On 26/05/2017 23:16, Roger Hayter wrote:
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Fri, 26 May 2017 17:38:34 +0100, Bill wrote:

In message , Harry Bloomfield
writes
The Natural Philosopher laid this down on his screen :
So why don't they just hose down asbestos when thy pull it out of
buildings? And then chuck it in a pond to get rid of it?

Where is the money to be made and white suits to be worn in doing that?

I was always taught that white asbestos and talc were similar
chemically.

So I have always been very careful who I kissed.

And where you kissed them http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/859485
;-)

Which points out, inter alia, that talc and asbestos are not similar,
but the latter used (up to 1970s) to contaminate the former because
they are found in the same places.

Chemical formula wise they are *very* similar indeed the difference is
in the exact crystalline form being blocky/amporphous or needle like.

And it still does if you look carefully enough at least for the
non-cosmetic grades of industrial talc. H&S are now requiring dust masks
for workers handling industrial grade talc which invariably does contain
traces of asbestos. I suspect it is present in cosmetic grade too since
you can only look so deep with a light microscope.

http://www.microlabgallery.com/gallery/Tremolite.aspx

--
Regards,
Martin Brown