Old MSDS Sheets related to Manganese in Welding Rods

I am seeking to obtain copies of MSDS sheets for welding rods and welding wire, used in manufacturing. In particular, I am looking for
older warnings given on the welding rods and wires. Anyone having older MSDS sheets, please contact me.
This is very important, as it relates to wedlers who have contracted a Parkinson-like disease from the use of these welding rods and wires, and who we believe were given inadequate warnings given on the MSDS sheets. We need to obtain these sheets in order to help these welders in their claims against the manufacturers of these rods and wires.
-Mike
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Can't help with the MSDS but start at google with a search on manganese madness.
On 28 Jan 2004 04:35:50 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@monheit.com (MMonheit) wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
How old are MSDS sheeta anyway? When did the government start requiring them?
-- Bob May Losing weight is easy! If you ever want to lose weight, eat and drink less. Works every time it is tried!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

1983
You can look it up in OSHA CFN 29 part 1920.1200. Or if your in construction it is also included in 29 CFN part 1926.59 (Sub part D).
I took the time to scan my workbook on the part concerning MSDS issues, these are general guides.
GENERAL INFORMATION The Hazard Communication standard requires that chemical manufacturers and importers evaluate their chemicals and determine if they are hazardous.
Employers shall develop, implement and maintain, at each workplace, a written Hazard Communication Program consisting of at least the following elements:
1. Labels and other forms of warning.
2. Material Safety Data Sheets.
3. Employee training and information.
4. List of known hazardous chemicals at workplace.
5. Methods used to inform employees of hazards.
On multi-employer workplaces, employers who produce, use, or store hazardous chemicals at the workplace must ensure that the information about these chemicals, in the form of MSDS, is available for their employees and any other employees who may be exposed to these chemicals.
LABELS & OTHER FORMS OF WARNING
The chemical manufacturer, importer, or distributor must ensure that each hazardous chemical is labeled, tagged or marked with the following information before it enters the workplace:
1. Identity of the hazardous chemical.
2. Appropriate hazardous warnings.
3. Name and address of chemical manufacturer, importer or other responsible party.
Once the hazardous chemical enters the workplace it is the responsibility of the employer to ensure that each container is marked or labeled with the following information:
1. Identity of the hazardous chemical.
2. Appropriate hazardous warnings such as words, pictures, symbols, or a combination of all three.
For portable containers, which are used to transfer hazardous chemicals from one labeled container to the point of use, the containers need not be labeled.
The employer must ensure that the labels, and any other forms of warning, are written in English and are prominently displayed on the container or readily available in the work area throughout each work shift.
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS
Chemical manufacturers and importers of hazardous chemicals must develop a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for each hazardous chemical they produce or import into the country.
Employers must have available, at each workplace, an MSDS sheet for all hazardous chemicals that are used.
MSDS sheets must be in English. MSDS sheets in other languages are permitted, provided they are IN ADDITION TO those in English.
Each MSDS must contain at least the following information:
1. The identity of the chemical.
2. The chemical and common names of the hazardous substances and ingredients.
3. Physical and chemical characteristics of the hazardous chemicals (flash point, vapor pressure).
4. Physical hazards such as fire, explosion and reactivity.
5. Health hazards of the chemical such as, signs and symptoms of exposure and medical conditions aggravated by exposure to the chemical.
6. Primary route of entry to the body.
7. OSHA permissible exposure limits, ACGIH-Threshold Limit Value, and any other exposure limits.
8. Listing for known carcinogens such as, National Toxicology Program (NTP) or International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
9. Any known safety precautions for handling the materials such as appropriate hygienic and protective measures including procedures for spills and leaks.
10. Any known control measures such as engineering controls, work practices or PPE.
11. Emergency and first aid procedures.
12. Date the MSDS was prepared and date of subsequent reVISions.
13. The name, address and phone number of the chemical manufacturer, importer or other responsible party who can provide additional information.
Chemical manufacturers, importers and distributors must ensure that employers are provided copies of the MSDS sheets with their initial shipment and with the first shipment after the MSDS has been changed.
The employer must maintain in the workplace MSDS sheets for each of the hazardous chemicals on site. MSDS sheets must be readily accessible, during each work shift, to employees when they are in their work area. Electronic access, such as computer databases, microfiche and other alternatives to maintaining paper copies of the MSDS sheets are permitted, as long as no barriers to immediate employee access in each workplace are created by such options. In any event, MSDS sheets must be readily accessible during each work shift to all employees.
If employees are required to travel between workplaces during a shift, MSDS sheets are permitted to be kept at the primary workplace facility. MSDS sheets may be kept in any form, provided they contain all of the required information as listed above.
EMPLOYEE INFORMATION AND TRAINING
OSHA requires that employers provide employees with effective training on the hazardous chemicals in their work places at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever new hazardous are introduced into the work place.
The required training shall cover at least the following topics:
1. The requirements of the Hazard Communication standard.
2. Operations in the employees area where hazardous chemicals are present.
3. The location of the written hazard communication program and MSDS sheets.
4. Methods and operations to detect the presence of hazardous chemicals.
5. The physical & health hazards associated with the chemicals in their work areas.
6. PPE available to the employees and other control measures they can use to protect themselves.
7. Details of the employer's hazard communication program, including how to use MSDS sheets and proper PPE.
PPE stands for Personal Protective Equipment.
I hope this is some use to you.
Tim Johnson IBEW Local 38
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@monheit.com (MMonheit) wrote in message

If the manufacturers of the welding rods and wire provided full information about the potential toxicity of their products then they are blameless. It is the employers of those affected workers who did not give their workers sufficient cautionary information, risk pay, handling and breathing equipment, and/or limited time exposure who you should ethically go after.
--Paul Wakfer
MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's easy. Whoevers got the deepest pockets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, and gather as many defendants as possible, that way in the end the lawyers get millions in fees and the individual defendants get $200 and a gift certificate for a free massage. I love lawyers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ian, What you describe is a class action. I do not handle class actions. Rather, I handle a very small number of cases for a few clients who have been severely injured. These cases are very expensive to puruse and I take only very serious cases.
That said, yes, there are the usual suspects that show up, and in the case of welding rods, there has been a class action filed, which no doubt will not deliver the level of attention or compensation that I seek for my clients. So I do not blame you for your cynical statement.
As to compensation, I have never received more than any client I represented. They always receive the lion's share. I wish I could say that were true of all lawyers.
In any event, should you come across the MSDS sheets I am seeking (older ones) it would be a big help to me and more importantly to my clients.
Regards, Mike
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Frank wrote:

Usually they don't even get that. A "good" lawyer takes all the money and only allows the defendants to get a $200 discount coupon off full retail price of future purchases of products from the offending companies. That way the offending company receives more business and only has to pay the lawyers. Lawyers find it easier to get out-of-court settlements when they only go after lawyer fees. Its not all profit, everybody that wins understands that they are required to make sufficient political contribution to ensure the rules of game and not changed and its all paid for by little people.
Its the only type of job in the world, other than government work, where you can make your own work, force other people to pay your salary and you get almost full control over the amount.
We now need a better system to deal with bad big companies and bad lawyering.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Obviously, you either completely missed or did not understand the words "blameless" and "ethically".
All that going after "deep pockets" ensures is that the products that are needed to increase the happiness of all humans will not be produced in the future. It is up to each individual to either make himself aware of harmful effects in the workplace or sign work contracts which require his employer to be fully responsible. Those who sell products with full disclosure of any potential harm which is known at that time must not held responsible for such a voluntary act of exchange. Where no coercion is involved, any restriction of or penalty for free informed exchange of goods and services in order to protect a few, always harms the many. By interfering with the production of beneficial goods and services, in the long-run such measures even harm the few who they were designed to protect.
--Paul Wakfer
MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@morelife.org (Paul Wakfer) wrote in message

Paul, Makes sense, to blame the employe, if the manufacturer gave adequate warnings... But they don't give adequate warning. In fact, just the opposite.
As early as 1972, there is a documented deception and lack of full disclosure from the industry. Under oath, the president of Lincoln in 1972 admitted that he wrote a memo advising to, and I am paraphrasing, "not let the word out about the dangers."
Even today, the MSDS is not adequate. For example, regarding Manganese, the warning reads, "Long-term (chronic) overexposure to welding fumes can lead to siderosis (iron deposits in lung) and may affect pulmonary function. Manganese overexposure can affect the central nervous system, resulting in impaired speech and movement. Bronchitis and some lung fibrosis have been reported. Repeated exposure to fluorides may cause excessive calcification of the bone and calcification of ligaments of the ribs, pelvis and spinal column. May cause skin rash."
But they don't say that the problem is irreversible. That is it progressive.
ALL THEY SAY IS... "can affect the central nervous system, resulting in impaired speech and movement". Here is what Manganism really is...
Mangansim is a disease which is very much like Parkinson's Disease in its clinical presentation. It manifests with symptoms of fixed gaze, bradykinesia, postural difficulty, tremor, rigidity and a decrease in mental status. These are all traits of parkinsonism.
This is troublesome, since these symptoms were first associated with manganese exposure in the scientific literature in 1837. Manganese, when exposed to the brain, can cause reductions of dopamine, norepinephrine, and neuromelanin. It also causes neuronal loss and gliosis in several areas of the brain. These, too, are characteristic of parkinsonism.
Manganism is often irreversible, but can be reversed if it is recognized and arrested in an early stage. It is typically defined in three stages.4 The initial stage is vague. It is typified by malaise, apathy, lethargy, anorexia and headaches.5 These symptoms are totally nonspecific, and can be explained away as depression, physical or mental exhaustion, or even the flu. This stage is reversible. If the exposure can be discontinued, typically there are no permanent sequellae.
If, however, exposure continues, then the symptoms will worsen, and will manifest as impaired memory and judgment, psychological disturbance, anxiety and possibly psychotic/hallucinogenic events (sometimes called "manganese madness"). This stage can last from 30 to 90 days. On the effects of black oxide of magnesium when inhaled into the lungs.
The third stage is the actionable phase, insofar as litigation is concerned. In this stage, there is extremity dystonia, gait disturbance, tremor, paresis, impaired coordination and facial rigidity. Once the victim reaches this stage, the condition is irreversible, and leads to complete disability. The condition mimics Parkinson's disease, but is not totally identical. The differences are subtle, but important to the legal causation analysis. First, the tremor is called "intention tremor" in Manganism. This means that the tremor is most pronounced while the victim is actively using various muscles. In parkinsonism it is called a "resting tremor." Second, the dystonia that is often associated with manganism is not generally present in Parkinson's disease. Therapeutic doses of levodopa therapy can impact on Parkinson's disease, but have no effect upon manganism. Third, the areas of the brain that are affected differ between the two conditions. In the manganism victim, the striatum and globus palidus are the most likely affected areas. Conversely, in the Parkinson's disease patient, it is the substantia nigra which is most affected. In the Parkinson patient, the striatum and globus palidus demonstrate only reduced dopamine concentrations.
NONE OF THIS IS IN THE MSDS. Thus, perhaps a code of silence between the manufacturer and the employer. But by no means a full disclosure, that is intended to reach the workers and allow them to take those steps, e.g. through their unions, to gain protection at work.
Best,
Mike
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
All this would have been nice to know as I used to sit inside the sceen hopper of a crusher building up and hardfacing rock crusher rolls. My former employer did not supply a respirator even when asked. The warning on the box that the rods came in did not have any more info than 7018 rods back in the 80s. Maybe that's what is wrong with me.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You were not forced to continue with your job. You could have demanded protection and quit if it was not forthcoming. Workplace environment effects on health and well-being are simply one of the many characteristics of any job which should be evaluated when choosing a job. If people approached life more often in this manner, then those riskier jobs would either have to pay more compensation and/or give more protection or they would not find employees willing to do the work. Furthermore, not supplying protection should not be grounds for a lawsuit only concerning fraud to the extent that the employer specifically gave you false information. He did not chain you to your work place and force you to stay there and work under under conditions.

Each person is responsible for himself and every individual needs to constantly look out for his own welfare, since no one else can know sufficiently what is his welfare (only he can truly know himself) or has the direct self-interest in doing so.

If your situation is not too bad, there are therapies which can help. It is never too late to begin their investigation.
--Paul Wakfer
MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>

MSDS are not well-written for end users. It would be really nice if there was a little column saying how much you have to do to damage yourself with the chemical in various ways.
E.G. Water: Airway: May cause death if breathed in quantity. If still breathing after immersion, professional aid should be sought as lung infections can develop.
Skin: Extended exposure will cause softening of skin, and may allow fungal infections to develop.
....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@monheit.com (MMonheit) wrote in message

[sniped additional details]
I am posting from sci.life-extension and I am quite familiar with the health effects of overdoses of manganese. In fact, that is one of the reasons why I do not take certain mineral supplement combinations from a supplier from which I get them for free.
If you are correct about the negligence and fraud of the manufacturers, then I do agree with going after them for restitution. However, I would still maintain that the more correct way to proceed is to sue the employers and then to the extent that the employers are blameless with respect to giving information and providing protection, etc, they (the employers) should sue the manufacturers for fraudulent sales of the products involved.

This is somewhat surprising since MSDSs that I have seen all have the very worst case situations portrayed. All that one needs to do is look at the MSDS for plain table salt (sodium chloride: http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/S3338.htm ) to see that. As always, "the dose makes the poison". Such worst possible cases are generally included *precisely* so that the chemical supplier is protected from any future blame for the mishandling of his product by those who use it.

One point that perhaps you and others are not aware is that the MSDS is prepared by the manufacturer of the product according to a government promulgated format. Therefore, different manufacturers may, and generally will have somewhat different MSDSs.
--Paul Wakfer
MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The political environement runs against.you. I will take great satisfaction to see your and your concubine behind bars without no hope of release. The tune will come .

social contracting
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Are you the troll that impersonates Paul Wakfer? Tom Pall?

you
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
So, what sort of exposure is dangerous? I weld less than 1 lb. a week (probably less than 1 lb. a month) of stick as a hobbyist; am I in danger of manganism?
What sort of respirator is adequate for this level of exposure -- is a particulate mask sufficient, or does one need something more?
snipped-for-privacy@monheit.com (MMonheit) wrote in message

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@duke.edu (Andy Wakefield) wrote in

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
An amazing statement from someone who professes himself to be an anarchyist.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.