triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Chemistry? Was: SB42

To: dstauffa@csc.com
Subject: Re: Chemistry? Was: SB42
From: stu.jo@ibm.net
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 16:04:29 -0700
Cc: jruwaldt@indiana.edu, triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
References: <8825651E.0052BF07.00@csc.com>
dstauffa@csc.com wrote:
> 
> I rememeber something from my college chemistry class that stated that
> "toxic" has to do with the level or amount of a particular chemical, not
> the chemical itself, i.e.,  a chemical isn't by definition toxic.  What was
> stresses was that there are toxic levels for a chemical.  Even pure oxogen
> is lethal if breathed in over one atomospere of pressure.   Maybe this
> explains why people react so differently to the same exposure to a certain
> chemical or substance.
> 
> I sure hope my chemistry professor is not rolling over in his grave...
> 
> Dave
> San Diego
> 1970 TR6 CP51649
I agree that all the substances I mentioned in my note are toxic.
However, my point was that government agencies have grossly overstated
the danger of many of these things. I am totally convinced that ripping
asbestos out of a building for instance, causes far more fibers in the
air than if it was lefy alone, but what the hey, people are making
millions doing it, usually at taxpayers expense.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>