What everyday objects can pose a danger to our health and safety?

[mgb_phys]

Doors...
The weird thing is that it turns out that the doors ARE the most dangerous "tools" where I work (and I work at a research institute where we handle cryogenic liquids, high voltages/currents, radioactive samples, nasty chemicals etc).

Me too - we had a nice old quaint little lab in a 150 year old building, with real mercury barometers until HSE found us.
They insisted on replacing the glass in our glass panel doors because it didn't meet standards, then it was decided that the replacement solid doors were dangerous because you could hit someone, so they put back the original doors with all the panels except one replaced by wood. In a university of course this took most of a year.


My best story, I was working in a government lab that handles really dangerous stuff ( smoking crater dangerous), the management of the lab was going to be handed over to a private contractor so it suddenly had to meet safety standards (the government is exempt!)
We had to have an extra fire door fitted to our upper story lab - which they did.
But the building exterior was still government managed and they didn't have to fit the fire escape.
So fire exit door -> 20 foot drop.
So we locked the door and put tape across it, "Do Not Use" Signs etc...
Next safety audit = can't have a locked/blocked fire door.
As far as I know it's still there.

 

[wolram]

One time i had to change a motor on one of the machines, to change the motor one has to wriggle inside it through a door at floor level, there are all manner of things in the way, any how when extracting my self half in half out my hand slipped and i caught my back.
The accident report said, hand slipped on floor hurt back.

 

[~christina~]

You mean - candy like a dangerous everyday object?

Yes, that candy that does this =>http://www.thegreenhead.com/imgs/voodoo-knife-holder.jpg

I am just back from my dentist BTW. But it is not that bad now. Somehow the worst time was in my University times, I wonder if it was not because of chemicals.

That's good but:
oh no... is it because of improper handling of chemicals? (starting to think about the hazards of lab and if it's safe to pursue a chemistry occupation*)

 

[kingdomof]

Yes, that candy that does this =>http://www.thegreenhead.com/imgs/voodoo-knife-holder.jpg

That's good but:
oh no... is it because of improper handling of chemicals? (starting to think about the hazards of lab and if it's safe to pursue a chemistry occupation*)

What's wrong? A little cancer scaring you? Hah!

 

[Borek]

is it because of improper handling of chemicals? (starting to think about the hazards of lab and if it's safe to pursue a chemistry occupation*)

Don't compare safety standards in the contemporary lab in US and in the lab back in eighties in Poland.

My feeling is that most of these todays lab regulations save 1 life in a year, impeding thousands of experiments at the same time. Overregulation is a word that comes to mind. Signum temporis.

 

[BobG]

Me too - we had a nice old quaint little lab in a 150 year old building, with real mercury barometers until HSE found us.
They insisted on replacing the glass in our glass panel doors because it didn't meet standards, then it was decided that the replacement solid doors were dangerous because you could hit someone, so they put back the original doors with all the panels except one replaced by wood. In a university of course this took most of a year.


My best story, I was working in a government lab that handles really dangerous stuff ( smoking crater dangerous), the management of the lab was going to be handed over to a private contractor so it suddenly had to meet safety standards (the government is exempt!)
We had to have an extra fire door fitted to our upper story lab - which they did.
But the building exterior was still government managed and they didn't have to fit the fire escape.
So fire exit door -> 20 foot drop.
So we locked the door and put tape across it, "Do Not Use" Signs etc...
Next safety audit = can't have a locked/blocked fire door.
As far as I know it's still there.

Doors are only a safety hazard for dorks.

We had a stairway door that opened into a main hallway with the same regs about the door not having a window. If finally occurred to someone that if the door were moved to exit out the side of the stairwell, the door would open into a much less traveled hallway around the corner with almost no difference in how far you have to travel to evacuate.

Our CE folks were very efficient and they completed the entire job in one weekend. The new doorway was installed and looked like it had been there forever. You had to look very close to even tell there was ever a door opening into the main hallway.

The following Monday morning was hilarious. A lot of second floor folks (and even some third floor folks) took the stairway instead of the elevator each morning. Well over half figured out something was drastically different before they reached the old doorway. Some tried the door to the left of the old one, but weren't very surprised to find it was only the door to the broom closet. Most correctly figured out that they were more likely to find the door around the corner.

The funny ones were the ones that realized there was no door at the point they were walking towards and seamlessly adjusted their path to the door on the left. Just a normal Monday morning until they open the "stairway" door to find a broom closet.

 

[Moonbear]

Doors...
Back when I had the Health and Safety introduction at the place where I work I was quite surprised by the fact that they spent so much time talking about doors, mainly about how we should avoid hitting someone in the face when opening one.
The weird thing is that it turns out that the doors ARE the most dangerous "tools" where I work (and I work at a research institute where we handle cryogenic liquids, high voltages/currents, radioactive samples, nasty chemicals etc). The thing is that there are a LOT of doors where I work, whoever designed the building really went to great lengths to reduce the risk of a fire in one of the labs spreading via the corridors. However, this also means that you spend a lot of time opening doors (I have to open 12 doors just walking from from my office to the lab) and when people are in a hurry they tend to just push them open (there are no handles) as fast as they can, meaning loitering in front of a closed door is a really bad idea
So far I have been hit twice, and according to the annual incident report I am not the only one...

Did they put in doors that swing both directions? (You said no handles.) Fire regulations everywhere I've lived require that doors open out toward the direction of the exit. So, if you have to pull a door toward you when trying to evacuate a building, turn around and go the other way.

But, if they swing both directions, that 1) gives you no hint which way to walk unless you've memorized the building map and 2) makes it completely unpredictable which way a door might swing if you're walking toward it.

As for people who stand and talk too close to doors, one should always open the door with as much force as possible. That way they are thrown clear from the doorway when you hit them and don't become a trip hazard too. I don't know why people do that, but it seems a lot just stop and stand behind doors to chat. Where I work, for some reason, students seem to stand in the stairwells behind the doors to talk on their cell phones. This I really don't understand, because I think the worst reception is in the stairwell, they're clearly in the way of the flow of traffic in the stairwells, and if they were seeking a place to have a private conversation, I'm not sure that having it travel up all 8 floors is any more private than if they just stepped outside or stayed in the hallway.

By the way, windows in doors are useless when they are that tiny square window placed about 5 ft from the floor...too high for us short people to see through, or be seen through. A long window near the edge that opens is more useful.

 

[~christina~]

Don't compare safety standards in the contemporary lab in US and in the lab back in eighties in Poland.

My feeling is that most of these todays lab regulations save 1 life in a year, impeding thousands of experiments at the same time. Overregulation is a word that comes to mind. Signum temporis.

I don't know about that, but my relatives are very old and they have worked in the chemistry backround for a long time and are now retired and are okay still.

We don't use masks so I don't know how to avoid getting the chemicals in contact with ones teeth. We do however, use Nitrile gloves in the lab.

Can you also define Signum temporis? I looked it up and I still cannot find the meaning/definition.

 

[Moonbear]

Can you also define Signum temporis?

A sign of the time.

 

[~christina~]

A sign of the time.

Thanks Moonbear

 

[DaveC426913]

My feeling is that most of these todays lab regulations save 1 life in a year, impeding thousands of experiments at the same time. Overregulation is a word that comes to mind. Signum temporis.

I guess you can put a price on a life...

 

[Danger]

Staples. I quite frequently don't have the patience to find the staple remover, and so unfold them and extract them by hand. It makes for a lot of punctures in my fingers.
Rice Krispees. No personal experience, but I remember when Bobby Goldsboro was on the Mike Douglas show back in the 70's. He was relating examples of what a klutz he was, and mentioned one time that a Rice Krispee escaped the bowl and hardened into the carpet. He then encountered it barefooted, and sliced his toe open on it.

 

[phyzmatix]

Rice Krispee escaped the bowl and hardened into the carpet. He then encountered it barefooted, and sliced his toe open on it.

And there we were thinking that Chuck Norris is dangerous!

 

[Danger]

I'd rather face Chuckie than an enraged Rice Krispee any day.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Dangerous everyday object: episode of Walker Texas Ranger.

 

[Borek]

We don't use masks so I don't know how to avoid getting the chemicals in contact with ones teeth.

It is not about chemicals contacting teeth, rather about chemicals lowering general immunity.

 

[Borek]

I guess you can put a price on a life...

We are constantly getting told that life is priceless. That's completely different discussion, but I have my doubts.

You can't move ahead without looses. General approach that everything can be done without any risk leads to absurds. Chemistry teachers have problems with finding experiments that will be not considered too dangerous. Test tubes are dangerous because you can cut your finger. That's ridiculous.

 

[Danger]

We are constantly getting told that life is priceless.

This is in line with the thinking of the late, great George Carlin... one who made observational humour.
Price = Worth, for the most part.
So why is something that's priceless more important than something that's worthless?

 

[BobG]

Staples. I quite frequently don't have the patience to find the staple remover, and so unfold them and extract them by hand. It makes for a lot of punctures in my fingers.
Rice Krispees. No personal experience, but I remember when Bobby Goldsboro was on the Mike Douglas show back in the 70's. He was relating examples of what a klutz he was, and mentioned one time that a Rice Krispee escaped the bowl and hardened into the carpet. He then encountered it barefooted, and sliced his toe open on it.

Which kind was it: one that went snap, crackle, or pop? Probably one of the crackle ones - those even sound dangerous.

 

[arildno]

I find that many objects are hazardous. (they seem quite harmless untill..)

For example:

Food category

Tootsie Roll Pops => I find that, after licking the lollipop a few times, I always get shards of the candy in my tongue.
Jolly Rancher Hard candy => A swallowing risk is involved when you melt the candy until it's small and thin. Shards of the candy can become embedded in tongue as well, I find.

Everyday items

Paper=> Paper cuts anyone?

Can anyone think of anymore hazardous items in our everyday lives that seem harmless enough?

Sexy males?

 

[Moonbear]

Sexy males?

Yep, and they make the doors more dangerous too, staring at them and not noticing you're walking into a door, not to mention the puddle of drool on the ground that someone could slip on.

 

[~christina~]

We are constantly getting told that life is priceless. That's completely different discussion, but I have my doubts.

So, Borek..how much is your life worth

You can't move ahead without looses. General approach that everything can be done without any risk leads to absurds. Chemistry teachers have problems with finding experiments that will be not considered too dangerous. Test tubes are dangerous because you can cut your finger. That's ridiculous.

That's very true. It could also be the explanation of why I never had a chemistry class until college. (we had a lab in lower school but it had absolutely no chemicals and everything chemistry related on paper )

It is not about chemicals contacting teeth, rather about chemicals lowering general immunity.

I am at risk then.

 

[DaveC426913]

So, Borek..how much is your life worth

Yep. Christina's right.

For how many experiments that advance our knowledge would you give up your own life? If you knew your life were standing in the way of - what? 10? 20? 50? - experiments, would you offer it?

 

[Borek]

So, Borek..how much is your life worth

15 years ago I have been visited by insurance agent and he calculated it. Methodology used was "how much does it cost to make sure your kid will be able to start on its own". TLV limits are calculated with some approximation of life worth (or rather cost of the therapy, be it necessary, but it they assume limit of the therapy cost, that translates to your life worth).

So, if you know where to look, there is a price tag. It is not advertised, but nonetheless it exists.

That's very true. It could also be the explanation of why I never had a chemistry class until college. (we had a lab in lower school but it had absolutely no chemicals and everything chemistry related on paper )

Some time ago someone on some other forum told a story about his daugther taking art class in sculpture, where they were not allowed to use sharp knifes, because they could harm themselves. It made some of the tasks they should perform impossible. That's part of the same problem.

 

[DaveC426913]

15 years ago I have been visited by insurance agent and he calculated it. Methodology used was "how much does it cost to make sure your kid will be able to start on its own". TLV limits are calculated with some approximation of life worth (or rather cost of the therapy, be it necessary, but it they assume limit of the therapy cost, that translates to your life worth).

So, if you know where to look, there is a price tag. It is not advertised, but nonetheless it exists.

Not the same thing at all. As you acknowledge, insurance is very careful to limit itself to replacing income potential in the family unit. That can in no way be compared to the price of a person, especially in the context of "how many lives can we afford to lose to keep research going?"

 

[Borek]

Let me reverse your question - "can we afford to stop the research to not risk any loses?" For example Chinese will have no doubts about, they will push ahead and can pass us without trouble. Can we afford it?

In fact it is not about loss of life, it is about throwing kid with a bath. We are getting paralysed thanks to our efforts to minimalize risks of every kind, real and imaginary. I have nothing against reasonable regulations that minimalize risks, but at some point they become absurd. For example when we start to require students to use gloves for handling 1M sodium chloride, but we have nothing against the same students engaged in wrestling or futball. Somewhere on the road we have lost a balance.

That's much longer discussion and I am afraid my English is too weak to express myself properly.

 

[~christina~]

In fact it is not about loss of life, it is about throwing kid with a bath. We are getting paralysed thanks to our efforts to minimalize risks of every kind, real and imaginary. I have nothing against reasonable regulations that minimalize risks, but at some point they become absurd. For example when we start to require students to use gloves for handling 1M sodium chloride, but we have nothing against the same students engaged in wrestling or futball. Somewhere on the road we have lost a balance.

I handled 1M H2SO4 with gloves but I also handled more potent things during the same day as well. I think it's not so much the danger of 1M NaCl but rather the idea of safety in whatevery you do, no matter the risk factor. (it builds up good habits)

That's much longer discussion and I am afraid my English is too weak to express myself properly.

It is understandable and if you can type a whole paragraph, well..

So, if you know where to look, there is a price tag. It is not advertised, but nonetheless it exists.

If you say there is a price, how much would you pay to purchase someone like a mother/father/child.

 

[Borek]

Please stop asking me "How much would you give for" and "what's the price of". I don't know the answer to that question and I have never stated I know. What I am stating is that whether we like it or not there are many ways of calculating life worth, that are used in different places. Be it life insurance, be it health insurance, be it estimates of loses due to war or natural cataclysms. Just because they are not advertised us such doesn't mean they don't exist. They rarely deal with the worth of individuals, rather with some generalization and statistics, but you can always divide to get an average. And I am not going to play the game in which I am pointing you to different methodologies used in different places and you are going to tell "that's not the life worth, because they concentrate on their gains/losses/aims and so on". In all these cases this is life worth from different points of view. You don't have to agree with each of these points of view, but they all deal with the same thing. Life worth.

Also note that I am not pretending to know the answer to the question "how many lives can we afford to lose to keep research going?" It is rather that I am aware of the question and its implications, and I wonder if we can afford to pretend that the question doesn't exist. Things neglected have tendency to change from bad to worse.

Finally, it is not simply a thing of research vs price tag on life. It is a much broader problem. Can you win a war without loosing soldiers? Does it make sense to implement systems dealing with specific pollutants that cost billions a year and potentially save 1 person per decade? Does it make sense to implement medical procedures that are irrationally costly?

Death was always part of our lives, and it won't change in the foreseeable future. We are doing everything to hide it from our view and to pretend we can trick it. Does it make sense to trick ouserlves that we can trick the death spending billions of dollars? Wont it be easier to accept the death as inevitable part of our lives? Accept that we will be getting older and then one day we will make place for others? Accept that everyone has to die one day and while it is better to die later, some of us will die earlier?

Could be I have stated it before - I am not against reasonable regulations that minimize risks. But we have gained momentum into enforcing more and more restrictive regulations. We are probably already past the common reason level and it doesn't look like we are going to stop, avalanche is just starting to speed up. That's in the name of false assumption that we can trick the death.

PS. I have spent over 30 minutes editing this post and I am still not sure it says what I wanted. That's why my English is an obstacle.

 

[lisab]

I understand your point, Borek, and I agree. We (meaning humans) aren't consistant in our approach to the value of life.

For example, when it comes to the perceived risk of chemical exposure, I find people to be irrational when it comes to calculating risk. But if we're late for work, we'll drive well over the speed limit - even though that's much, much riskier.

People rationalize some hazards, such as lighting fireworks or driving after a few drinks, but then do irrational things like wash their hands with anti-bacterial soap.

 

[~christina~]

Please stop asking me "How much would you give for" and "what's the price of". I don't know the answer to that question and I have never stated I know. What I am stating is that whether we like it or not there are many ways of calculating life worth, that are used in different places. Be it life insurance, be it health insurance, be it estimates of loses due to war or natural cataclysms. Just because they are not advertised us such doesn't mean they don't exist. They rarely deal with the worth of individuals, rather with some generalization and statistics, but you can always divide to get an average. And I am not going to play the game in which I am pointing you to different methodologies used in different places and you are going to tell "that's not the life worth, because they concentrate on their gains/losses/aims and so on". In all these cases this is life worth from different points of view. You don't have to agree with each of these points of view, but they all deal with the same thing. Life worth.

It was not my intention to offend and I apologize if I did. I did not take it too seriously and it was not a very serious conversation in my opinion. I will stop asking. There is a monetary worth put on everyone's head but not when it comes to one another. Value is put only put on individuals by companies that have to put a value on them.
(okay now you can whack me with a fish http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/8264/shakefishfq0.gif

Death was always part of our lives, and it won't change in the foreseeable future. We are doing everything to hide it from our view and to pretend we can trick it. Does it make sense to trick ouserlves that we can trick the death spending billions of dollars? Wont it be easier to accept the death as inevitable part of our lives?

I absolutely agree with this. I have heard that people spend 60% of the money they have sete aside for health insurance during the last days of their lives. In the end, they die anyway and all the money cannot help.

 

[Borek]

I was not offended, I was just clarifying. I am not that easy to offend. Fish saved for more dense situations

 

[~christina~]

I was not offended, I was just clarifying. I am not that easy to offend. Fish saved for more dense situations

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/1406/whewcz2.gif

 

[stickythighs]

My son once accidentally shut his wifes cat in their bottom freezer refrigerator.

They found the frosted cat after hearing a strange muffled sound coming from the fridge.

An old lady in my neighborhood once put a wet cat in a microwave in order to dry the cat. The cat exploded. It was big news in our neighborhood. I was amazed at how many sickos there are. So many people thought it was funny

 

[BobG]

An old lady in my neighborhood once put a wet cat in a microwave in order to dry the cat. The cat exploded. It was big news in our neighborhood. I was amazed at how many sickos there are. So many people thought it was funny

The cat wouldn't have exploded. It would have died, but the old lady must not have stuck around for the cooking. Being microwaved is a slow, painful way to die. The cat would have let out many loud, long painful screams over the approximately 10 minutes it takes to kill a cat in a microwave.

Teens plead guilty to microwaving cat

 

[thomasxc]

how do you know how long it takes to kill a cat in a microwave?! pencils are dangerous. especially recently sharpened, needle like ones. i was flipping one on my desk. it landed wrong side up. it went pretty deep. i almost passed out in the nurses clinic. i still have graphite under my skin from it, and this was threee years ago.

 

[DaveC426913]

pencils are dangerous. especially recently sharpened, needle like ones. i was flipping one on my desk. it landed wrong side up. it went pretty deep.

How heavy was this pencil? And how high did you throw it??

 

[DaveC426913]

The cat wouldn't have exploded. It would have died, but the old lady must not have stuck around for the cooking.

I thought the same thing but didn't feel like dragging it out (the argument, not the cat).

 

[thomasxc]

it was a standard wood no.2 pencil. i was throwing it up about a foot or so. after i would slip it up, i woud try to slap it down on the desk. its kinda hard to explain.

 

[rootX]

The cat wouldn't have exploded. It would have died, but the old lady must not have stuck around for the cooking. Being microwaved is a slow, painful way to die. The cat would have let out many loud, long painful screams over the approximately 10 minutes it takes to kill a cat in a microwave.

Teens plead guilty to microwaving cat

Those teenagers should be microwaved for 5 minutes.

 

[thomasxc]

sometimes i find it hard to grasp just how epicly stupid people can be:-(

 

[Garth]

An old lady in my neighborhood once put a wet cat in a microwave in order to dry the cat. The cat exploded. It was big news in our neighborhood. I was amazed at how many sickos there are. So many people thought it was funny

Perhaps you are thinking about this myth: Microwaved poodles, McCoffee spills – and other phoney lawsuits.

Apparently a cup of coffee is also a dangerous object....

Garth

 

[DaveC426913]

...i woud try to slap it down on the desk.

aaaaaaaaannnnd there's the other shoe...


(wherein we learn that it is not the pencil that is the dangerous item in this scenario. The danger lies in the chair-pencil interface )

 

[thomasxc]

lol.../

 

[stickythighs]

The cat wouldn't have exploded. It would have died, but the old lady must not have stuck around for the cooking. Being microwaved is a slow, painful way to die. The cat would have let out many loud, long painful screams over the approximately 10 minutes it takes to kill a cat in a microwave.

Teens plead guilty to microwaving cat

All sources said that this cat exploded.

 

[~christina~]

How heavy was this pencil? And how high did you throw it??

 

[~christina~]

The cat wouldn't have exploded. It would have died, but the old lady must not have stuck around for the cooking. Being microwaved is a slow, painful way to die. The cat would have let out many loud, long painful screams over the approximately 10 minutes it takes to kill a cat in a microwave.

Teens plead guilty to microwaving cat

This is so sad..I looked it up after and found this story.

I don't believe the story that the todler did this. If they first mention that they did not have the money to pay for medical bills or even to have the cat, what is the chance that they did not place it in there themselves?

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4709733&affil=wtnh

 

[hypatia]

I sprained my ankle early this morning on a slippery rawhide chewie, which somebodies dog left on the step down to the laundry room.

 

[ThomStev222]

I know it can be funny to make light of getting a tie caught in a shredder, but today, I read more than a couple of stories where pets were injured badly by shredders. Common sense would have kept that from happen. I mean why can't people just unplug the shredder when they aren't using it? If you aren't going to do that, then at least get a shredder that will automatically shut off when a hand, finger, or paw is near it, you can found out more by going http://www.fellowes.com/Fellowes/site/safesense/default.aspx" .

Paper shredders. Never wear a tie around those things. A person's head will never fit down the little slot, but most people panic anyway. The panic attack can result in serious neck strain.

Legos, especially on the stairs ... especially if walking barefoot down the stairs with a cup of coffee.

Complex math problems. They're always fun until someone loses an i.

 

[ThomStev222]

An old lady in my neighborhood once put a wet cat in a microwave in order to dry the cat. The cat exploded. It was big news in our neighborhood. I was amazed at how many sickos there are. So many people thought it was funny

Theres evil people in the world. Sadly, I heard of the story last year, that was worst than a cat in the microwave. But I don't want to go into it. Cruelty to humans or animals should not be tolerated.

 

[turbo]

Very dry oak firewood looks innocent enough until you go to shove a stick of it in the stove and it hangs up on something. I've picked enough splinters out of my hands to start a lumberyard. A sharp knife with a fine point and a bottle of Isopropyl alcohol are standard tools for that.