EMBRACING “PECULIARITY” Samuel Ramsey is one of the foremost practitioners of entomology. But as a Black man trying to break into an almost exclusively white field, Ramsey had to overcome entrenched prejudice and learn to rely on “peculiar thinking”—reasoning influenced by the qualities that make him unique.

During his doctoral studies, Ramsey’s advisor obstructed his participation in the program and eventually dismissed him, saying that he lacked “the skillset for science,” even though he had already published research as an undergrad. Ramsey later discovered that no Black people had ever graduated from the program before and that two former researchers, both Black, had left under similar circumstances. He filed an appeal and was eventually reinstated on the condition that he give the project he’d been working on for two years to his former advisor. He would have to find a new advisor and project.

At about the same time, Ramsey was excommunicated from his church, where he had been a worship leader. The congregation had previously accepted him as a queer person, but someone had threatened to report them to the church hierarchy if Ramsey stayed. “Being peculiar often is a matter of you being at the intersection of things that people don’t think should intersect,” Ramsey reflected. “The intersection of my orientation with my faith eventually resulted in me being excommunicated.”

Back at university, the only researcher willing to let Ramsey join his lab studied bees, so Ramsey became a bee researcher. The focus of most bee research was the mite Varroa destructor, which was believed to feed on the bees’ blood. Ramsey wondered how he could contribute to this research, since so many entomologists were already working on it. He discovered that the pathologies associated with Varroa mites could all be caused by disruptions to the bees’ livers (technically, their fat bodies), and he designed experiments that confirmed the mites were indeed consuming liver, not blood. Ultimately, he gathered more evidence than was necessary to prove his theory because he knew he would have to overcome other scientists’ implicit bias to convince them of his findings. “When I show up to a conference to talk about this,” he said, other researchers would “see someone they’re not used to seeing.” For this research, Ramsey earned not only his PhD but multiple awards.

Ramsey, who now teaches science communication at the University of Colorado Boulder, encouraged each attendee to embrace their own uniqueness. “A lot of us have been told that the peculiarities that exist in us are a problem,” Ramsey said. But as his experience shows, “creative thinking is born of peculiarity. Peculiarity is actually an asset.”

EXPOSURE CONCERNS FROM E-CIGARETTES Cheri Marcham and Evan Floyd, members of the team that developed AIHA’s white paper on e-cigarettes in the indoor environment, delivered a presentation on May 20 that encompassed the evolution of e-cigarettes and related guidelines and legislation.

E-cigarettes make vapor by heating “e-liquid,” also known as “e-juice.” One of the main components of e-liquid, propylene glycol, is often used to create theatrical fog. People exposed to theatrical fog on a regular basis can develop health problems including asthma, decreased lung function, and respiratory irritation. “Compare that to intentionally inhaling it 16 hours a day” from an e-cigarette, Marcham said.

Heating or pyrolysis of glycerin, another e-liquid component, can cause the formation of formaldehyde, a known human carcinogen; acrolein, which can damage the lining of the lungs; and acetaldehyde, a probable carcinogen that can irritate the eyes, skin, and respiratory tract.

Floyd said that aerosols from e-cigarettes have been found to contain at least 35 elements or metals. Vapers may be exposed to aluminum, manganese, and antimony. Earlier research Floyd conducted showed that e-cigarette aerosols can spread through HVAC systems to adjacent parts of a building. This is a concern since many vape shops are in strip malls or shopping centers. Researchers found nicotine contamination on surfaces in businesses adjacent to vape shops.

AIHA’s white paper on electronic cigarettes was first published in 2014 and was updated in 2018. The third version of the document is expected to become available later this year.

USING CHATBOTS TO SUMMARIZE REGULATIONS During a “pop-up” session held May 20, Benjamin Roberts, a supervising risk scientist at Benchmark Risk Group, described an investigation that sought to determine the effectiveness of chatbots at summarizing OEHS regulations. Researchers uploaded PDF copies of OSHA’s noise and silica standards into several tools, including ChatGPT 3.5, which was the most recent iteration of the tool at the time, and several versions of Llama, a chatbot created by Meta. The research team prepared questions about both standards, such as “how long can employees be exposed to 95 decibels of noise?” The chatbots’ answers to these questions were recorded, and four reviewers graded the answers on a four-point scale.

ChatGPT performed the best, with an average score of 3.15 on questions about the noise standard and 3.64 on questions about the silica standard. By comparison, the versions of Llama scored from 1.67 to 2.27 on noise questions and 2 to 2.86 on silica questions.

Still, the researchers noted some oddities in ChatGPT’s responses. For example, its lengthy reply to the question about 95 decibels didn’t actually provide an answer. (Roberts noted that according to the OSHA noise standard, exposure to 95 dBA should not exceed four hours.)

The testing illustrated commonly reported problems with chatbots: that they aren’t good at even basic math, and they often present answers with unwarranted certainty. Someone unfamiliar with the regulations could be lulled into a false sense of security that the chatbot is answering a question accurately.

While the researchers concluded that chatbots have the potential to be useful for specific OEHS applications, Roberts advised users to proceed cautiously. “Don’t rely on these things to do your thinking for you,” he said.

FUNGAL DISEASE AT A PAPER MILL At a pop-up session on May 21, NIOSH’s Ryan LeBouf shared details about an ongoing health hazard evaluation involving a blastomycosis outbreak among paper mill workers in northern Michigan that resulted in one fatality. The disease is associated with the fungus Blastomyces, which grows in moist soil and decomposing matter. People can get blastomycosis by breathing fungal spores.

NIOSH visited the facility in late March 2023 and found that 160 of the mill’s 800-plus workers met the agency’s definition for blastomycosis. Agency personnel assessed the mill’s HVAC system and collected more than 500 samples. No Blastomyces was detected, LeBouf said, adding that this finding is not abnormal because the fungus is difficult to find and analyze.

So far, the agency has not been able to identify a source. In response to a question from the audience, LeBouf stated that the source is likely somewhere outside the plant. He mentioned that the water level in the river near the mill was historically low, so the soil along the river was one possibility. However, LeBouf stressed that blastomycosis is usually related to community exposures. Cases are typically seen among people who’ve been in the woods or hiking, or among workers on construction sites where soil is being disturbed. An outbreak in an occupational setting like the mill is “unheard of,” he said.

An additional case had recently appeared, which NIOSH was investigating. As of press time the final report was forthcoming.

TSCA CHALLENGES On May 21, Jason Lotter and Lori Zemen advised attendees on how to prepare for significant new EPA regulations stemming from the agency’s authority under the Toxic Substances Control Act. Lotter explained that EPA may reduce by orders of magnitude occupational exposure limits (OELs) that have not been changed for many years. For example, OSHA’s current permissible exposure limits for asbestos and methylene chloride are 0.1 fibers per cubic centimeter of air (f/cc) and 25 ppm, while EPA’s new existing chemical exposure limits (ECELs) are 0.005 f/cc and 2 ppm, respectively. OEHS professionals will have to consider whether their monitoring data is still adequate to ensure compliance with new, lower OELs.

Companies will have to meet new requirements for recordkeeping and documentation, including when EPA requests data during the risk determination process. OEHS professionals usually collect data to manage risks specific to their organization’s work sites, and this data may not be representative of exposures for all workers. But EPA will use data provided by companies to characterize health risks for a range of occupational users and non-users across industries and as the basis for decisions about OEL feasibility and the need for exposure controls. Lotter recommended that OEHS professionals record trends in data over time and the groups their data represents. For example, are they characterizing the most highly exposed employees? Or are they characterizing all individuals in the facility?

For chemicals and uses that aren’t banned under new regulations, OEHS professionals will have to provide to EPA exposure control plans that document not only the controls their organizations have chosen but all available controls and rationales for not selecting the others.

Zemen spoke briefly on her experiences as industrial hygiene leader for Olin Chemicals, one of a handful of U.S. companies that uses asbestos diaphragms. Under EPA’s asbestos ban, Olin must convert to diaphragms that do not contain asbestos within five years. Olin’s strategy to demonstrate compliance with the ban will involve monitoring every worker to prove they are not being exposed to asbestos and to provide extensive field notes for every sample. “Anything that we have to answer should be documented,” Zemen said. “Don’t think that when EPA comes in that it’s going to be an inspection. It’s going to be an audit.”

BRAIN HACKS FOR OEHS PROFESSIONALS At the closing session on May 22, Helena Boschi, a psychologist who specializes in applying neuroscience to the workplace, explained how our brains evolved into erratic, work-avoiding rationalization machines that are both easily duped and stubbornly resistant to what’s good for us.

Laziness is just one of the problems with our brains. They are also “negatively wired,” Boschi said, predisposed not to embrace life but avoid death. This tendency served us well long ago, when our lives often depended on snap fight-or-flight judgments. Today, we see its legacy in our great preference for the familiar over the unfamiliar.

“Because the brain is predictive, it really struggles with uncertainty, and it struggles with change,” Boschi explained.

Hand in hand with our brain’s laziness and discomfort with uncertainty is its stubbornness. This is one reason why OEHS professionals encounter resistance when trying to get workers to wear respirators or convince company executives to invest in engineering controls.

Fortunately, there are ways around these shortcomings. The first way to “hack your brain,” as Boschi put it, is to adopt new perspectives, to think about the world through another person’s vantage point. She also recommended involving other people in proposed changes and building off others’ ideas. It’s much easier to improve on what others have done than to come up with something entirely new.

The final hack is to activate the laws of persuasion. Given the brain’s preference for visual information, Boschi recommended using graphs, visuals, colors, and pictures to get a message across. If pictures aren’t available, storytelling can do just as well.

By the end of Boschi’s presentation, it was clear that her description of the brain’s problems was itself a story—a true one, but not the only one that can be told. Our brains may be imperfect, but they are also adaptable and capable of growth if we care for them properly. Earlier, Boschi had talked about neuroplasticity, the ability of our nervous system to reorganize itself. It turns out that our lazy brains don’t define us. “We’re born unfinished,” Boschi said. “We shape ourselves until the day we die.”

KAY BECHTOLD, ABBY ROBERTS, and ED RUTKOWSKI are the Synergist editorial team.

Send feedback to The Synergist.