We disapprove of what you say, but others will defend to the death your right to say it
Our apologies to Evelyn and Volaire
|
 Chemwatch have undertaken a systematic comparison of the instances in which two separate companies have made their own assessments of the same chemical. We have found the allocation of R-codes varies significantly – in fact, we were absolutely staggered by the variance. Where any one substance is produced by two companies, the level of disagreement on the classification of risk is greater than 50%!
Surely there should not be so much flexibility as to whether an R-code is assigned to a chemical or not. An irritant is an irritant, a toxin is a toxin and a burn is a burn. A chemical exhibits the same properties and hazards no matter who has produced it or sold it. They are the same: it’s not even like choosing your favourite espresso of those made by the several coffee shops near work. Will a company purchasing a chemical from one producer suffer under strict regulatory restrictions when their competitor purchased the exact same chemical from a different supplier and are only required to conform to minimal requirements? Will the risks associated with dangerous chemicals be under-communicated through choice of the wrong producer’s MSDS? Where Occupational injury occurs – who will be responsible if the employer has seen both MSDS? Employers know when the courts get involved it is all duty of care. There should be no room for such subjective impressions of the risk of a chemical. They either do fall under a risk code or they do not, any grey zones should clearly give rise to the more elevated risk phrase. And yet, despite the differences in their judgments and views, producers are still free to assess the risk of their own chemicals, and apparently without any concerted attempt by regulators to investigate consistency. At Chemwatch, our only product is the MSDS. Currency and accuracy is integral – if it isn’t right we don’t have anything to sell. Suppliers and Manufacturers are selling the real physical product – the MSDS is an expensive regulatory requirement that may reduce sales. Who then has the best incentive to give you up to date information – Chemwatch or the supplier? So when the inspector comes looking for your supplier’s original MSDS, we’ll have it for you. We encourage you to read it closely. It will make you appreciate Chemwatch even more. |
|
(percent mismatch) Number of mismatches/Number of chemicals both supply
| |
Sigma |
Merck |
Acros |
Fisher |
Alfa |
| Sigma |
- |
58% (1720/2960) |
57% (1798/3165) |
58% (3308/5745) |
54% (5137/9520) |
| Merck |
58% (1720/2960) |
- |
61% (565/933) |
61% (1148/1890) |
63% (1818/2897) |
| Acros |
57% (1798/3165) |
61% (565/933) |
- |
57% (61/107) |
56% (1601/2848) |
| Fisher |
58% (3308/5745) |
61% (1148/1890) |
57% (61/107) |
- |
60% (3018/5014) |
| Alfa |
54% (5137/9520) |
63% (1818/2897) |
56% (1601/2848) |
60% (3018/5014) |
- |
| Copyright Chemwatch 2009 ©
Link: https://www.swiftpage6.com/speasapage.aspx?X=2Y0S6DMIHQPEH5SB00ZLW3
|
|
Advertisement
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
Recent Comments