News/Posts/Events

Are hand-arm vibration myths causing unnecessary human and financial costs?

Yes! Next question, please... Webinar: 24th October 2023, midday, 60 minutes

Stop press: view the HAVS risk management webinar video here >

This webinar with Peter Wilson, our technical director, demonstrates how many organisations are wasting fortunes on ineffective risk reduction measures based on common myths associated with HAVS. It also provides the antidote in the form of a practical guide to best practice in HAVS risk management to minimise the risks.

The latest HSE data shows that the number of HAVS cases in 2021 had increased to well above the 2018 pre-pandemic levels (67% higher). The reason has to be that the current commonly implemented vibration risk control measures are not as effective as people assume and that improvements are needed.

There are 5 common HAVS myths that are still in circulation that should be dispelled once and for all. There is also a 6-element best practice checklist that should be used regularly to evaluate where, if, and what improvements to HAVS risk management processes could be made...

Both EHOs and the Environment Agency consider that around 80% - 90% of the reports that they get from noise consultants are so inadequate that they ought to be rejected out-of-hand.

Think about that for a moment...

This is not only a waste of regulator time and resources, but it can also delay projects and dramatically increase the money spent on the (wrong) mitigation measures.

These inadequate reports are also the cause of continuing unacceptable noise environments for nearby residents that lead to more complaints and health issues into the future.

This should be an unacceptable state of affairs...

Interestingly, the title of my session was changed from "Why are noise consultant reports inadequate" to "Noise consultant reports: current best practice approaches" at the last minute. No comment...

The HSE has just released new guidance on how best to manage the use of hearing protection for employees who wear hearing aids. The following is a summary, but you can also download a full advance copy.

Why did the Advertising Standards Authority have to rule on what should be common knowledge? What is HAVS monitoring best practice, what do insurers say and could zero monitoring be the best option?

We are living in interesting times in the field of hearing damage risk reduction due to new mobile technologies coupled with a host of new (and forthcoming) ways to reduce risk dramatically. Here are 4 new things that you should know about…

Once more there are claims that wrist/glove mounted vibration transducers can be used to assess HAV risk in operators as per the British Standard (BS ISO 5349). No they can’t. Thank you for listening…

How to update the current (failing) noise risk management process to make it much more effective – and self-financing...

The current noise risk management process has failed. This is how we fix it to reduce risk by c 90%…

Misunderstanding Hand Arm Vibration monitoring marketing material can put hands and safety policies at risk. Caveat emptor.

The availability of this new test will have a dramatic effect on the management of hearing loss prevention programmes…

This is one of a number of highly rated, interactive and practical noise related workshops developed for Environmental Health Officers. They are held locally by a host authority, saving on travel, time – and at a fraction of the cost of conventional training. It can even be a profitable exercise…

A simple way to cope with mobile plant and tools.

INVC recognised at the UK Energy Innovation Awards

International Occupational Hygiene Association (IOHA) Conference Paper: 27th April 2015: Peter Wilson: INVC Technical Director