Magnus is now selling possibly harmful silica chalk with Rungne. WHY ???
|
djkyote wrote: V5 is chuffing? |
|
JCM wrote: Yup, I think that's a good idea and I'm going to make my own liquid chalk/silica silylate mix to test it out. |
|
Nicholai Petrunin wrote: Report back when you do! |
|
Adam W wrote: Your ancestors would be ashamed of you for suggesting that vaccines aren’t a good thing, because they died of things we no longer have to worry about. Not saying science is perfect, but the odds of being harmed by a vaccine are infinitesimally smaller than the odds of being harmed by a virus. |
|
Antivaxxers should be forced to buy a coffin and a graveyard plot for each of their children they don’t vaccinate. |
|
I assume you guys got the latest COVID boosters? |
|
This thread has taken a weird turn. |
|
JCM wrote: There is a strong correlation between anti-vaxxers and forum cancer. |
|
I had no interest in trying out silica based chalk products until this thread. Quite effective guerilla marketing campaign. |
|
Eric Moss wrote: Yes, I enjoy not dying of lung failure or cytokine storms from easily preventable, highly transmissible diseases. I also enjoy not going to church, synagogue, or my local mosque, and yet remain happily fulfilled without belief in any higher power, to head off your next tangential and nonsensical question. PS
|
|
Climbing Weasel wrote: Well keep doing it, then. I'm doing fine without it. To each his own. |
|
Climbing Weasel wrote: The party of love and compassion, ladies and gentlemen. |
|
Jay Goodwin wrote: NIOSH REL TWA 10 mg/m3 (total) TWA 5 mg/m3 (resp) OSHA PEL TWA 15 mg/m3 (total) TWA 5 mg/m3 (resp) NIOSH REL TWA 6 mg/m3 OSHA PEL TWA 20 mppcf (i.e., 2 mg/m3 [10 mgppcf respirable dust = 1mg/m3]) NIOSH REL Ca TWA 0.05 mg/m³ OSHA PEL TWA 50 µg/m³ (i.e., 0.05 mg/m³) |
|
El Duderino wrote: Could you please translate this into something resembling the English language, so that I and, I'm guessing, most following this thread, will be able to understand this potentially important information for our health? Thank you. |
|
Basically it says that the safe exposure limit for crystalline silica is 1% of that for chalk and for amorphous silica it’s 40%. |
|
Just a personal comment. I have used and been around regular chalk longer than anyone, starting with gymnastics in the mid 1950s to blackboard chalk as a math teacher until 2000, through climbing till 2009. I am in my late 80s and have health issues, but my lungs and heart are in excellent shape. Of course, I did not spend time in climbing gyms. FWIW. |
|
John Gill wrote: John that’s refreshing to hear. Do you consider v5 chuffin? |
|
|
|
Nate A wrote: Thanks, but what does a "safe exposure limit" percentage mean in 'real life'? I, honestly, ( and, again, believe that many others are in the same situation) don't know if "1% of that for chalk" is a good or bad thing, nor if "40 %" in this context is better or worse. Also, don't know what the 'chalk' exposure baseline or any of this means in terms of potential health risks. I apologize for not being a scientist. |
|
Alan Rubin wrote: I’m no scientist either. But I think there is no safe level for breathing in direct-aid tools. You wouldn’t want to breathe in piton, not even a knifeblade! Chalk is no different. |