No. IPA = isopropyl alcohol, not India Pale Ale.
Specimen ethics
Re: Specimen ethics
The MSDS of IPA states that it should be kept in a tightly closed container. And that inhalation of the vapors may cause health problems. And for health and safety reasons should be stored in a ventilated area. IMO the simple plastic bottle from the store is OK as long as the plastic lid is tightly screwed. Albeit, the sensitivity to smell varies widely among persons. BTW, I apply the same rules to ethyl alcohol 95%.deBult wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 9:39 pmPlease elaborate, as most IPA is now sold in plastic bottles and there is always a very faint smell.
Re: Specimen ethics
Tnx will move the large bottles to the cellar and keep a set of small ones with the alcohol(s), cleaner etc. for daily use in an extra closed box.
Re: Specimen ethics
So I guess you go to a bar, you just drink the liquor and not sniff it,especially the 151...
Re: Specimen ethics
A big reason why isopropyl alcohol should be kept in a tightly closed container is that it is very hygroscopic, at least until it dilutes itself down to 65% (35% water).
Re: Specimen ethics
Now that is useful info.
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)
-
- Posts: 3457
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:06 am
- Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Re: Specimen ethics
--Withdrawn--
Last edited by DonSchaeffer on Mon May 04, 2020 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Specimen ethics
MicrobeHunter is a microscopy forum and its rules viewtopic.php?f=29&t=4193 require that all posts be microscopy related.
Zeiss Standard WL (somewhat fashion challenged) & Wild M8
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)
Olympus E-P2 (Micro Four Thirds Camera)
-
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 5:17 pm
- Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Re: Specimen ethics
I knew a grad student who was thrown out a research lab because she was releasing lab Paramecium into the wild.
That is a mortal sin.
Lab was working on Paramecium / Didinium predator prey dynamics, using Protoslo
stock photo attached
That is a mortal sin.
Lab was working on Paramecium / Didinium predator prey dynamics, using Protoslo
stock photo attached
- Attachments
-
- Didinium ingesting Paramecium
- 800wm.jpg (77.27 KiB) Viewed 5364 times
Re: Specimen ethics
.DrPhoxinus wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 8:04 pmLab was working on Paramecium / Didinium predator prey dynamics, using Protoslo
Useful link to a previous discussion about Protoslo :
viewtopic.php?t=4419
MichaelG.
Too many 'projects'
Re: Specimen ethics
I happen to believe in prudent precautions in the use of chemicals rather than absolute avoidance. I also believe in treating chemicals according to their known heath effects, which is why I treat benzene completely differently than I treat ethanol (I avoid benzene entirely and treat ethanol with just a little more caution than I treat water--after all, my great grandfather consumed literally hundreds of gallons of the stuff over 96 years without any apparent adverse effect. )Hobbyst46 wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 6:57 amThe MSDS of IPA states that it should be kept in a tightly closed container. And that inhalation of the vapors may cause health problems. And for health and safety reasons should be stored in a ventilated area. IMO the simple plastic bottle from the store is OK as long as the plastic lid is tightly screwed. Albeit, the sensitivity to smell varies widely among persons. BTW, I apply the same rules to ethyl alcohol 95%.
I also feel that amateur science has been the victim of the trend towards safety at all costs. Back when I was a kid in the 1960s we had real chemistry sets, with chemicals like potassium dichromate, chrome alum, and others. Lots of neighborhood kids had these sets and I don't recall anyone dying, getting injured, or growing a second head. Now chemistry sets contain little more than vinegar, sodium bicarbonate, and sodium chloride. Are we doing our kids a service by shielding them in this way? I don't think so.
In California we have something called Proposition 65, which was a ballot initiative passed several years back that requires warning labels on anything that might cause cancer. The law provided for fines for businesses that didn't label something that might cause cancer, but no fine for labeling something as causing cancer that actually doesn't. As a result, businesses play it safe and put the warning label on practically everything. Indeed, the state of California has determined that everything causes cancer. The warning is effectively worthless.
People nowadays are deathly afraid of getting the slightest whiff of xylene or formaldehyde lest they wake up with cancer the next day. Sure, if you work in a factory eight hours a day using these chemicals, you should be concerned, but if you occasionally use a little xylene to clean a lens you are not going to drop dead the next day.