Who needs Powerpoint?

I do, but only sometimes.

It seems that everyone expects speakers/trainers/teachers to have a deck of Powerpoint slides to use when they’re talking. They’re often badly designed and used poorly, but they can be a useful way of making a talk more visual and interesting. However, they can also be a distraction and if overused their impact is reduced.

I probably overuse Powerpoint. It’s easy to do this. Preparing a talk or session on a training course can easily turn into preparing a set of slides which form the structure of the talk and end up being used a speaker prompts. The problem with this is that your talk starts to follow a rigid framework imposed by the default Powerpoint template. I think that Nancy Duarte and Garr Reynolds have it right when the recommend “going analogue” when preparing a talk – i.e. using paper to plan it out. This can free your thought process and allow you to think about how to present your ideas without getting stuck in a Powerpoint induced rut..

From an audience point of view, watching contiuuous streams of slides projected on a screen can become tedious. Its much more interesting if there is some variety in the way material is put across. You’re more likely to keep their attention.

I was running a revision course last week for occupational hygienists preparing to take their Diploma examination. A lot of topics were covered during the week. For the first three days I’d used some slides for some, but not all of the sessions. I’d tried to avoid too many “lectures” and involved the delegates in discussions and group activities.

On the fourth day of the course we started with an open session. I’d asked the delegates to go through past some exam questions the previous evening and decide which questions they’d like to talk through in the class. This meant that I only had a broad view of we’d need to talk about. The session inevitably threw up some topics where the delgates didn’t have much knowledge and were looking to me to help them fill the gaps. I could have started opening up relevant presentations from my laptop but instead we just had a general discussion and where I needed to fill in some details I relied on description and the old fashioned “talk and chalk” approach, using a flip chart. It was really refreshing to do this from my perspective and the delegates seemed to like it too.

I didn’t switch the projector on all day . For the other sessions I used techniques such as brainstorming, breakout groups an, where I had to “lecture” I stuck with the flip chart.

Slideware such as Powerpoint is a useful tool, but it’s only one item in our toolbox. Unfortunately it’s overused. Its refreshing to use other techniques and I think we all benefited from a “Powerpoint free” day.

What's a "confined space"?

I recently received the following query regarding the application of the Confined Space Regulations 1997:

“is the intent that any room that has a hazard in it is considered a Confined Space? Let’s say we have a room with 2 doors, some general dilution and exhaust ventilation, and has a CO2 line running through it with several flanged connections. The line has never leaked, but I suppose it could if something breaks. Is that a confined space according to the regs?”

The term “confined space” has a particular legal meaning. Once a space is defined as such then the requirements of the “Confined Spaces Regulations 1997″ become applicable and employers are required to

• avoid work in the confined space “as far as reasonably practicable”
• where work is necessary, ensure that there is a safe system of work
• make arrangements to safely rescue anyone who becomes incapacitated within the confined space.

It isn’t true that any room containing a hazard would be considered as a “confined space”. However, I would probably categorise the situation described in the query as such. I once had to deal with a similar situation – a pub cellar where there are CO2 cylinders. There was a risk of a cylinder “bursting” which could release gas into the room. HSE does include “unventilated or poorly ventilated rooms” as an example of a confined space in their guidance on the Regulations in their guidance leaflet, indg258 .

Our British approach is a little woolly, but allows flexibility. The crucial questions to answer when deciding on whether something is a “confined space” are

1. Is the room “substantially” enclosed? i.e. is access / egress limited?
2. Is a potential hazard present in the room ( or one is “reasonably foreseeable”)?
3. In the case of a hazardous gas/vapour/fume/dust, is ventilation limited so that a dangerous concentration is possible?

If the answer to each of these is “yes”, particularly if access/egress limited, then I’d classify it as a confined space and the Confined Spaces Regulations would apply.

In the example given in the query, it appears that there is limited access/egress and there is a reasonably foreseeable risk (albeit small) of a leak. If the concentration could build up to a dangerous level than I’d definitely classify it as a confined space under the Regulations. So the crucial test is whether a leak would lead to a dangerous concentration.

Detailed guidance on the Regulations are available here

BOHS Meeting on the Thermal Environment

Working in extreme heat

We had a good turnout at the meeting today in Ellesmere Port 28 people turned up to listen to four speakers who covered a number of aspects of managing the thermal environment.

Doug Hiebert talked about how BNFL dealt with a problem at their Selafield site. Maintenance work has sometimes to be carried out in relatively high temperatures and high relative humidity and the risk is increased by the need to wear very comprehensive protective clothing to protect workers from the radiological hazards. One problem they faced when assessing the risk is that it wasn’t possible to use the usual equipment to carry out environmental measurements due to the potential for it to become contaminated.

After assessing the problem a number of measures were implemented including

• classifying the area as a “confined space” and introducing restrictions on acess based on factors that could affect an individual’s susceptibility to heat strain
• trying to schedule maintenance work during plant shutdowns
• introducing quite stringent and conservative time restrictions for work in the area
• providing cooling vests

Andrew Moore from the HSE was the second speaker. He provided a regulatory perspective but also gave some good advice on how to manage the health risks associated with work in hot environments. He stressed the importance of obtaining competent advice and effective management, ensuring that all the relevant stakeholders are involved. He illustrated his presentation with a case study where workers at a leisure pool were working in relatively high temperatures and high humidities. Although treated as a thermal comfort problem, the temperatures involved meant that the workers could be considered to be experiencing thermal stress.

I was the third speaker. Copies of my slides with notes can be viewed on Slideshare and a previous post.

The final speaker was Len Morris of the HSE who announced the formation of a BOHS Topic group on the thermal environment. Anyone interested in getting involved should contact BOHS HQ.

There are a number of good on-line information sources for anyone who’d like to find out more about managing the risks to health presented by the thermal environment, including the following

• the HSE thermal environment website
• the BOHS Technical Guide on the thermal environment andaddendum
• HSE’s guidance on heat stress

Visual Notetaking

I stumbled across this presentation on Slideshare the other day

I think it’s a really example of the modern approach to presentation design as advocated by Garr Reynolds and Nancy Duarte. It’s well designed and very visual. No not boring lists of bullet points here. The content is good and interesting too.

To understand the message fully you’d need to listen to the presenter – and that’s what presentations are about – the slides should support the presentation. With Slideshare that’s not possible (unless the originator records a soundtrack to go with it) so the full message doesn’t come across. However, the creator, Eva-Lotta Lamm, has made the notes that go along with the presentation available on her blog “Do Not Forget”

I like the idea of using sketchnotes and have tried to use them when I’ve attended conferences and meetings over the last 12 months – but I’ve not got the hang of them yet. I’m not a natural sketcher and I still find myself writing out linear lists. But I’m going to keep trying!

Thermal Comfort

The thermal environment is one of the traditional topic areas studied by occupational hygienists. There are two issues:

• thermal stress and strain
• thermal comfort

Excessive thermal stress means that the body has to work hard to avoid he core temperature moving outside narrow limits (37 + 2 C). If that happens we’re in a serious situation that leads to serious health effects and may be fatal. Our efforts to prevent this happening can also lead to adverse effects. This is most likely to occur in extreme environments or, sometimes, in more moderate environments where particularly heavy work is being performed or clothing is worn which prevent metabolic heat escaping.

Thermal comfort is most likely to be an issue in workplaces such as offices, but complaints or concerns can sometimes occur in manufacturing environments and other types of workplace. In this case the body is not experiencing a level of stress that it can’t cope with. There isn’t a physiological problem and ill health will not occur due to excessive thermal strain. But that encompasses a wide range of conditions. Will all of them be “comfortable”? Experience clearly shows that the answer to that is “no” !

Most occupational hygienists don’t work in industries work in high or low temperatures and so usually don’t have to deal with problems due to workers experiencing excessive heat or cold stress. However most of us, at some time or other, will be faced with a situation where workers are complaining that an environment is uncomfortable.

The BOHS is holding a Regional Meeting at Ellesmere Port tomorrow on the thermal environment. I’ll be giving a presentation on how to evaluate thermal comfort. These are the slides I’ll be using.

Thermal comfort for bohs version for slideshare notes

View more documents from Mike Slater.

Jocelyn Bell Burnell - "Beautiful Minds"

On Wednesday this week I watched the first of a series of 3 programmes profiling British Scientists. It told the story of Jocelyn Bell Burnell, who, as a postgraduate student, discovered pulsars – highly magnetized, rotating neutron stars that emit pulses of radiation at regular intervals.

Jocelyn Bell comes across as a genuine, self efacing, modest person. She speaks quietly with a distinct brogue revealing her Northen Irish origin (interestingly, her sister, who was interviewed during the programme, didn’t have a trace of a Ulster accent!). The programme included segments of an interview with her, where she expressed views on the practice of science but mainly concentrated on the story of her discovery of pulsars. As a PhD student in Cambridge, working under Antony Hewish, she was given the task of building a radio telescope (not the dish type but a field full of wires) and analysing the data obtained. Being in the 1950’s this data was in the form of chart recorder data – yards and yards of paper.During this analysis she noticed a series of small “blips”. Initially dismissed as “noise” by her superiors she carried on obtaining better data by slowing down the pen recorder! This allowed her to analyse these “blips” in more detail and it was then quite clear that she had found a series of regular pulses, This led to quite a furore as initially it was thought these could be signals from ET. However, she went on to analyse other parts of the sky where she found similar signals, ruling out the ET theory.

Despite this marvellous work, it was her supervisor, Antony Hewish, who was awarded the Nobel prize. JBB didn’t get a mention. Hewish was interviewed during the programme and justified this by almost dismissing JBB’s role and arguing that it is a team effort and that the team leader is the person who deserves any credit. I think this was absolutely disgraceful and is indicative of the attitude of the scientific establishment. The “top men” taking all the credit and glory and also the embedded misogyny. Despite this, when discussing it during the programme (and I’ve seen other interviews with her where she takes the same attitude), she does not come across as bitter. I don’t know whether she feels any anger inside – if so, she does a good job of hiding it. I suspect this is partly explained by her religion – she is a Quaker and a gentle, stoic attitude and lack of bitterness seems to go allong with that.

Although I enjoyed the programme the content was inevitably limited it mainly concentrated on the pulsar story, only touching on other aspects of her life and career. I would have liked to have known more about how she squares her deep religious conviction with being a scientist and to have learnt more about her career after the 1950’s. In other programmes I’ve seen about her life she has mentioned how difficult it was to work in science as another and how she was able to keep in touch by working as a tutor for the Open University.

More information on JBB can be found on the Internet including some interviews with her that delve into some more detail, here.

Picture credit: NASA via Wikipdedia http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/objects/heapow/archive/compact_objects/vela_pulsar_jet.html

UK Nanotechnology Strategy

The UK Nanotechnologies Strategy was published on 18th March 2010. It outlines the strategy of the current government, so things may change after May 6th - we'll have to wait and see!

Nano Strategy Fully Accesible Version - Final

The potential health risks from nanoparticles are one of the "emerging issues" that occupational hygienists and health and safety professionals in general need to keep abreast of. Nanotechnology is a fast developing field and the toxicological implications are not fully understood. Governments see nanotechnology as an important emerging technology that can lead to economic benefits and is encouraging its development. It's important that sufficient emphasis is given to research into the health implications.

One of the strategic aims set out in the strategy document is a commitment to

"Better understanding of the risks associated with the use of, and exposure to, nanomaterials, and enough people with the right skills to assess them. "

In respect to this aim the document sets out the following actions

• Approaches to Government EHS research on nanotechnologies will be explored by the Chief Scientific Adviser network, with the aim of improving co-ordination. A meeting will be chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, John Beddington.
• There will be an ongoing portfolio of Government and publically funded research into a wide range of crucial EHS nanotechnologies issues including the behaviour of key nanomaterials in the gut when eaten and when inhaled into the lungs.
• Contributions will be made to international work programmes on nanotechnologies including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Nanotechnology Working Parties and the EU’s Framework Programme. The UK will work to influence the future scope of these projects.

All commendable, if rather vague.

One of the problems is that its only possible to see an effect once exposure has occurred so there is a dilemma - how can we detect effects in humans without exposing them to possible dangers? Animal experiments present difficulties both in terms of transferability of the findings to humans and the ethical implications.

Until stronger evidence is available the only sensible approach is to be cautious and apply a high degree of control. Nano-particles may or may not have serious health effects - we don't know - but if we treat them as if they do and design our control strategies similar to those for carcinogens and sensitisers, then we should ensure that worker health risks are minimised.