Chemical Exposure: Worried About Cancer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stadtjunky
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chemical
Click For Summary
A student chemist expressed concern about potential cancer risks after a spill of methyl iodide (MeI) mixed with dichloromethane (DCM) on his hand, despite wearing nitrile gloves. Experts in the discussion clarified that nitrile gloves are not effective against DCM, which can permeate them quickly. Methyl iodide is classified as a suspected human carcinogen but is not deemed highly dangerous in small, accidental exposures. The consensus emphasized that while caution is necessary when handling hazardous materials, the likelihood of serious long-term health effects from such a brief exposure is low. Participants encouraged the importance of consulting Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for understanding chemical hazards and recommended that young chemists learn to interpret these documents effectively to gauge the relative dangers of substances. Overall, the discussion aimed to alleviate fears while promoting safe lab practices and education regarding chemical safety.
  • #31
MSDSs are full of cover-your-*** nonsense written by lawyers.

If you try and teach young chemists that every single chemical is highly dangerous, they will come to understand that you're exaggerating and they won't learn where *real* dangers exist.

Understanding, for example, the possible formation of organic peroxides in THF (and many other organic solvents) is very important. Understanding, for example, that DCM will go straight through nitrile gloves is very important.

Replacing real education and real chemistry literacy and real understanding of the realistic hazards of different chemicals with the overzealous language of MSDSs, implying that every chemical there is is scary, insidious and lethal is a mistake.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
  • #32
minerva said:
MSDSs are full of cover-your-*** nonsense written by lawyers.

If you try and teach young chemists that every single chemical is highly dangerous, they will come to understand that you're exaggerating and they won't learn where *real* dangers exist.

Understanding, for example, the possible formation of organic peroxides in THF (and many other organic solvents) is very important. Understanding, for example, that DCM will go straight through nitrile gloves is very important.

Replacing real education and real chemistry literacy and real understanding of the realistic hazards of different chemicals with the overzealous language of MSDSs, implying that every chemical there is is scary, insidious and lethal is a mistake.

Nice try, but in addition to the legalese are the warnings you really DO need to know. I don't think anyone has suggested "Chemistry-By-The-Labels", so your education argument is a bombastic one, and a straw man. Read the label is a good idea, and no one is saying it's the ONLY thing you should do.
 
  • #33
minerva said:
If you try and teach young chemists that every single chemical is highly dangerous, they will come to understand that you're exaggerating and they won't learn where *real* dangers exist.

Funny, because that's exactly how I learned these things.
By reading the relevant MSDSes for every chemical I was about to handle before every lab. Yes at first glance 'everything' would seem dangerous (and everything is, to an extent). But if you read more than one of them you quickly get a good understanding of relative dangers. An LD50 of 1000 mg/kg is quite safe, 1 mg/kg is not.

I think you're underestimating the ability of students to interpret and evaluate the data, and that the attitude you're espousing ("Don't bother reading the MSDS, it just says everything is bad!"), is a lot more dangerous than reading an MSDS ever would be.
 
  • #34
alxm said:
Funny, because that's exactly how I learned these things.
By reading the relevant MSDSes for every chemical I was about to handle before every lab. Yes at first glance 'everything' would seem dangerous (and everything is, to an extent). But if you read more than one of them you quickly get a good understanding of relative dangers. An LD50 of 1000 mg/kg is quite safe, 1 mg/kg is not.

I think you're underestimating the ability of students to interpret and evaluate the data, and that the attitude you're espousing ("Don't bother reading the MSDS, it just says everything is bad!"), is a lot more dangerous than reading an MSDS ever would be.

This is the sensible approach in my view. If you can't figure out labels, maybe you shouldn't be in chemistry? :biggrin:
 
  • #35
To be honest, I have to agree with previous comments. When you start out in chemistry it's not clear what's dangerous and what's not. And it doesn't help that you're not medically trained, so when you see "may cause cancer" or "may cause death" or whatever, it's difficult to interpret these warnings initially in any other way apart from "be extremely extremely careful" such that you're almost afraid to touch the bottle.

Look at the MSDS for DCM for example, it makes it sound like a chemical warfare agent...hence why I was frightend of alkyating agents like MeI...
 
  • #36
alxm said:
Funny, because that's exactly how I learned these things.
By reading the relevant MSDSes for every chemical I was about to handle before every lab. Yes at first glance 'everything' would seem dangerous (and everything is, to an extent). But if you read more than one of them you quickly get a good understanding of relative dangers. An LD50 of 1000 mg/kg is quite safe, 1 mg/kg is not.

I think you're underestimating the ability of students to interpret and evaluate the data, and that the attitude you're espousing ("Don't bother reading the MSDS, it just says everything is bad!"), is a lot more dangerous than reading an MSDS ever would be.

Agreed, but most young student chemists aren't taught about LD50 values, at least I wasn't. You have to learn for yourself.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
26K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
14K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K