I stand corrected on falsely accusing acetone for being a carcinogen. It was
tetrachlorathan that we used to use back in the 80s for degreasing and
cleaning. That has harsher reviews than acetone.
But I'm still heading for the hills. They all stink and make me nauseous.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Spidell
To: Mark LaPierre
Cc: healeys@autox.team.net ; Bob Haskell ; Tracy Drummond
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Breaking rusted bolts
Well, I did a bit of research:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetone
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts21.html
The second source states:
"The Department of Health and Human Services, the International Agency for
Research on Cancer, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have not
classified acetone for carcinogenicity.
Acetone does not cause skin cancer in animals when applied to the skin. We
don't know if breathing or swallowing acetone for long periods will cause
cancer. Studies of workers exposed to it found no significant risk of death
from cancer."
I think the reference to acetone being "an absolute known carcinogen" may be
a bit speculative--doesn't mean you shouldn't be careful with the
stuff--especially since government agencies are inclined to declare a
substance carcinogenic if there's even the slightest epidemiological evidence
of association.
I think the "life shortening stories" are just that: stories. A lot of
people tend to associate cause and effect without thoughtful consideration;
e.g. "I used acetone, I got cancer, therefore the acetone caused the cancer."
Not exactly good science.
bs
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Healeys@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
http://www.team.net/archive
|