PDA

View Full Version : Amidol will Kill You?



Pawlowski6132
25-Mar-2011, 20:21
Lokk at Bret Weston's comments about Amidol HERE (http://www.anchellworkshops.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30%3Abrett-weston-on-technique&catid=15%3Aoutput-darkroom-and-lightroom&Itemid=39). Uncalled for?

cdholden
25-Mar-2011, 20:53
Why do you think it's uncalled for? Amidol is a corrosive carcinogen. It's better for people to be educated and make logical decisions on whether or not to use it. It can be safe to use with proper protective gear, but that doesn't make it any less harmful.

Leigh
25-Mar-2011, 20:57
Don't drink more than a liter a day.

- Leigh

Pawlowski6132
25-Mar-2011, 20:58
I don't know if it's uncalled for or not. I use it exclusively. Should I not? According to Brett, I shouldn't.

Merg Ross
25-Mar-2011, 20:59
Lokk at Bret Weston's comments about Amidol HERE (http://www.anchellworkshops.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30%3Abrett-weston-on-technique&catid=15%3Aoutput-darkroom-and-lightroom&Itemid=39). Uncalled for?

Certainly not uncalled for. Amidol is a carcinogen. Brett died thirteen months after the interview with Steve.

Pawlowski6132
25-Mar-2011, 21:05
Wow. I have to be honest, I'm shocked at the responses her so far. Makes me pause. But, so many other photographers use it and live to tell about it so...?????????

coops
25-Mar-2011, 21:16
Wow. I have to be honest, I'm shocked at the responses her so far. Makes me pause. But, so many other photographers use it and live to tell about it so...?????????

Don't quite understand. Why shocked?

Pawlowski6132
25-Mar-2011, 21:19
If it's so deadly, why do so many photographers use it? And why are they all not dropping dead like Brett?

Really??? Am I the only person that sees a dichotomy between folks like M.A.S. who claims Amidol to be holy water and Brett Weston who refused to touch it????

I'm starting to feel very naive.

Brian C. Miller
25-Mar-2011, 21:35
Brett "dropped dead" at 81 years old. I don't think it was Amidol that killed him.

Pyro is also "dangerous" and should be handled with care. Many people are allergic most all photographic chemicals, and they can't spend time in the darkroom at all. I handle Pyro with gloves, and if I used Amidol, I'd be using gloves with it, too.

Don't worry about it; just don't drink it. (I was told about a case where a fellow had been using his empty JD bottles for his photo chems. His house was burgled and also stolen were the JD bottles. The thief's uncle had been drinking, and wanted more whiskey. The thief's uncle then proceded to down the photog's chemistry in the JD bottles, and of course died. The thief then contact the police, and got them to charge the photog with poisoning. The photog of course got off scott free, because the bottles had been labled, and the bottles were stolen from his house.)

Vaughn
25-Mar-2011, 21:45
My guess, and only a guess, is that Brett's working methods were such that he was in contact with whatever he used...and perhaps he preferred not to change his working habits -- and instead, changed the developer to a less toxic one. Perhaps Brett was not comfortable wearing gloves, for example.

And from my own experience, when one has been around these chemicals for several decades, one can become hype-sensitive to them. It takes less exposure to push us over the line.

I do not see the dichotomy. I do not think M.A.S. has ever recommended that people touch Amidol -- use it, yes, but touch it, no.

Scotty230358
25-Mar-2011, 23:50
Amidol is certainly toxic - in its powdered form it is easily inhaled. I use a mask and gloves when mixing to reduce exposure. Mind you I also use a mask and gloves when using paint stripper. If sensible precautions are taken then harmful effects from using admidol (indeed any photographic chemical) can be greatly reduced.

In fact, the chemical that did me the most damage was 10% sulphuric acid. I spilt some on my tee shirt and it ended up full of holes.

Roger Cole
26-Mar-2011, 00:22
Certainly not uncalled for. Amidol is a carcinogen. Brett died thirteen months after the interview with Steve.


Brett "dropped dead" at 81 years old. I don't think it was Amidol that killed him.

Pyro is also "dangerous" and should be handled with care. Many people are allergic most all photographic chemicals, and they can't spend time in the darkroom at all. I handle Pyro with gloves, and if I used Amidol, I'd be using gloves with it, too.

Don't worry about it; just don't drink it.

Of a massive stroke, not of cancer. A carcinogen has nothing to do with having a stroke.

I don't really even read the villifying of amidol in the interview that the OP and some others seem to see. As others have said, it IS toxic, but if I liked the results and thought they were significantly better than I could get otherwise (I don't - I've seen amidol prints and they were ok but not obviously better than other developers to me - it may be paper specific of course) I might use it - carefully. And Brett does seem to be saying it's dangerous, which it is, and that he preferred to work with phenidone. If anything I'm a bit surprised at his condemnation of metol (which is mostly a contact irritant in some people as far as I'm aware) and hydroquinone. The latter has been used topically as a skin whitener, albeit banned as such in some countries. About the most conclusive thing one can say about it is that the FDA says it cannot be ruled out as a carcinogen, a far cry from a known danger. I think the danger from hydroquinone and metol (in the non allergic) with just normal care is minimal. Brett obviously got his hands in the developer, or the amidol wouldn't have stained his nails. I use tongs even with phenidone developers.

I think this is more to the point with Weston:


My guess, and only a guess, is that Brett's working methods were such that he was in contact with whatever he used...and perhaps he preferred not to change his working habits -- and instead, changed the developer to a less toxic one. Perhaps Brett was not comfortable wearing gloves, for example.

And from my own experience, when one has been around these chemicals for several decades, one can become hype-sensitive to them. It takes less exposure to push us over the line.

I do not see the dichotomy. I do not think M.A.S. has ever recommended that people touch Amidol -- use it, yes, but touch it, no.

I agree, and also agree with this:


Amidol is certainly toxic - in its powdered form it is easily inhaled. I use a mask and gloves when mixing to reduce exposure. Mind you I also use a mask and gloves when using paint stripper. If sensible precautions are taken then harmful effects from using admidol (indeed any photographic chemical) can be greatly reduced.

Know what you're using, the risks associated with it, and treat it accordingly. That seems sensible to me.

Gary L. Quay
26-Mar-2011, 03:33
The reason I stopped using it was because of disposal issues. You can't just dump the stuff down the drain. I like the results I got with it. Mr. Weston's comments were fairly matter-of-fact. I don't see them as an attack or condemnation. We have choices to make as photographers--for our health, and the health of our waterways. He made a different choice near the end of his life. May we all have the ability to change our spots as long as that.

--Gary

Bruce Barlow
26-Mar-2011, 04:30
Wear gloves. Practice Safe Photography.

John Jarosz
26-Mar-2011, 05:28
Different people are susceptible to different substances. But as a whole, a lifetime of exposure to photographic chemical can cause various conditions (none of them good). Wear gloves for contact with solutions, and a mask for working with powders. Ventilating your work area to the outside is always a good thing. label containers as to their contents. Clean work surfaces when you are done and dispose of chemicals per guidelines. Keep this stuff away from your kids. Just be a responsible informed user. All this information is available online.
People use toxic and carcinogenic material every day in laboratory work with no consequences if they protect themselves from exposure.

Brett's comment was correct, but those that don't want to hear that message will take it the wrong way.

Mark Sampson
26-Mar-2011, 06:13
+1 to Bruce. Treat all photo chemicals with care, and keep developers (especially) off your skin.
I found after some testing that when making enlargements on modern cold-tone paper, the difference in results between an Amidol developer and a standard-brand developer was insignificant. Especially when cost was considered. I also found that Michael Smith's Amidol formula does work well with Azo, better than (say) Dektol 1:2, but I'm not printing that way so for me it's a moot point.

Marko
26-Mar-2011, 07:29
Wear gloves. Practice Safe Photography.

Or safer yet, use Photoshop!

ic-racer
26-Mar-2011, 08:09
Or safer yet, use Photoshop!

Actually if we are going to be propagating conjecture, urban legends and the expert opinions of people without credentials, then Photoshop may be indeed more dangerous! :D
Risk of DVT and prolonged sitting
Risk of nearsightedness from bright screen on dark background
Risk of inhaling aerosolized ink printer dyes
Risk of electrocution plugging everything in
Risk of carpal tunnel
Risk of electromagnetic radiation
etc....

ic-racer
26-Mar-2011, 08:15
Amidol can kill you. The LD50 in rats is 0.24 g/kg. You might extrapolate to a 75kg human that one could ingest 36 grams you may die without medical attention.

Threads like this probably belong in the Lounge.

Marko
26-Mar-2011, 08:38
Actually if we are going to be propagating conjecture, urban legends and the expert opinions of people without credentials, then Photoshop may be indeed more dangerous! :D

What conjecture?

With all the hard facts available, it would be dangerously idiotic to negate Amidol's (as well as some other chemicals' used in photography) toxicity.

On the other hand, comparing that with Photoshop would be only amusingly so... ;)

Leigh
26-Mar-2011, 08:42
Amidol can kill you. The LD50 in rats is 0.24 g/kg. You might extrapolate to a 75kg human that one could ingest 36 grams you may die without medical attention.
Threads like this probably belong in the Lounge.
Ingest 36 grams??? Who among us has ever ingested any?

And to our members who are rats... Don't eat Amidol.

Every chemical on the planet is lethal in sufficient quantity, including water.

This thread belongs in the garbage, not the lounge.

- Leigh

E. von Hoegh
26-Mar-2011, 08:51
Crossing the street will kill you. Don't look, don't listen, just pick a busy street and pop out there from between two parked cars. You can drown in your bathtub, it's easy.

Don't try for a Darwin award, use some forethought, and life becomes much safer.

Bill_1856
26-Mar-2011, 09:06
Pyro is the natural antidote for Amidol. Used together in sequence they are not toxic.

Sal Santamaura
26-Mar-2011, 10:08
Pyro is the natural antidote for Amidol. Used together in sequence they are not toxic.Just in case someone as naive as the OP reads this, note that Dr. Mitchell is being facetious.

E. von Hoegh
26-Mar-2011, 10:22
Pyro is the natural antidote for Amidol. Used together in sequence they are not toxic.

If perchance you swallow lye, just chase it with a little battery acid.:D

Sal Santamaura
26-Mar-2011, 10:32
Just in case someone as naive as the OP reads this, note that Dr. Mitchell is being facetious.


If perchance you swallow lye, just chase it with a little battery acid.:DEvan's being just as facetious.

Drew Wiley
26-Mar-2011, 10:43
The primary use of amidol is in pharmaceuticals, not in photography. So of course it
is not intended to be carelessly handled. It's a rather heavy power so I doubt many
of us inhale it. I'd also hope that all of us know what a pair of nitrile or vinyl gloves are, and how to wash our hands after a darkroom session before eating. In the old
day people soaked their hands in everything from developers to pesticides and lead
based paint, and often paid a price for it.

Robert Hughes
26-Mar-2011, 10:50
Water will kill you, if you drink enough of it.

Roger Cole
26-Mar-2011, 10:56
Or safer yet, use Photoshop!


Actually if we are going to be propagating conjecture, urban legends and the expert opinions of people without credentials, then Photoshop may be indeed more dangerous! :D
Risk of DVT and prolonged sitting
Risk of nearsightedness from bright screen on dark background
Risk of inhaling aerosolized ink printer dyes
Risk of electrocution plugging everything in
Risk of carpal tunnel
Risk of electromagnetic radiation
etc....


What conjecture?

With all the hard facts available, it would be dangerously idiotic to negate Amidol's (as well as some other chemicals' used in photography) toxicity.

On the other hand, comparing that with Photoshop would be only amusingly so... ;)

Better question than "which is safer" is "who cares?"

I also fly small airplanes which, statistically, compares closely (but slightly favorably) with riding motorcycles. Driving cars is safer. Flying commercially is MUCH safer. Safer still would be wrapping myself in bubble wrap and lying quietly on the floor (so one can't fall) at home. The options of flying an airplane myself versus lying quietly on the floor compare pretty similarly on the "fun factor" to me with working in a darkroom versus Photoshop. ;) (Not saying this is true for everyone of course. I know people who hate darkroom work or merely tolerate it. To each their own.)

More importantly, the dangers with even a modicum of care don't compare. Flying is just one of several things I do (bicycling on the road, heck, hiking in the woods with the camera) that are considerably more dangerous than working in a darkroom if just sensible precautions are taken. We all do dangerous things every day. Be careful, but don't be silly about it. Nervous Nellies are no fun and generally have no fun. To quote Jimmy Buffet, "I'd rather die when I'm living than live when I'm dead."


Crossing the street will kill you. Don't look, don't listen, just pick a busy street and pop out there from between two parked cars. You can drown in your bathtub, it's easy.

Don't try for a Darwin award, use some forethought, and life becomes much safer.

Exactly so.

The risks of amidol (or any other substance) are worth knowing about and not underestimating so that reasonable precautions can be taken. Such are probably a bit more with amidol than with MQ or PQ developers, naturally enough.

E. von Hoegh
26-Mar-2011, 10:57
Evan's being just as facetious.

I thought everyone knew that a base would neutralise an acid?:confused:

Marko
26-Mar-2011, 11:00
Better question than "which is safer" is "who cares?"

Question? There was no question here.

Roger Cole
26-Mar-2011, 11:03
Question? There was no question here.

Sheesh. Tough crowd.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rhetorical+question

Marko
26-Mar-2011, 11:08
Sheesh. Tough crowd.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rhetorical+question

There are many ways to say "who cares?" :D

Pawlowski6132
26-Mar-2011, 11:09
The primary use of amidol is in pharmaceuticals, not in photography. So of course it
is not intended to be carelessly handled. It's a rather heavy power so I doubt many
of us inhale it. I'd also hope that all of us know what a pair of nitrile or vinyl gloves are, and how to wash our hands after a darkroom session before eating. In the old
day people soaked their hands in everything from developers to pesticides and lead
based paint, and often paid a price for it.

Drew, is this really true? I recall reading that the ONLY known use for Amidol is as a paper developer. Which is why it's relatively expensive.

Or, am I thinking of pyro?

Drew Wiley
26-Mar-2011, 13:02
Pyrogallol has had all kinds of industrial uses. Don't know about pyrocat however.
And yes amidol has pharmaceutical applications. I originally bought my amidol from
Bryant Lab locally. They shipped photo chemicals all over the country and a number
of folks might remember them as a convenient source analagous to Photographers
Formulary today. They supplied other industries too, but the owner and his wife were both organic chemists and by far their largest segment of business was to
pharmaceutical mfg, biotech, and hospitals. They were extremely knowledge folks,
employed phD's at their sales counter (!!), and told me that by far the largest volume of amidol they sold was to pharmaceutical companies. It was probably not
a medicine per se, but an ingredient in different things. Interestingly, they also said
that photographic amidol needs to be of higher purity!

Kirk Gittings
26-Mar-2011, 15:30
In the old days people soaked their hands in everything from developers to pesticides and lead based paint, and often paid a price for it.

When I was a kid I worked at a printed circuit board manufacturing company. The boards were stripped clean with a solvent called trichloroethylene (TCE). When we had a finger cut we would dip it in the TCE to cauterize it. TCE is now a known carcinogen. The old dirty TCE we would dump in an unlined pit. The site where we worked is now a Superfund site in large part because of the TCE which has gotten into the ground water. I must have goten a fair amount into my system too- that was over 50 years ago. So far so good.

Drew Wiley
26-Mar-2011, 15:42
Oh the stories I could tell about trichloroethane! It was called "safety solvent" and
was also used as movie film cleaner. It was first developed as an anesthetic. Janitors would use it to remove bubble gum and other sticky stuff from vinyl floors.
They would get woozy and pass out from time to time. It was heavier than air, so
the next morning they would find the poor guy dead on the floor. It was also bootlegged into siding stains at one time when safer solvents were considered too
smog-forming. Some fool used the stuff indoors despite the warning label, "Can
cause asphixiation or death", and the electrician got goofy and managed to burn the
house down. House painters would get woozy and fall off scaffolds. That was some nasty nasty stuff and caused horrible sore throats and lung irration under the best
of circumstances. Illegal to even mfg anymore, but not because of any of the above risks, but because dioxins were a byproduct of mfg and probably the real carcinogens involved. Yeah, I knew people getting killed by it.

John Bowen
26-Mar-2011, 17:23
It is my understanding (urban legend perhaps) that Amidol is used in hair dye for orientals. Makes sense, if it will turn your fingernails black, it would make your hair black.

Nitrile gloves....I purchase them by the case and develop in amidol almost exclusively.

SW Rick
26-Mar-2011, 18:06
If it doesn't bother you, use it with abandon!

Leigh
26-Mar-2011, 18:08
If it doesn't bother you, use it with abandon!
I've never heard of an Amidol-Abandon developer. :eek:

What are its unique characteristics? :confused:

- Leigh

Gary L. Quay
26-Mar-2011, 19:28
I'd like to inject a serious question into this seriously questionable thread. While we're discussing the toxicity of Amidol, does anyone know about how to dispose of this stuff. I've heard that Pyro becomes much less toxic after it oxidizes. Can Amidol be made safer to dispose of without having to take it to the toxic waste dump?

--Gary

rguinter
26-Mar-2011, 21:17
This thread has me so relieved!

With the loss of so many manufacturing jobs in the last two decades, the demand for Certified Industrial Hygienists (CIHs) has really declined.

But with all the WA comments here in this thread I sense the need is still strong.

Monday I think I'm going to go in to the office and ask for a raise.

Bob G. CIH

Jim Shanesy
27-Mar-2011, 07:33
And to our members who are rats... Don't eat Amidol.


To our members who are human...Amidol, like Pyrogallol, is a phenol and hence is absorbed through the skin. You don't have to drink it to ingest it. However, Paul Strand and Brett Weston both put their hands in it on a routine basis for decades without gloves. However, I prefer not to tempt fate so I wear nitrile gloves (simply because I prefer them to latex for a lot of reasons) and have never touched either pyro or amidol even though I've used both for about 10 years.

I think the real danger is breathing the powders when you mix them; stock solutions in the case of pyro, and working solution in the case of amidol. I know one photographer whose lungs were damaged by breathing pyrogallol powder while mixing a stock solution.

Leigh
27-Mar-2011, 07:59
I know one photographer whose lungs were damaged by breathing pyrogallol powder while mixing a stock solution.
I'm confident that, given all the environmental contaminants we encounter in our daily lives, the medicos were able to determine unequivocally that his problem was caused by one exposure to a particular chemical.

I have to go now, the Tooth Fairy is knocking on my door.

- Leigh

Greg Blank
27-Mar-2011, 08:45
We had a PCB place like that up the road from my howntown in Maryland, my Brother in law worked there. It to became a Super Fund site, I remember the seeing the special plumbing the federal government installed to remove the stuff from the water, this place was along a major throughfare, once it was deemed cleaned up they converted the site to a parking lot and large Grocery, with a new housing development behind it.

I also for a time worked as a landsurveyor, we did topographical mapping and one location was in front of a very large manufacturing company in Baltimore. Our purpose: to locate the area where 1,000's of 55 gallon drums were buried under the front lawn.

At one point - and I looked into photochemical disposal quite a bit- the EPA stated in thier pamplet that you could store up to 50 - 55 gallon drums on your premissis. I don't advocate that. Trichloroethylene (TCE) in and of itself is considered toxic. Danger of fire as its flamable, the vapors are toxic, and it breaks down under strong UV to rather nasty stuff. Its also a frequenty used chemical component in film cleaner and dry cleaners for clothing....it does an outstanding job removing stuck on tape goo :) I would advocate using gloves when using it!


The old dirty TCE we would dump in an unlined pit. The site where we worked is now a Superfund site in large part because of the TCE which has gotten into the ground water.

Leigh
27-Mar-2011, 08:50
We had a PCB place like that up the road from my howntown in Maryland
Was that by any chance on Rt. 1 just inside the Baltimore beltway, on the south side?

That company made PC boards for me when I was engineering manager at a company in Gaithersburg.

Small world.

- Leigh

Drew Wiley
27-Mar-2011, 09:25
There are a lot of things you just don't want to know. For several years my nephew's
geophysics company did computer modeling of sandstone formations leading out from a particular city in Cal where a former mfg of drycleaning chemicals had gone
bankrupt and dumped everything into a well - and thereby posioned the groundwater and all the wells within a couple hundred square miles with carcinogens. Reminds me of what Halliburton is doing with impunity right now in certain parts of the country. And I know of a couple of local superfund sites which now have shopping
centers over them. The contaminants are probably somewhat sealed under all the
asphalt and concrete, but when those areas were graded the workers and neighbors
weren't even warned. I feel a lot safer in my own darkroom.

John Bowen
27-Mar-2011, 10:10
Yes, by all means wear a dust mask/respirator when working with Amidol or Pyro powders.

I too have read about a photographer being a little too cavalier with the handling of pyro and now regretting it.

neil poulsen
27-Mar-2011, 10:16
After I put my darkroom in, I went down to a local safely supply store and spent about $125 on a 3M full face-mask. Reasonably priced filters attach to each side. Mine isolates the mouth and nose from the rest, so that the screen doesn't fog up while breathing.

Worth every cent, as far as I'm concerned. I mix powders, and I sure as heck don't want granules lodging in my lungs. Forever.

ic-racer
27-Mar-2011, 10:55
And to our members who are rats... Don't eat Amidol.


My point exactly !! :D :D

ic-racer
27-Mar-2011, 10:57
If perchance you swallow lye, just chase it with a little battery acid.:D

Actually, swallowing base leads to more esophageal replacements than swallowing acid because the esophagus can handle acid (stomach fasting pH around 2 to 3).

Greg Blank
27-Mar-2011, 17:25
Actually no, the place I referred to was in Northern Baltimore county. & The place that had the drums buried was out near Sparrows Point. When I did Landsurvey we also worked off Marley Neck on the south side of Baltimore. CSX was buying the land for thier use, and Union Carbide owned it for years, it may have been my imagination but the trees on the property were all at 1/3 shorter than the surrounding properties. From what I heard UC dumped chemicals by the tanker load on the survey area.


Was that by any chance on Rt. 1 just inside the Baltimore beltway, on the south side?

That company made PC boards for me when I was engineering manager at a company in Gaithersburg.

Small world.

- Leigh

Vaughn
27-Mar-2011, 20:31
I'm confident that, given all the environmental contaminants we encounter in our daily lives, the medicos were able to determine unequivocally that his problem was caused by one exposure to a particular chemical.

I have to go now, the Tooth Fairy is knocking on my door.

- Leigh

Sometimes it is easy to pin point the culprit. I developed a nasty form of asthma making platinum/palladium prints. After 5 years of making prints something happened. My whole family came down with sore throats (including me). I recovered 100% within 3 days, while the rest of the family did not. I just considered myself lucky

A week or so later, I came down with a sore throat again -- lasting 3 days (family members fine). This happened again a week or so later, this time with a deep dry cough...3 days later I am fine. It happened again a couple weeks later, but the cough was worse. Another time with even a worse cough -- something was wrong.

I finally corralated all my episodes with platinum printing the night before each occurrence. I usually coated 6 to 8 8x10 sheets at each sitting and was blow-drying them with a hair-drier...kicking platinum and palladium salts into the air. Research showed that workers in the platinum refining industry can come down with a nasty nasty form of asthma.

I started to wear a dust mask and had no further problem. But due to putting the platinum and palladium dust into the air and into the room (I work at the university), I switched to air drying -- and got better prints, too.

I now have permanent asthma, fortunately rather low-grade (I went my first 45+ years without any lung problems) that hits me only when I catch a cold or am around a lot of smoke.

So, say hello to the tooth fairy for me-- and ask her to bring me a new set of lungs.

neil poulsen
27-Mar-2011, 20:46
Sometimes it is easy to pin point the culprit. I developed a nasty form of asthma making platinum/palladium prints. . . .

Scary.

Bill_1856
27-Mar-2011, 20:52
HC 110 & Ansco 130.

Vaughn
27-Mar-2011, 20:53
Scary, yes. Will it happen to most people doing the same as I? Probably not. Why me? I don't know, except I have been doing photo since 1977 and have been in charge of the darkroom at a university since 1991 -- so I have been around a lot of chemicals for a long time -- and for most of that time, not too careful about it.

Vaughn

tgtaylor
27-Mar-2011, 21:27
[QUOTE=Vaughn;705797]
I now have permanent asthma, fortunately rather low-grade (I went my first 45+ years without any lung problems) that hits me only when I catch a cold or am around a lot of smoke.
QUOTE]

It's more likely that you have an acute case of bronchitis which is reversible if you remove yourself from the irritant. If you don't, then it progresses to the chronic bronchitis which is irreversible. I caught the acute stage while attending college in San Diego. The irritant in my case was the smog that was being transported into San Diego from LA: In the evening an offshore wind would blow all the smog in LA offshore and during the night it would drift south only to be blown ashore in San Diego with the onshore wind in the morning. Medical autopsies in LA county of young people indicated that most were suffering from acute bronchitis. My symptoms cleared-up within three weeks of moving to the San Francisco Peninsula.

I had asthma as a child but " out grew" it by age 11. I saw an add for Primatene on television and took 99 cents out of my piggy bank and gave it to the pharmacists for a bottle. I took [b]one] pill and never had an attack of asthma again. "Amazing"
I thought, "coincidence" said the doctors that treated me for years.

I'm not an expert on either of these disorders but from experience wheezing, shortness of breath, and a cough are symptomatic of bronchitis while asthma, in addition to those symptoms, is accompanied by a difficulty in breathing that can become severe.

If you have acute bronchitis it is essential to remove yourself from the irritant or it will progress to the chronic stage which is non reversible. If you have asthma....well, try Primaten :)

Vaughn
27-Mar-2011, 21:45
Well, I am going by what my doctor said, and I would think bronchitis would be more of a "wet" cough. It has been about ten years since I made the connection between my platinum/palladium sessions and my sore throats and dry coughs (no noticable phlem production) -- and about 5 years since the doctor diagnosed asthma. I do have an inhaler (abuterol) if needed, but the stuff hits me like speed. Its okay if I am physically active, but it has me tossing and turning all night, so I don't use it before bedtime.

And as I mentioned, my lungs are almost 100% until I am around smoke or I get sick (hits the lungs harder than it ever did before). I do little platinum printing these days, but will be doing some more when I get the chance. Mostly I do carbon printing -- cheaper and also a more beautiful process in many ways (my opinion, of course).

And there is little or no industry around here (some timber mills -- the paper mills closed down ), and there is enough rain to keep the air clean...relatively few tobacco smokers, and in general they are pretty good about not smoking around others (always exceptions, of course), and the occasionally the whiff of the o' wacky tobaccy is in the air.

Scott Davis
28-Mar-2011, 10:58
Or safer yet, use Photoshop!

Yeah, and turn green from the monitor tan you get. :D

jp498
28-Mar-2011, 11:59
Was that by any chance on Rt. 1 just inside the Baltimore beltway, on the south side?

That company made PC boards for me when I was engineering manager at a company in Gaithersburg.

Small world.

- Leigh

Except for the possible flame retardant option, I don't think PCBs are used to make PC Boards.

Circuit boards have their own risks... Lead and fumes from wave solder machines, metal etching processes, coatings, etc...