Wearing contact lenses at a plant? 2

[Waterhero]

A friend told me that you can’t wear contact lenses at a chemical plant because any hazardous gas or vapor can irritate the contacts and then irritate the eyes.

Is that true?

I know that getting particles in the eye can affect contacts but one wears glasses or goggles they should be fine.

 

[TiCl4]

Irritation isn’t the issue. If an acid, base, or other incompatible material with contacts splashes in your eyes, the liquid will move via capillary action to sit between your eye and the lens, and can “melt” the lens to your eye. At that point eye wash stations will do you no good. That’s the theory, anyways. I’ve never heard of an actual case where that happened. It seems like to me if you get sulfuric acid in your eyes you are screwed anyways.

Lastly, it depends on your role. Engineers don’t have day-to-day potential exposure, normally, because we aren’t the ones handling chemicals. Operators, lab techs, and lab R&D all handle chemicals much more frequently. I wore contacts 99% of the time at a plant that handled large amounts of chlorine, titanium tetrachloride, and other air-born corrosives. The other 1% usually involved a plant test with me actually running the test. I wore glasses on those days.

 

[3DDave]

It looks like it depends. I can see that since contact lenses don't afford any protection from chemicals that they will be an additional, difficult to dislodge impediment to treating any eye problems. Using corrective glasses it's obvious to any helpers that the glasses are there, but contact lenses are not so obvious.

It is clear that the contact lens cannot be irritated, but in case of splash they might trap chemicals behind them where an eyewash station might be unable to reach.

I don't know if that reaches the point that they are so unsafe as to be banned, but of the choices with regard to eyes coming into contact with chemicals and other contamination, contact lenses seem less safe than eye glasses.

 

[mk3223]

Agreed that the contact lenses won't be a personal protection gear (PPE) except as an eyesight correction. If the person's eyes are sensitive to the chemical vapor while working in the chemical plant or similar environment, he may consider to use the glasses instead of the contact lenses.
Of course, googles or face shield are also needed depending the the nature of the work to be performed in the plant.

 

[0707]

Specialy in a HF unit.

luis

 

[EdStainless]

I have known of a number of plants where at least in specific units contacts were not permitted to be worn by operators.
The same for for no jewelry of any sort. Too many possible complications in accidents.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed

 

[SuperSalad]

I wore my contacts for years in a plant setting, but more recently I've switched to prescription safety glasses/goggles.

There is, without a doubt, a danger in a chemical setting if something hazardous to eyes were to get into your eye with contacts. The contact could block it from direct contact to the iris at first, but it will still be there. The bigger problem, as I see it, is that you then have to remove the lens in order to do anything to help yourself. Which means putting fingers into your eyes in a situation where you don't have the luxury of washing them due to the urgent need to remove the contaminants. The other option is getting to an eyewash station and hoping the eyewash dislodges the lens and flushes it out of the eye socket. Unfortunately, it could also just move it behind the lid and really make things much worse though too.

Either way, contact lenses pose more risk than the convenience is worth really if you know you have potential of eye exposure to hazardous materials. This is coming from a previously ardent contact lens wearer who really dislikes wearing glasses and goggles. Eyes have become a major focus (pun intended) for me because sight is not worth losing.

Andrew H.

http://www.MotoTribology.com

 

[Waterhero]

@SuperSalad

Are there any documented cases of this happening?

If I'm an engineer, 99% of the time I don't work directly with chemicals. Only in situations of confined spaces.

 

[SuperSalad]

Documented cases of what exactly?

If you are wearing adequate eye protection otherwise (goggles, face shields, etc.), the contacts really don't pose a significantly higher risk. But when you work with stuff that is particularly hazardous to eyes, (I work with concentrated potassium hydroxide and sulfuric acid with splash potential), and there is potential of exposure, it makes sense to me to take every precaution.

If I only worked around chemical hazards 1% of my time, I would likely just wear my contacts.

Andrew H.

http://www.MotoTribology.com

 

[TiCl4]

SuperSalad: Agreed. I meant documented cases of chemical splash onto a contact-wearer's eye whereby the presence of the contact lens caused irreversible damage in what would have otherwise been okay. My main point was that the majority of chemicals that "melt" the contact will also melt your eye in seconds too. There may be a few that are aggressive against contacts, but not the eyes. See my point below about the hazard being job specific.

According to the link below, apparently the prohibition against contact lenses came from NIOSH in 1978. That prohibition was removed in 2003.

https://ohsonline.com/articles/2005/10/contact-lenses-in-a-chemical-environment.aspx

There are some cases where glasses can be more hazardous than having contacts. To wit, most operators carried full-face respirators with them at my plant. To wear those respirators, operators would need to remove their glasses, compromising their visual acuity. To add to this, TiCl4 makes a very effective smokescreen upon contact with air, and produces air-born HCl. In an emergency situation, operators would need to sacrifice vision to wear their respirators in an area that already had limited visibility. Contacts would actually be preferred to glasses there. As an engineer, I simply had a bag-style escape hood that worked with glasses. Operators were not required to carry both types.

I think it really comes down to actually doing a job hazards analysis for any particular site and role within the site, and making a determination from there. Saying carte blanche that contacts are bad is not just oversimplifying, it's just wrong.

 

[SuperSalad]

@TiCl4

Yes I would agree with that completely. I see how my first post probably did come across like that, but it wasn't my intent. I was trying to give my own personal experience and evolution on the topic from contacts to glasses over the years because of changes to my work environment and caution levels.

When I said: There is, without a doubt, a danger in a chemical setting if something hazardous to eyes were to get into your eye with contacts, I meant that to mean that contacts are not adequate protection, which a surprising number of people believe they are if you see the shear volume of warnings contradicting the idea of them to be PPE. I didn't mean for that to come across as saying contacts create a hazard in and of themselves.

I fully agree with with the comment on the importance of the job hazard analysis you mentioned too. Depending on the PPE available and recommended, glasses may not be compatible and contact lenses could be preferable in some cases.

Andrew H.

http://www.MotoTribology.com