Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2021, Photographic Chemicals ranks #684 of 838 by danger score (29/100) at ER-volume #821 of 838 (54/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #684
- danger rank of 838
- #821
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 29/100
- danger score
- 54/yr
- estimated ER visits (avg)
Danger score combines injury volume, hospitalization, fatality, and five-year trend. ER volume is the average annual NEISS estimate alone. Rank 1 is highest on each list.
Where this category's danger score sits nationally
Danger score (29/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
29 Among the lowest lower than 82% of 838 product categories
scored CPSC product categories, bucketed by value
Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more product categories. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.
Source CPSC NEISS, PlainSafety danger-score model · 2021
Composite verdict
Composite Safety Score: 16/100
One verdict blending 4 independently-sourced dimensions from two separate CPSC systems, each benchmarked against all 838 scored product categories by percentile rather than raw value, so no single huge-volume category can dominate the scale.
| Dimension | Value | National percentile | Weight applied | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) | 0 | 0th | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 54 | 4th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | +280% | 100th | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 0 | 0th | 20% | CPSC SaferProducts.gov public incident report count |
Methodology: each dimension is ranked against the full population's p10/p25/p50/p75/p90 breakpoints and interpolated to a 0-100 percentile; the composite is the weighted average of available percentiles. See methodology for the full benchmark table.
Where 429 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 926. Segments sum to 429 - a body-map mix, not a danger score or ER-volume rank.
Two danger lenses
Same-group peer scores and this product's dial
The bars compare PlainSafety danger scores inside the Home Workshop Tools & Equipment group (same CPSC NEISS extract). The dial is this product's score alone on the Low/Moderate/High bands. Do not read a peer bar as an ER-visit count.
Home Workshop Tools & Equipment danger scores
How this 29/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for photographic chemicals - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 54 ER visits/yr Low volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 0.0% Low admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
- 5-year trend+280%
Band labels compare this category against the corpus of 838 scored CPSC product categories, see the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Across the 17-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2021, injury counts for photographic chemicals are rising by about 280% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2009 (107 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2016 (15 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 91 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by other to the eyeball (79 cases). The 15-24 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 265 cases over the NEISS window, and males appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 0.0% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 0 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 10 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how photographic chemicals fail in real households. Every figure on this page comes from CPSC-published data: NEISS projects national estimates from a probability sample of about 100 U.S. hospital emergency departments, while SaferProducts.gov collects voluntary reports from consumers, manufacturers, and clinicians. The danger score, trend indicators, and demographic breakdowns update automatically when CPSC releases a new yearly NEISS file, which is why this page is dated 2021-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.
Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2021)
Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 60 | 31 | |
| 5-14 | 0 | 57 | |
| 15-24 | 147 | 118 | |
| 25-34 | 0 | 16 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| All Parts Body | Poisoning | |
| Eyeball | Other | |
| Lower Leg | Other | |
| Finger | Laceration | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Eyeball | Derma/conjunct | |
| Hand | Other | |
| Wrist | Derma/conjunct | |
| Upper Leg | Burn, Chemical |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
14YOF W/ CHEMICAL BURN TO R THIGH DEVELOPING PHOTOGRAPHS IN SCHOOL W/ AGENT *** DEVELOPER,SPILLED TOR THIGH DX: CHEMICAL BURN THIGH
17 Y O F FB PHOTOGRAPHERS DEVELOPER SPLASHED IN HER EYE AT SCHOOL RN CALLED POISON CONTROLA AND CHEMICAL IS NON TOXIC
=33 YOF RASH TO BIL WRIST & RT FACE AFTER EXPOSED TO FILM DEVELOPINGCHEMICALS. DX CONTACT DERMATITIS
19YOF IS PHOTOGRAPHY STUDENT, USES SILVER NITRATE FOR DEVELOPING PHOTOSC/O HAND TURNING BLUE. DX - HAND DISCOLORATION 2ND TO CHEMICALS
15 YOF CONJUNCTIVITIS EYE AFTER EXPOSURE TO PHOTOGRAPHIC CHEMICAL FIXER
WART ON SHIN,READ SM AMT DINITROCHLOROBENZENE,WOULD CREATE IMFLAMMATORYRXN & DESTORY WART DX: CELLULITIS SHIN
PT INGEST ACETIC ACID( PHOTOGRAPHIC INDICATOR)
PT WAS WORKING WITH PHOTOGRAPHIC FIXER AND SPLASHED LEFT EYE SUSTAININGCHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS W/BURNING, REDNESS, BLURRED VISION
PT TRYING TO DEVELOPE OWN FILM AND GOT SOME CHEMICALS IN EYE C./O PAINBLURRED VISION AND REDNESS CORNEAL ABRASION LEFT EYE
PATIENT GOT PHOTO DEVELOPING SOLUTION IN EYE AT SCHOOL, EYE BURNING ANDRED; CHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to photographic chemicals on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Home Workshop Tools & Equipment
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Photographic Chemicals: cross-group products nearest on danger score (29/100), estimated annual ER visits (54/yr), and hospitalization share (0.0%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.
Similar danger score
Nearest cross-group products by PlainSafety danger score (100-point scale).
Similar ER visit volume
Nearest cross-group products by NEISS estimated annual ER visits.
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
Related Products in Home Workshop Tools & Equipment
Read with this product
About this data
CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports form the basis of this page. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments.
According to PlainSafety's CPSC NEISS corpus ranking, Photographic Chemicals ranks #684 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #821 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does photographic chemicals rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, photographic chemicals ranks #684 by PlainSafety danger score (29/100) and #821 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (54/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from photographic chemicals?
The most common injury is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 91 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from photographic chemicals increasing or decreasing?
Up 280% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for photographic chemicals injuries?
The 15-24 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 265 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by photographic chemicals?
Of all ER visits involving photographic chemicals, approximately 0.0% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (100.0%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with photographic chemicals?
You can file a consumer incident report at SaferProducts.gov, the official CPSC reporting portal. Reports help the CPSC identify emerging hazards and trigger investigations or recalls. You can also call the CPSC hotline at 1-800-638-2772.
PlainSafety is rendered directly from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall and incident records, no number is typed in by an editor. Product recall timelines and hazard labels are drawn from CPSC recall records for this product. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.