Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Workshop Compounds Or Chemicals ranks #482 of 838 by danger score (34/100) at ER-volume #612 of 838 (473/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #482
- danger rank of 838
- #612
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 34/100
- danger score
- 473/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 (34/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
34 Lower than most lower than 57% 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 · 2024
Composite verdict
Composite Safety Score: 44/100
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) | 4 | 33rd | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 473 | 25th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | +49% | 93rd | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 17 | 54th | 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 9,471 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 833. Segments sum to 9,471 - 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 Communication & Entertainment 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 Communication & Entertainment danger scores
How this 34/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for workshop compounds or chemicals - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 473 ER visits/yr Below median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 3.9% Below median admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
- 5-year trend+49%
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 20-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2024, injury counts for workshop compounds or chemicals are rising by about 49% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2023 (966 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2011 (169 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 1,274 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by foreign body to the eyeball (609 cases). The 55-64 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 1,990 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 3.9% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 17 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how workshop compounds or 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 2024-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.
Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2024)
Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 362 | 219 | |
| 5-14 | 188 | 152 | |
| 15-24 | 693 | 492 | |
| 25-34 | 1,186 | 323 | |
| 35-44 | 993 | 327 | |
| 45-54 | 1,240 | 349 | |
| 55-64 | 1,283 | 707 | |
| 65-74 | 283 | 309 | |
| 75+ | 220 | 88 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| All Parts Body | Poisoning | |
| Eyeball | Foreign Body | |
| All Parts Body | Derma/conjunct | |
| Eyeball | Derma/conjunct | |
| Eyeball | Other | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Arm | Derma/conjunct | |
| Eyeball | Burn, Chemical | |
| Lower Leg | Burn, Chemical | |
| Face | Derma/conjunct | |
| Hand | Burn, Chemical | |
| Hand | Derma/conjunct | |
| Foot | Burn, Chemical | |
| Face | Burn, Chemical | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
59YOF WAS WORKING WITH A NEW TYPE OF RESIN AND GOT SOME ON HER SKIN, SHE WAS WEARING GLOVES. SHE HAD A BURNING AND DEVELOPED A RASH ON HER ARMS, FACE AND TORSO. DX: ALLERGIC REACTION
46YOM PRESENTS WITH AN ALLERGIC REACTION. HE STATES HE IS ALSO ALLERGIC TO EPOXY. HE HAD A REACTION TO THIS SEVERAL DAYS AGO. HE PUT AWAY HIS CLOTHES TODAY WHICH HE MAY HAVE BEEN WEARING WHEN HE WAS INITIALLY EXPOSED TO THE EPOXY IS NOT SURE IF HE WAS REEXPOSED. HE STATES THAT HE FELT SHORT OF BREATH AND DEVELOPED A DIFFUSE RASH. DX: ACUTE ALLERGIC REACTION
27YOM REPORTS WITH PUNCTURE WOUND TO HAND WHEN HE WAS USING A CHAULK GUN AND IT SLIPPED. DX PUNCTURE WOUND TO HAND
19YO *** *** ***, PATIENT REPORTS HE ACCIDENTALLY INGESTION UV RESIN DX: ACCIDENTAL INGESTION OF SUBSTANCE
40 YOM PRESENTING WITH REDNESS AND SWELLING TO HIS FACE STATUS POST EXPOSURE TO EPOXY WHILE SANDING A WALL EARLIER IN THE DAY. DX: ALLERGIC REACTION.
31 YOM WAS WORKING ON GROUT IN HIS BATHROOM AND DEVELOPED A RASH THAT SPREAD ALL OVER HIS BODY. DX: CONTACT DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC REACTION
16MOM PRESENTS AFTER HE INGESTED 25 ML OF RESIN HARDENER. NOTES TO HAVE LIP SWELLING AND CHEMICAL IRRITATION OF EYE AND ABDOMEN AT HOME. DX: INGESTION OF FOREIGN SUBSTANCE
37YOM WAS WORKING ON DOING SOME GROUT IN THE BATHROOM HE STARTED DEVELOPING A HEAVY SENSATION OF THE CENTER OF HIS CHEST DX CHEST PIAN
34YOM WAS USING RESIN AND GOT SOME IN HIS EYE. DX LEFT CHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS
69YOM WAS CARRYING A SLAB OF CONCRETE AND DEVELOPED PAIN DOWN LOWER BACK DX: LUMBAR STRAIN
24YOF, PRESENTING WITH NONTRAUMATIC LEFT LATERAL LOWER CHEST WALL PAIN SINCE LAST NIGHT, ENDORSING HISTORY OF HEAVY VAPING AND EXPOSURE TO RESIN TYPE CHEMICAL FUMES WORKING ON ART PROJECT, DX: CHEST PAIN UNSPECIFIED
33YOM PRESENTS WITH BURN TO FOOT. PATIENT STATES HE WAS POURING CONCRETE AND HAD A HOLE IN HIS BOOT AND THE CONCRETE WENT IN. PATIENT STATES HE THOROUGHLY WASHED THE CONCRETE OFF WITH WATER AND VINEGAR BUT HAS WORSENING PAIN TO FOOT. DX: CONCRETE BURN TO FOOT
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
The reason for reporting is that I developed a blistering rash on my hands and arms. 3d SLA resin made by Anycubic Myself The product was used in a Anycubic mono5s printer. It was used in my apartment with ventilation and with Latex Gloves. I developed a blistering rash on my right hand and left hand. I also developed bumps on my right and left lower arms. I developed these rashes through indirect contact with the resin.
I was spraying a product called Flex Seal Clear outdoors in my backyard. I was spraying it on an old metal ice chest/cooler. There was no ignition source around. The spray spontaneously combusted - exploded. The can warns against using indoors and making sure there is plenty of ventilation and that there is no ignition source (pilot light, flame, etc.). Using it outdoors and with no heat source there should have been no reason for it to ignite.
Inhaled Bondo dust Lungs: normal DIB Discharged home in stable condition Diagnosis: Acute bronchospasm
Consumer had their concrete floors stained and sealed by a contactor, with the concrete seal being applied on March 3. As of today, 03/27/2017, the odor of the sealant is still prevalent and the consumer is concerned about the health of his family and his unborn child his wife is pregnant with. His concern is the VOCs being gassed off may be harmful. Consumer also stated that he hosted a party at his house on 03/26/2017 and some of the guests complained of their eyes burning. As of 4/5/17, the smell is still present despite airing out the house every afternoon.
Submitter used the product on his driveway. After the product finished drying somehow it got tracked into the home. Black residue was found on the hardware floor and carpet ad few days after installation. Submitter is reporting eye irritation ad respiratory problem have been occurring for the past two years. Submitter believes that after the product dried it turned into some kind of powder that was tracked into the home.
I am a competitor of this product and am concerned that the manufacturer is not properly listing CPSC/GHS hazard warning information on the labels. This product can be purchased from Amazon as well as Direct to Consumer on the manufacturer's website. This product is an epoxy resin that is advertised to be used for DIY art, jewelry, table top and molds.
I am a competitor of this product and am concerned that the manufacturer is not properly listing CPSC/GHS hazard warning information on the labels. This product can be purchased from Amazon as well as Direct to Consumer on the manufacturer's website. This product is an epoxy resin that is advertised to be used for DIY coating, art, geodes, tabletop, bar top, and live edge river tables.
I am a competitor of this product and am concerned that the manufacturer is not properly listing CPSC/GHS hazard warning information on the labels. This product can be purchased from Amazon as well as Direct to Consumer on the manufacturer's website. This product is an epoxy resin that is advertised to be used for DIY coating, casting, art, geodes, tabletop, bar top, and live edge river tables.
Showing 8 of 17 reports.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to workshop compounds or chemicals on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Home Communication & Entertainment
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Workshop Compounds Or Chemicals: cross-group products nearest on danger score (34/100), estimated annual ER visits (473/yr), and hospitalization share (3.9%). 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 Communication & Entertainment
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, Workshop Compounds Or Chemicals ranks #482 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #612 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does workshop compounds or chemicals rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, workshop compounds or chemicals ranks #482 by PlainSafety danger score (34/100) and #612 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (473/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from workshop compounds or chemicals?
The most common injury is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 1,274 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from workshop compounds or chemicals increasing or decreasing?
Up 49% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for workshop compounds or chemicals injuries?
The 55-64 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 1,990 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by workshop compounds or chemicals?
Of all ER visits involving workshop compounds or chemicals, approximately 3.9% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (96.1%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with workshop compounds or 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.