Findings from the latest research report for the Chatered Management Institute (CMI) in the UK - 2023

An interesting report has been published this month by CMI regarding a landmark study on the impact that good management can have. Although this report only applies to the UK, the results are worth reviewing, and one must ask what the stats will look like in other countries such as South Africa. Good management practices can lead to a more profitable business and create motivated staff, as has been shown in many studies, as well as satisfied clients, "Happy worker, happy customer", as the saying goes. 

The report highlights the following statistics: 

1. 82% of managers who enter management positions have no formal management and leadership training – they are “accidental managers”.
2. 52% of managers do not hold any management and leadership qualifications.
3. A third of current managers and leaders have never received any formal management and leadership training (33%), including a quarter (26%) 
4. Workers who rate their manager as ineffective are significantly more likely to plan to leave their organisation in the next 12 months than those who say their line manager is effective (50% vs 21%). A third (33%) of managers will likely leave their jobs in the next 12 months.
5. Lastly, A worrying 46% of managers agreed that people were promoted based on internal relationships and profile rather than ability and performance.

Blog up and running Again

 Good Day All 

After a long time not running with any new posts, I have revived the old blog with new posts from research that affects occupational health and safety, sustainability and environmental management  

Mechanics of pesticide-Parkinson’s link revealed

A genetic mutation massively increases risk for agrochemical exposure. Andrew Masterson reports.

Even very low levels of exposure to some common agricultural chemicals can boost the risk of Parkinson’s disease, according to new research.

A paper published in the journal Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology reveals that exposure to pesticides known as paraquat and maneb dramatically affects the function of dopamine-producing neurons – the cells primarily targeted by Parkinson’s – in people carrying a particular genetic mutation.

Separate lines of research kicked off two decades ago identified the chemicals and the mutation – in a gene known as alpha-synuclein, located on chromosome four – as risk factors for developing Parkinson’s, but the latest study is the first to uncover what happens on a cellular level when the two combine.

“People exposed to these chemicals are at about a 250% higher risk of developing Parkinson's disease than the rest of the population,” says Scott Ryan from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, lead author of the new study.

“We wanted to investigate what is happening in this susceptible population that results in some people developing the disease.”

The role of chemical exposure in influencing risk for Parkinson’s was first identified in epidemiological studies, starting in 1998.

A separate line of investigation around the same time focussed on a large Italian family group prone to developing the disease, many members of which carried the alpha-synuclein mutation. 

Ryan and his colleagues set out to determine what happens to human cell function when both risk factors are combined.

To do so researchers established two cohorts of stem cells. The first used cells derived from Parkinson’s patients known to be carrying the mutation. The second derived from standard embryonic stem cells into which the mutation was edited.

Both sets were induced to form the target neurons, which were then exposed to varying levels of paraquat and maneb.

In cells containing the mutation even very low levels of exposure prevented the mitochondria from functioning correctly, depriving the neurons of essential energy and causing them to fail.

Cells that did not carry the mutation needed higher doses before function was impaired.

“Until now, the link between pesticides and Parkinson’s disease was based primarily on animal studies as well as epidemiological research that demonstrated an increased risk among farmers and others exposed to agricultural chemicals,” explains Ryan. 

“We are one of the first to investigate what is happening inside human cells.”

Critical exposure levels for the mutation-carrying cells were lower than the maximum safe levels contained in Canadian Environmental Protection Authority regulations.

Ryan says that the results indicate that current one-level-fits-all advice for chemical exposure needs to be ditched.

“This study shows that everyone is not equal, and these safety standards need to be updated in order to protect those who are more susceptible and may not even know it,” he says.

Fracking chemicals “imbalance” the immune system

Mice exposed to fracking chemicals during pregnancy were less able to fend off diseases; scientists say this could have major implications for people near oil and gas sites 

Chemicals commonly found in groundwater near fracked oil and gas wells appear to impair the proper functioning of the immune system, according to a lab study released today.
The study, published today in the journal Toxicological Sciences, is the first to find a link between fracking chemicals and immune system problems and suggests that baby girls born to mothers near fracking wells may not fight diseases later in life as well as they could have with a pollution-free pregnancy.
"This is a really important study, especially since the work started with the idea of identifying what's out there in the environment, how much people are exposed to," Andrea Gore, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology in the College of Pharmacy at the University of Texas at Austin, told EHN.
"So it's all based on this model that has been determined by a real world situation," said Gore, who was not involved in the study.
The implications are far-reaching: More than 17 million people in the U.S live within a mile of an oil or gas well. Hydraulic fractured wells now account for about half of U.S. oil and two-thirds of the nation's natural gas, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Related: Fracking chemical mix causes disturbing changes in breast tissue

Fracking, short for hydraulic fracturing, is a method of drilling where millions of gallons of water and chemicals are pumped underground at high pressures to fracture shale or coal bed layers to release otherwise unreachable oil and gas deposits. The chemicals used in the process remain proprietary, however, industry has reported more than 1,000 chemicals are used in fracked oil and gas wells—and researchers have found more than 200 of these compounds in wastewater near extraction.
The researchers tested 23 chemicals commonly found in groundwater near fracking operations. The chemicals chosen were recently associated with reproductive and development impacts on mice.
The researchers exposed mostly female mice in their mothers' womb to the chemical mixture at levels commonly found near fracking sites. Exposed mice had "abnormal responses" to diseases when they were older—specifically an allergic disease, a certain type of flu, and a disease similar to multiple sclerosis.
"The mice whose moms drank water containing the mixture had faster disease onset and more severe disease," lead author Paige Lawrence told EHN in a phone interview. Lawrence is a researcher and chair of Environmental Medicine at the University of Rochester Medical Center.
Some of the observed changes were subtle — "such as alterations in the number or percentage of certain cell types, whereas other changes were more manifest, such as advancement in the onset and severity of disease," the authors wrote.
Lawrence said human and mice immune systems are "more similar than they are different."
"This provides information as to what to look for in people," she said.
It's not entirely clear how the mixture altered the mouse immune system, but Lawrence said the chemicals may be altering pathways that control the immune cells that would fight off diseases. Some of the compounds in the mixture—benzene and styrene—are considered toxic to mammals' immune system.

Related: Fracking chemicals and kids' brains don't mix

Susan Nagel, a researcher and associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and women's health at the University of Missouri School of Medicine and study co-author, said the 23 chemicals they use are known endocrine disruptors, meaning they interfere with the proper functioning of hormones.
Properly functioning hormones are crucial for immune system development.
There's probably "some overlap of chemicals that perturb the endocrine system, some that perturb the immune system and probably some that do both," Gore said.
Female mice had more severe changes to their immune systems and abilities to fight off disease. "Immune responses of males and females are inherently different, and ... sex affects the timing, magnitude or penetrance of many diseases," the authors wrote, but cautioned that this study alone doesn't conclude that females are more sensitive to fracking chemicals than males.
The study is just the latest concern for people near fracking sites. Previous studies have found associations between living near fracking sites and birth defects, prostate and breast cancer, asthma, and acute lymphocytic leukemia.
Over the past decade the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified dozens of chemicals used in fracking as health hazards, according to a report from the Partnership for Policy Integrity and Earthworks. However the report found the agency allowed the chemicals to be made and used, and hasn't disclosed the chemicals to the public.
The EPA would not comment on the new study — a spokesperson said the agency is reviewing it.

Depression in the Workplace

A recent study conducted by The South African Depression and Anxiety Group (SADAG) in partnership with Hexor, with the support of Lundbeck, indicates that depression affects one in four South African employees. 

People aged between 25 and 44 are most affected by depression and take more than 18 days per annum off work because of it. The IDEA study of the London School of Economics and Political Science 2016 says this costs the South African economy more than R232 billion (or 5.7% of the country’s GDP) as a result of lost productivity, either due to absenteeism or attempting to work while feeling depressed.

Health24 previously quoted Dr Sebolelo Seape, chairperson of the Psychiatry Management Group, who said that more than 9.7% of the South African population (or 4.5 million to be exact) were suffering from depression. That means there's a good chance the person who sits next to you has had to cope with depression at some point in their lives. 

Given the shocking statistics, what should companies be doing to handle mental illness in the workplace? 

Depression is a medical condition

Psychiatrist and leadership lecturer at the University of Stellenbosch Business School (USB), Dr Renata Schoeman, says that more than 40% of all work-related illness is due to work-related stress, major depression, burnout and anxiety disorders.

She recently presented at a Corporate Mental Health Awareness seminar at USB and said companies need to realise the significance their structure, expectations of employees and management style have on the company’s annual turnover, overall productivity and the risk of employees developing health problems that could prevent them temporarily or permanently reentering the workforce.  

Fear of stigma

Non-disclosure of depression as a reason for sick leave in the workplace often arises due to the stigma that comes with the condition. Employees also fear losing their jobs.

In 2017 SADAG released stats following a survey to find out what the impact of mental illness has in the workplace. The results were shocking.

• 61% of respondents had disclosed their mental illness to their manager, with 69% of them saying they had experienced a negative or no response when they discussed the issue with them. 
• 44% of respondents felt uncomfortable disclosing their mental health issue to their manager. 

“Undiagnosed and untreated mental health conditions directly impact a workplace through increased absenteeism and presenteeism (attending work while unwell), reduces productivity and increases costs. Most employers tend to completely underestimate the financial impact of mental illness on their bottom line,” Dr Schoeman said.

“The cognitive symptoms of depression, such as difficulties concentrating, making decisions and remembering, are present 94% of the time during an episode of depression. Since leaders find themselves in roles of decision-making and responsibility, they are more prone to presenteeism. They would be less able to cope with the demands of their position, and as a leader their condition whilst at work would have a major impact on inter-office relationships, decision-making and their ability to manage their teams.”

She says it is imperative that companies understand the leading role they play in reducing or eradicating possible stressors at work. 

“[Companies] should foster a healthy educational environment with pro-active mental health awareness programmes, stress management training, access to services which nurture help-seeking behaviour, implement a coaching or counselling programme, identify people in need of care and offer them resources to ensure they receive proper treatment,” she said. 

A supportive culture is needed

Although policies and guidelines are necessary in the workplace, Dr Schoeman says that alone will not make a difference. Instead, companies need to foster a supportive culture of understanding and acceptance around mental illness. 

“Stigma, born out of ignorance, prejudice or fear, is a major problem in the workplace, creating a situation where employees choose to rather suffer in silence. One can understand their reluctance to seek support or report their condition, especially in the current economic climate where they might fear losing their job. As a result mental health problems often go undiagnosed and untreated, not only to the detriment of the individual’s career and health but also directly impacting the workplace’s bottom line.”

Dr Schoeman says mental health awareness in the workplace will ensure early identification and treatment of disorders, prevent recurrence and long-term complications. Implementing employee assistance programmes will help improve the quality of life for employees, while the longevity of the company will see a lesser loss to the country’s GDP and prevent disorders from becoming permanent disabilities.

How does your company handle mental illness in the workplace? Do you have an employee assistance programme at your company? Have you used it? Email mandy.freeman@24.com to share your story.

Are Poisons and Inhibitors Lurking in Your Workspace?

Just because a poison or inhibitor wasn't applied directly to the instrument doesn’t mean that it may not have been exposed to something while in a tool box, storage locker, or anywhere else gas detection equipment may be stored.

• By Ryan Thompson
• Apr 01, 2018

The sensors inside your personal gas detector are meant to be exposed to toxic, corrosive, and explosive gases, but that doesn't mean they are infallible. Chemicals and vapors from everyday cleaners and lubricants and specialized chemicals can all act as poisons or inhibitors to different sensor types. One of the most negatively affected is the catalytic bead LEL sensor. Having a catalytic bead LEL sensor in your personal gas monitor is standard in many applications, so being aware of what can act as a poison or inhibitor can be the difference between a fully functioning monitor and one that may not have the ability to alert you when in the presence of combustible gas.

Although it is one of the most common types of LEL sensors, the way in which a catalytic bead LEL sensor detects gas is one of the main reasons it is so susceptible to poisons and inhibitors. Internally, a catalytic bead sensor is going to burn the gas that comes in contact with the bead and detect a change in temperature. This change in temperature is what is then translated into the reading you see on your screen. When poisons and inhibitors come in contact with this bead, they can completely prevent the gas from burning, or may prohibit the bead from burning as much as it would have, which in turn, can prevent a readout from being available on your screen. Poisons and inhibitors can have a similar affect, but the way in which they affect the sensor and the sources they come from are different.

Some of the most common poisons are silicone-based products, lubricants, gas additives, lead, and sulfur compounds. As soon as an instrument with a catalytic bead sensor is powered on, that bead starts to heat up. If any of these poisons come in contact with that heated bead, they instantly melt and head to the surface. Once these poisons encapsulate the catalytic bead, there is no way to remove them and the sensor must be replaced. Since this sensor now has a layer of the melted poison substance surrounding it, it is no longer able to burn any combustible gas that may come in contact with it and can no longer provide a reading. If an instrument is not regularly calibrated and bump tested, there would be no way to identify if it has been poisoned or not. This can put a user in a dangerous situation as they could have a meter in a combustible environment that is not providing a reading due to the bead being blocked.

If there is any thought that the LEL sensor may have been poisoned, it should be calibrated immediately to make sure it is in working order. If the sensor can read the calibration gas and provide a readout during this process, then it will be able to detect gas in the field. If the sensor is poisoned, it will not be able to read the calibration gas applied and will give the user a failed calibration.

Inhibitors, while not as destructive as poisons, still have a negative effect on the sensor. If combustible gases and inhibitors are present at the same time, the catalytic bead sensor may not detect the combustible gas. Inhibitors can desensitize the bead and may shorten its life span, but after a calibration and bump test, the sensor may still be in a usable state. Some of the most common inhibitors would be halogenated compounds as well as anything containing astatine, bromine, fluorine, chlorine, and iodine. If an instrument has been exposed to any inhibitors, a calibration is recommended to make sure the instrument is still in working order. When the catalytic bead burns the gas from the calibration cylinder, it will also burn off some of the inhibiting material that may have been stuck on. If the bead is repeatedly desensitized by inhibitors, or comes in contact with a large quantity, it may not recover, resulting in a failed calibration.

Staying on the Safe Side
In some instances it may be obvious that the sensor was exposed to a poison or inhibitor, but this might not always be the case. Many lubricants or silicone-based products come in some form of spray that can bounce off of the surface it may be applied to, and if standing too close, can easily come in contact with a personal gas detector a user is wearing. A lot of these products also take some time to dry, releasing chemicals and vapors in the process. Storage also has to be taken into consideration. Just because a poison or inhibitor wasn't applied directly to the instrument doesn't mean that it may not have been exposed to something while in a tool box, storage locker, or anywhere else gas detection equipment may be stored.

Some of the most common poisons and inhibitors are listed above, but this does not limit the list to what has been stated here. By starting each day with a calibration or bump test and calibrating your instrument any time you think it has come in contact with anything that may have a negative effect, you are ensuring that your instrument is in working order and will detect gas that may be present. If a meter was affected by a substance, a failed calibration will indicate this instrument is no longer in working order and will need attention.

About the Author

Ryan Thompson serves as associate product manager at Industrial Scientific and can be reached at rthompson@indsci.com.

Report calls out worst produce for pesticides—strawberries, spinach top list

Pesticides residues are found on about 70% of tested produce; new research suggests this exposure could impact fertility 

Just when you thought it couldn't get any harder to eat healthy.
Turns out those nutrient packed foods we're all told to eat—such as strawberries and spinach— are also consistently tainted with potentially harmful pesticides. Both foods top the "Dirty Dozen" list released today by the Environmental Working Group(EWG), which analyzed federal data on pesticides in produce.
EWG, which examined tests done over the past few years by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, reports almost 70 percent of the produce sampled by the feds had pesticide residues.
Some were worse than others: "More than 98 percent of samples of strawberries, spinach, peaches, nectarines, cherries and apples tested positive for residue of at least one pesticide," according to the report.
For strawberries, which topped the Dirty Dozen list, about one-third of the samples contained 10 or more pesticides. Pesticides tainted a whopping 97 percent of the samples of spinach, which was second worst according to EWG.
Other produce on the "Dirty Dozen":

• Nectarines 
• Apples 
• Grapes 
• Peaches 
• Cherries 
• Pears
• Tomatoes 
• Celery 
• Potatoes
• Sweet Bell Peppers

"If you are going to buy some things organic, this is a helpful, clear list of those with highest residues on them," said Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst with EWG, which releases the list annually.
In all the USDA found 230 different pesticides and compounds formed when pesticides break down in their more than 38,000 samples.

Instigating infertility? 

It's difficult to say how much these residues on produce may harm people. Pesticides come in many forms—some are highly toxic, some not as much—and chemicals can have different effects at different doses.
Also, produce can have complex mixtures of different chemicals. Studies of people who work with pesticides, and are chronically exposed, have linked exposure to respiratory and memory problems, depression, cancer, birth defects and brain problems.
Lunder said there are certain pesticides, such as the organophosphate pesticide chlorpyrifos, that are showing up on produce and are widely considered toxic. After several studies linked the chemical to impaired brain development and behavior in children, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during the Obama Administration proposed banning the chemical, however, new EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt, cancelled the ban.
The EWG report pointed to a new line of research on pesticide residues linking the exposure to infertility. In January, a study of 325 women undergoing infertility treatment found women who ate two or more servings per day of produce with pesticide residues were 26 percent less likely to have a successful pregnancy than women with less pesticide exposure.
"These data suggest that dietary pesticide exposure within the range of typical human exposure may be associated with adverse reproductive consequences," the authors wrote.
In 2015, scientists found men's intake of pesticide-tainted produce was linked to lower semen quality.
It's not entirely clear how pesticide residues could impact fertility, however, in animal studies, exposure to low doses of pesticide mixtures early in pregnancies "increases embryonic cell death and inhibits its normal cell division ultimately resulting in fewer live born pups," said Jorge Chavarro, a researcher and associate professor at Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who was the senior author of the study that linked pesticide residues to fewer successful pregnancies in women.
"Something similar may be happening in humans," he said.

Keep eating your fruits and veggies

Lunder stressed that eating fruits and vegetables is important and, while avoiding pesticides isn't easy, buying organic will certainly lessen your exposure.
She added that avoiding pesticides is especially important when women are pregnant, planning to get pregnant or parents are feeding kids.
EWG also lays out the "Clean Fifteen" —those produce least likely to have pesticides.
So here's a good start for your next grocery list:

• Avacados
• Sweet Corn
• Pineapples
• Cabbage
• Onions
• Sweet Frozen Peas
• Papayas
• Asparagus
• Mangoes
• Eggplant
• Honeydew Melon
• Kiwi
• Cantaloupe
• Cauliflower
• Broccoli