Literature DB >> 2169219

Analysis of amphibole asbestos in chrysotile and other minerals.

J Addison1, L S Davies.   

Abstract

Chrysotile asbestos and many other mineral raw materials contain amphibole minerals which may be asbestiform. There is currently no analytical method which will detect the presence of amphibole at sufficiently low limits to preclude the possibility of inadvertent exposure of persons handling these materials to hazardous airborne fibre concentrations. A method of chemical digestion of chrysotiles has been tested with regard to the determination of their tremolite contaminant content and this has been applied to a range of chrysotile and other minerals. The method improves the sensitivity of the amphibole analysis at least 10-fold giving detection limits of 0.01-0.05% in chrysotile by X-ray diffractometry (XRD). The difficulties arising from compositional and morphological variations are discussed in the context of the potential hazards from airborne fibres and the relative values of analyses by XRD, infrared spectrophotometry (IR) and electron microscopy. It is concluded that XRD and IR are useful as screening methods for the detection of amphibole in chrysotile but other materials should be analysed by optical or electron microscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2169219     DOI: 10.1093/annhyg/34.2.159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg        ISSN: 0003-4878


  8 in total

1.  Asbestos-related cancer and the amphibole hypothesis. The amphibole hypothesis: neither gone nor forgotten.

Authors:  A M Langer; R P Nolan
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Chrysotile effects on the expression of anti-oncogene P53 and P16 and oncogene C-jun and C-fos in Wistar rats' lung tissues.

Authors:  Yan Cui; Yuchan Wang; Jianjun Deng; Gongli Hu; Faqin Dong; Qingbi Zhang
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 3.  Health risk of chrysotile revisited.

Authors:  David Bernstein; Jacques Dunnigan; Thomas Hesterberg; Robert Brown; Juan Antonio Legaspi Velasco; Raúl Barrera; John Hoskins; Allen Gibbs
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.635

Review 4.  Occupational exposure to chrysotile asbestos and cancer risk: a review of the amphibole hypothesis.

Authors:  L T Stayner; D A Dankovic; R A Lemen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Retention patterns of asbestos fibres in lung tissue among asbestos cement workers.

Authors:  M Albin; F D Pooley; U Strömberg; R Attewell; R Mitha; L Johansson; H Welinder
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 4.402

Review 6.  Health effects of asbestos and nonasbestos fibers.

Authors:  O Y Osinubi; M Gochfeld; H M Kipen
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 9.031

7.  Re-creation of historical chrysotile-containing joint compounds.

Authors:  G P Brorby; P J Sheehan; D W Berman; J F Greene; S E Holm
Journal:  Inhal Toxicol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.724

8.  Lung content analysis of cases occupationally exposed to chrysotile asbestos.

Authors:  R P Nolan; A M Langer; J Addison
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 9.031

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.