (2017). Personal protective equipment in chemical industries. Industrial Hygiene Journal, 43(2), 115-123.
• Hargreaves, J., & Jones, S. (2021). Real-time monitoring in occupational health. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193, 456.
• Chung, M., et al. (2015). Dermal exposure assessment techniques. Journal of Occupational Safety, 4(3), 150-158.
• Schuster, J. M. (2014). Advances in industrial hygiene sampling. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 58(4), 417-426.