|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 20, 2014 4:01:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by 150FromFundy on Apr 20, 2014 5:33:45 GMT -5
Really interesting and believable site. Thanks for posting. No more rock licking for me. A number of those are alarmingly common in many mineral collections. We'll have to bubble wrap the fool's gold before we let the kids play with it.
Darryl.
|
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 20, 2014 13:02:25 GMT -5
devilishly delightful list for poison hearts  so far I've only made one out of cinnabar o and couple out of amphibolite  |
|
halitedigger
starting to spend too much on rocks
Lost in the Mojave, Sierras or Itoigawa
Member since September 2013
Posts: 104 
|
Post by halitedigger on Apr 20, 2014 13:52:31 GMT -5
Good reference. Especially for newer collectors and those of us here in Cali where a lot of those minerals occur. Recently I've been digging up a lot of tourmaline and I saw a site that detailed radioactive particles in some of the host rock. They look like little iron stains, but are infact, radioactive.
|
|
rxscram
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2011
Posts: 519
|
Post by rxscram on Apr 20, 2014 14:07:40 GMT -5
Seems very sensationalist to me. I think any of those minerals, with standard reasonable precautions, would be no more or less dangerous than any other mineral that we rockhounds would use.
I guess I should stop licking rocks though...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 15:43:08 GMT -5
I agree: sensationalistic. Anyone who licks, breaks, heats or otherwise destroys some of those nice specimens isn't much of a collector. Some of the dangers are overblown, too. In many of the rocks, the dangerous bits are encased in quartz or other minerals and are not nearly so toxic (if at all) as would be the pure mineral. Although some common sense is always advisable, people have been working around and with rocks for our entire history. We breathe rock dust every day, no matter where we live and whether or not we collect rocks. Those pretty flowers in your garden and in your house can be as, or more, toxic as anything on that page and I'm not about to rip out my garden due to that. The body can tolerate toxins remarkably well, though there is certainly no need for overload, which can be dangerous.
|
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 20, 2014 15:51:51 GMT -5
I'm walking proof of the above statement  not that I'm proud of it and my health is probably lousy I can't afford to go to the doctors to find out not that they will have any good new anyways so I save my money for rocks but for 20 years I worked in a grinding shop it was way nasty we took precautions but in the interest of making a profit I failed many times to take proper precautions |
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 20, 2014 15:53:12 GMT -5
o for the last 20 years I worked in a clean room
so I figure I'm breaking even
mostly
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 15:54:50 GMT -5
I'm calling BS on asbestos.
The rest make sense. Thanks for posting.
|
|
owyhee
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since March 2014
Posts: 105
|
Post by owyhee on Apr 20, 2014 18:14:01 GMT -5
Now we can't lick rocks, whats next Amazon delivering by drones?  |
|
Geoff
spending too much on rocks
Please add 1074 to my post number.
Member since December 2012
Posts: 446
|
Post by Geoff on Apr 21, 2014 1:02:12 GMT -5
That was by far the dumbest thing I've read in weeks. Torbernite is not a pocket sized Chernobyl. In fact everything they said was flawed in one way or another. It's like they found scary words in mineral compositions and made a list. When lead is combined with sulfur it doesn't act the same way in the body as pure lead. Arsenopyrite? Same thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 21, 2014 2:07:08 GMT -5
I'm calling BS on asbestos. The rest make sense. Thanks for posting. Asbestos has been linked to lung cancer, but it is not a cause. And the cancer has nothing to do with scarring of the lungs. Research studies have shown asbestos to be a co-factor to the SV40 virus, which can cause lung cancer. |
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 21, 2014 2:09:11 GMT -5
That was by far the dumbest thing I've read in weeks. Torbernite is not a pocket sized Chernobyl. In fact everything they said was flawed in one way or another. It's like they found scary words in mineral compositions and made a list. When lead is combined with sulfur it doesn't act the same way in the body as pure lead. Arsenopyrite? Same thing. I would think it would have a lot to do with method of exposure for one thing. For example, will ingestion cause a reaction of the sulfur components of these minerals with stomach acid freeing their metallic components or making them more soluble? |
|
|
|
Post by kk on Apr 21, 2014 2:57:43 GMT -5
All fine and good.... But they left out the most hazardous rock and mineral of all times. For no other rock or mineral (save maybe coal) have more people died, than for Gold and Diamonds. |
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 21, 2014 10:03:47 GMT -5
excellent point kk
uranium as a high death count also
|
|
