Guest guest Posted August 5, 2004 Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 Rob, The need for a respirator, in many cases is a personal choice. If you are going into a home that people are living in, wearing a respirator would unduly alarm the occupants. If you going into a flooded home, that has had standing water for a week and you can see visible mold on large areas, it might be a different question. I have samples hundreds of homes and I can count on one hand the homes where the total spore levels exceeded 65,000 m3. You can find this level in the outside air in the summer time. On the other hand questions regarding mycotoxins, different species, etc. can make a difference. I find aspergillus especially irritating. So it goes back to personal choice and sensitivity. The asbestos regulations requirement for a respirator for inspectors is not based on any real risk or scientific study. It was just some bureaucrat writing laws with no occupational hygiene or scientific knowledge. The epidemiology on workers who have developed asbestos disease shows ( in both the US and other countries) that only insulation workers and other workers with long term high level exposure (asbestos product manufacturers) developed some disease. No kids who were exposed to asbestos in schools ever developed disease. No roofers who were exposed to asbestos in roofing products ever developed disease. No floor tile workers ever developed disease. The EPA now admits that only long term exposure to high levels (many times the OSHA exposure limit) will cause disease. Further the EPA also now agrees with other countries in the world that asbestos fiber less the 5 microns in length ARE NOT A HEALTH HAZARD. ANY ONE CARE TO FIGURE HOW Many Billions of dollars OUR SCHOOLS HAVE WASTED ON REMOVING ASBESTOS FLOOR TILE that should have been used to educate children? BOB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 Here is some personal experience: In San , in August, it can be very hot and often humid as well. I was inspecting a very contaminated residence today and planning to cut into several walls to inspect wall cavities. I rarely use a respirator, but I decided to use an N95 today. Unfortunately, the work was so hot and I was perspiring so heavily that the water was blinding the respirator. I just couldn't get enough air through it. I decided I was better off without the respirator. When I took it off I poured water out of it. I finished quickly to reduce my exposure. Luckily I have never noticed any significant effects from inspecting moldy buildings, but I sure need something better than the N95 in the future. I have had similar experiences previously while in attics and crawl spaces, but today's experience was significantly worse. I have a new realization of the difficulty of working in a hot/humid environment with a disposable respirator. Don Schaezler, Ph.D., P.E., CIH Cibolo, Texas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2004 Report Share Posted August 7, 2004 Don, Did you respirator have an exhalation valve? These valves are designed to help vent water vapor exhaled from the lungs. It is very critical in humid environments especially since condensed water vapor will make it much more difficult to breath through the filter media. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2004 Report Share Posted August 8, 2004 Don, I have had similar problems. I use an MSA Full face respirator with P100 cartridges with protection agianst OVs and acid gasses. My " opinion " is to wear a full face if anything better than a disposable N-95 with protection against OVs is necessary. I hope this will provoke thought rather than encite a riot. Here's is my reasoning no matter how much it may be flawed. If you need a fitted respirator then your eyes are in far more danger. Ask anyone who does EPA toxicity testing of pesticides. Also, safety goggles are a joke. They fill the OSHA safety square but, create higher labor costs since the workers are blind from fog. This also creates unsafe work practices while blindly following " alledged " safety rules. I have PAPR. They work great unless you are doing physical work. The facepiece gets fogged easily with heavy breathing since they have one speed for the fan motor to introduce air. I have had the same problems with moisture accumulating in my MSA negative air pressure mask. My exhalation valve works great. The excess water is sweat from my face. Working in hot and humid environments makes you have to tighten your mask every 5 to ten minutes to keep a good seal. I don't let workers go for more than 45 minutes in this environment with out a 15 minute break to clean their masks and get some water and air. So my rules are easy to follow. If you are dispersing any dust (gypsum, concrete, mold bacteria and/or allergens), you should be wearing a fullface respirator. You can mist the air and get it very clean so the workers can wear disposable N95 respirators while they are damp wiping and HEPA vacuuming. Also, it you are misting anything like a biocide or saopy water, you should be wearing a full face respirator. PAPR works well for this since this is not very physical. While the researchers with the CDC/NIOSH are well intentioned, I think they need to look at how effective half face respirators are ehen wearing safety goggles. They should check for eye damage at the same time. We work in a synergistic world and our rules should be based on synergistic studies. The IICRC and anyone else who wants to write standards should make every person who contributes work in this type of environment for a full 40 hour week in a hot, humid environment and pass a real post test. Until they do this, I will continue to ignore. It is readily apparent when you read the book that they did not think this through in practice. There is scientific theory and there is applied science. The S520 is not applied science since it is disjointed, dicombobulated and need of help getting out of the crib since it is a living document. I think the NYC guidelines is still the best document given it's simplicity and room for judgement. I would only change one thing. make it 3 levels similar to the ACGIH positions. Containment could then be stated as: no containment, limited containment with poly sealed doorways and full containment with airlocks. Don't kill the messenger. Regards, Greg Weatherman Aerobiological Solutions Inc. Arlington VA 22202 gw@... ************************************************* > Here is some personal experience: > In San , in August, it can be very hot and often humid as well. I > was inspecting a very contaminated residence today and planning to cut > into several walls to inspect wall cavities. I rarely use a respirator, > but I decided to use an N95 today. Unfortunately, the work was so hot > and I was perspiring so heavily that the water was blinding the > respirator. I just couldn't get enough air through it. I decided I was > better off without the respirator. When I took it off I poured water out > of it. I finished quickly to reduce my exposure. Luckily I have never > noticed any significant effects from inspecting moldy buildings, but I > sure need something better than the N95 in the future. I have had > similar experiences previously while in attics and crawl spaces, but > today's experience was significantly worse. I have a new realization of > the difficulty of working in a hot/humid environment with a disposable > respirator. > Don Schaezler, Ph.D., P.E., CIH > Cibolo, Texas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.