7 Safety Myths You Should Stop Believing Before Traveling Dont Risk It
Every field has its sets of established truths. But if you consider some of these so-called truths a little critically, you sometime find out they're not true at all. It's like the professional version of an urban myth. They're in the air around us; we read about them and we heard smart people saying they're true; we never stop to question if they really ARE true; and ultimately, we end up believing in them ourselves.
In the learning and development field, a classic myth is that you can get better training results by designing training to match your learner's so-called learning styles. But I digress--we'll get back to that in another article.
In occupational safety, there may be some myths out there too. And that's why we had the conversation below with safety mythologist Carsten Busch. Put on your critical-thinking cap and your skeptical socks and give it a listen (or a read). And many thanks to Carsten for his sharing his time and knowledge with us.
Polyamorous Relationship Myths It's Time To Stop Believing
If you liked this video, we think you'll also like the guide to the new view of safety, below--HOP, HPI, Safety Differently, Safety-II, Resilience Engineering, and more. And yep, Carsten is one of the many global safety experts who contributed their thoughts to the guide.
Hi, everybody, and welcome. This is Jeff Dalto of Convergence Training back with another webcast from our webcast series. Today we're going to be in the world of Occupational Safety and Health. And we have a pretty cool guest, I'm excited about this.
. And we'll be discussing a number of the safety myths that he brought up in his book. And so before we go much further, let me just start by welcoming Carsten and saying hi.
Mpox (monkeypox) Myths You Shouldn't Believe
As am I. Well, cool. Thank you so much for coming on. And before we start getting into the prepared questions, could you tell us a little bit about yourself, how you see your role in safety or your views on safety, and show everybody that book
A bit about myself. I've worked for over 25 years now in safety, starting in occupational safety, adding some quality on the way, then moving into traffic safety. I've worked a lot in railroads and a bit in process safety but mostly safety management.
And for the past four years, I've worked for something completely different. Occupational Safety again, back to the roots, but within the Norwegian police force, I'm an advisor on occupational safety, which is an extremely interesting world to work in. Totally different from industry and railways and stuff like that.
Random Information About Eggs That Isn't Actually True
So you asked me say something about my role in safety. And well, I proclaimed myself a safety mythologist. That was mostly for fun because nobody has a title like that, and everybody wants to be unique. So I became unique, but there's also something more about it. I try to be critical with regard to establish truths, but also with regard to the newer stuff, and try to see what's in it and what's useful and well, mainly ask questions. Not give answers that much, maybe.
Great, great for those listening, I think you'll agree, like I do, Carsten is a provocative and interesting guy. He mentioned that he’s critical of traditional safety dogma but also some of the some aspects of new safety as well and Carsten, I know you've written an article on that, and I'll be sure to include a link to that article, kind of showing how you position yourself, I think, to some degrees in the middle of those two camps. Also, people will find that a Carsten is pretty funny as well, something I enjoy. And with that, we've got a series of 10 questions prepared for Carsten, and we'll jump right into the first one. And each of these kind of relate to a safety myth that Carsten has identified in his book.
Well, if you take the point of departure in our everyday speech, you would probably think they're bad because when people talk about hazards and risk, when you run a risk of something, then most of the time it's something bad, and hazard is often the origin of risk. And therefore we also see hazard as a bad thing. Hazard is something that can do damage to something. That's, well, the loose definition of a hazard that is found in some standards.
Myths About Dengue And Malaria You Must Stop Believing
But if you think about it.. really? Because look at this one (shows a coffee cup). You know what it is? A coffee cup. And I use those often when I do workshops and risk assessment courses, because it says here in small print - so you know, there's a lawyer involved, probably: “caution contents may be hot.”
And then think about it. If you go to 7-11 or where ever you get your coffee, and you would get a cup of a nice, cold coffee, which is very safe. You're not going to the counter and say thank you for the most safe coffee ever. You're going to complain and you're going to complain loudly. Because coffee has to be hot, has to be strong. I nearly want a heart attack and I want my tongue burned. Not really, but I want the possibility.
So I really want the hazard, I want the risk, and I've thought about—do you know the movie, The Matrix? And somewhere in that movie comes up the question, “Why have these machines built the virtual worlds the way they have built it? Because and then they explain they had a version of the world that was perfect and there was no harm whatever, but people died.
Myths About The Hymen You Need To Stop Believing Health News , Firstpost
And then they created a new version of their matrix where people have problems and stress and pollution and stuff. And that's where they thrived. And I think that that's a really nice image for us. Because systems and organisms need risk, we need stress. We need signals to react upon, if we don't get them, we die, we will wither away.
So I guess you're making two arguments, I think. One is it with the hot coffee, I'm drinking one myself right now, and I've stolen that example from your book and I use it a conferences myself, so credit now where credit's due. That risk brings, you know, good, bring some form of pleasure or reward or something good. So you really, I think part of what you're saying is you can't have that success you want in business sometimes without taking some measure of risk or confronting some level of hazard.
And then secondarily, I think you're saying they act as an indicator or a signal that something bad is about to happen. Am I getting both those right?
Myths About Male Orgasms You Should Stop Believing
Yeah. I should say we need risk in order to develop, to learn, to…whatever. But maybe not too much, and certain risks we don't want.
So next question. And this has to do ultimately with the definition of safety, which is something you hear discussed quite a bit lately.
A lot of people will say that safety is the absence of incidents, I believe, some organization or some standard and maybe you know this off the top of your head, has defined safety as such, or as something similar. But what is your take on that? Is safety the absence of incidents?
Laundry Myths: 7 'myths' Which Could Be Ruining Your Clothes In The Washing Machine
I don't think so. But if you go out on the street and you ask people “What is safety for you, ” most people will probably return something in the line of not having accidents, or they say, well, it's a feeling, feeling good or something. I think that are the two most common general answers and the connection to accidents is very natural.
And if you go back in the history of safety, all the early writers or most of the early writers write about accident prevention, like Heinrich, who of course is the best known guy, his book was
Safety and risk only enter the language later on, not as promptly as accident prevention. So I think it's quite natural of the people identify the two together safety and absence of incidents. And the thing is, of course, to test if the definitions works. Say you would have to re verse it and say “If I don't have an accident, am I safe?”
Myths About Vegetarian And Vegan Diets
And one of the examples I use is when I go into a bathtub, and I think let me be a bit efficient and blow dry my hair, which is very hypothetical, of course, and I get out of the box, and nothing has happened. Was that safe? Of course not. I'm doing something very, very dangerous sitting with an electrical appliance in the bathtub. But when I get out, one could say, well, this was safe because no accident happened. No it's not. It’s lethally dangerous but I was lucky.
So, not defining safety as something like the lack of incidents would lead you to practice and measure safety differently, is that correct?
I think viewing safety as an absence of accidents can give you some degree of information. It
Posting Komentar