Loading…

Chrysotile in Water

The problems of quantitating chrysotile in water by fiber count techniques are reviewed briefly and the use of mass quantitation is suggested as a preferable measure. Chrysotile fiber has been found in almost every sample of natural water examined, but generally transmission electron miscroscopy (TE...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environmental health perspectives 1974-12, Vol.9, p.161-163
Main Author: Speil, Sidney
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-4df3f767d4e156a7c353c9cb117a152889e61e3470927c237748da1cba3b7ca03
cites
container_end_page 163
container_issue
container_start_page 161
container_title Environmental health perspectives
container_volume 9
creator Speil, Sidney
description The problems of quantitating chrysotile in water by fiber count techniques are reviewed briefly and the use of mass quantitation is suggested as a preferable measure. Chrysotile fiber has been found in almost every sample of natural water examined, but generally transmission electron miscroscopy (TEM) is required because of the small diameters involved. The extreme extrapolation required in mathematically converting a few fibers or fiber fragments under the TEM to the fiber content of a liquid sample casts considerable doubt on the validity of numbers used to compare chrysotile contents of different liquids.
doi_str_mv 10.1289/ehp.749161
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1475396</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3428274</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3428274</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-4df3f767d4e156a7c353c9cb117a152889e61e3470927c237748da1cba3b7ca03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkM9LwzAYhoMoc04vehZ2EA9CZ74kzZdcBBn-goEXxWNI09R1dO1MOmH_vR0dY56-w_vwvB8vIZdAJ8CUvvfz1QSFBglHZAhpyhKtmTgmQ0o1JBJlekrOYlxQSkFJOSADIZBqTofkajoPm9i0ZeXHZT3-sq0P5-SksFX0F7s7Ip_PTx_T12T2_vI2fZwljgsFicgLXqDEXHhIpUXHU-60ywDQQsqU0l6C59smho5xRKFyCy6zPENnKR-Rh967WmdLnztft8FWZhXKpQ0b09jS_E_qcm6-m18DAlOuZSe43QlC87P2sTXLMjpfVbb2zToaQM0UAu_Aux50oYkx-GJfAtRsJzTdhKafsIOvD9_ao7vNuvymzxexbcKhiXGKhgumGAr-B3ezdjA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>17928713</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Chrysotile in Water</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Speil, Sidney</creator><creatorcontrib>Speil, Sidney</creatorcontrib><description>The problems of quantitating chrysotile in water by fiber count techniques are reviewed briefly and the use of mass quantitation is suggested as a preferable measure. Chrysotile fiber has been found in almost every sample of natural water examined, but generally transmission electron miscroscopy (TEM) is required because of the small diameters involved. The extreme extrapolation required in mathematically converting a few fibers or fiber fragments under the TEM to the fiber content of a liquid sample casts considerable doubt on the validity of numbers used to compare chrysotile contents of different liquids.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0091-6765</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-9924</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1289/ehp.749161</identifier><identifier>PMID: 4470930</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. National Institutes of Health. Department of Health, Education and Welfare</publisher><subject>Amphiboles ; Asbestos - analysis ; Average linear density ; Biological Effects of Ingested Asbestos: Proceedings of a Joint NIEHS-EPA Conference Durham, North Carolina November 8-20, 1973 ; Freshwater ; Microscopy, Electron ; Potable water ; River water ; Solar fibrils ; Water Pollution, Chemical - analysis ; Water samples ; Water Supply - analysis</subject><ispartof>Environmental health perspectives, 1974-12, Vol.9, p.161-163</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-4df3f767d4e156a7c353c9cb117a152889e61e3470927c237748da1cba3b7ca03</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3428274$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3428274$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768,58213,58446</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4470930$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Speil, Sidney</creatorcontrib><title>Chrysotile in Water</title><title>Environmental health perspectives</title><addtitle>Environ Health Perspect</addtitle><description>The problems of quantitating chrysotile in water by fiber count techniques are reviewed briefly and the use of mass quantitation is suggested as a preferable measure. Chrysotile fiber has been found in almost every sample of natural water examined, but generally transmission electron miscroscopy (TEM) is required because of the small diameters involved. The extreme extrapolation required in mathematically converting a few fibers or fiber fragments under the TEM to the fiber content of a liquid sample casts considerable doubt on the validity of numbers used to compare chrysotile contents of different liquids.</description><subject>Amphiboles</subject><subject>Asbestos - analysis</subject><subject>Average linear density</subject><subject>Biological Effects of Ingested Asbestos: Proceedings of a Joint NIEHS-EPA Conference Durham, North Carolina November 8-20, 1973</subject><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>Microscopy, Electron</subject><subject>Potable water</subject><subject>River water</subject><subject>Solar fibrils</subject><subject>Water Pollution, Chemical - analysis</subject><subject>Water samples</subject><subject>Water Supply - analysis</subject><issn>0091-6765</issn><issn>1552-9924</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1974</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkM9LwzAYhoMoc04vehZ2EA9CZ74kzZdcBBn-goEXxWNI09R1dO1MOmH_vR0dY56-w_vwvB8vIZdAJ8CUvvfz1QSFBglHZAhpyhKtmTgmQ0o1JBJlekrOYlxQSkFJOSADIZBqTofkajoPm9i0ZeXHZT3-sq0P5-SksFX0F7s7Ip_PTx_T12T2_vI2fZwljgsFicgLXqDEXHhIpUXHU-60ywDQQsqU0l6C59smho5xRKFyCy6zPENnKR-Rh967WmdLnztft8FWZhXKpQ0b09jS_E_qcm6-m18DAlOuZSe43QlC87P2sTXLMjpfVbb2zToaQM0UAu_Aux50oYkx-GJfAtRsJzTdhKafsIOvD9_ao7vNuvymzxexbcKhiXGKhgumGAr-B3ezdjA</recordid><startdate>19741201</startdate><enddate>19741201</enddate><creator>Speil, Sidney</creator><general>National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. National Institutes of Health. Department of Health, Education and Welfare</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19741201</creationdate><title>Chrysotile in Water</title><author>Speil, Sidney</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-4df3f767d4e156a7c353c9cb117a152889e61e3470927c237748da1cba3b7ca03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1974</creationdate><topic>Amphiboles</topic><topic>Asbestos - analysis</topic><topic>Average linear density</topic><topic>Biological Effects of Ingested Asbestos: Proceedings of a Joint NIEHS-EPA Conference Durham, North Carolina November 8-20, 1973</topic><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>Microscopy, Electron</topic><topic>Potable water</topic><topic>River water</topic><topic>Solar fibrils</topic><topic>Water Pollution, Chemical - analysis</topic><topic>Water samples</topic><topic>Water Supply - analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Speil, Sidney</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Environmental health perspectives</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Speil, Sidney</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Chrysotile in Water</atitle><jtitle>Environmental health perspectives</jtitle><addtitle>Environ Health Perspect</addtitle><date>1974-12-01</date><risdate>1974</risdate><volume>9</volume><spage>161</spage><epage>163</epage><pages>161-163</pages><issn>0091-6765</issn><eissn>1552-9924</eissn><abstract>The problems of quantitating chrysotile in water by fiber count techniques are reviewed briefly and the use of mass quantitation is suggested as a preferable measure. Chrysotile fiber has been found in almost every sample of natural water examined, but generally transmission electron miscroscopy (TEM) is required because of the small diameters involved. The extreme extrapolation required in mathematically converting a few fibers or fiber fragments under the TEM to the fiber content of a liquid sample casts considerable doubt on the validity of numbers used to compare chrysotile contents of different liquids.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. National Institutes of Health. Department of Health, Education and Welfare</pub><pmid>4470930</pmid><doi>10.1289/ehp.749161</doi><tpages>3</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0091-6765
ispartof Environmental health perspectives, 1974-12, Vol.9, p.161-163
issn 0091-6765
1552-9924
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1475396
source Open Access: PubMed Central; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects Amphiboles
Asbestos - analysis
Average linear density
Biological Effects of Ingested Asbestos: Proceedings of a Joint NIEHS-EPA Conference Durham, North Carolina November 8-20, 1973
Freshwater
Microscopy, Electron
Potable water
River water
Solar fibrils
Water Pollution, Chemical - analysis
Water samples
Water Supply - analysis
title Chrysotile in Water
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T02%3A45%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Chrysotile%20in%20Water&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20health%20perspectives&rft.au=Speil,%20Sidney&rft.date=1974-12-01&rft.volume=9&rft.spage=161&rft.epage=163&rft.pages=161-163&rft.issn=0091-6765&rft.eissn=1552-9924&rft_id=info:doi/10.1289/ehp.749161&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E3428274%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-4df3f767d4e156a7c353c9cb117a152889e61e3470927c237748da1cba3b7ca03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=17928713&rft_id=info:pmid/4470930&rft_jstor_id=3428274&rfr_iscdi=true