Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T21:32:17.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The incidence of quartz and sericite particles in siliceous residues in silicotic lungs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

J. Davson
J. Davson
Affiliation:
From the Department of Pathology, Victoria University of Manchester
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Preparations for petrographical examination were obtained by micro-incineration of sections from silicotic nodules from thirty-one cases of unequivocal silicosis.

2. Particle counts above and below 2 μ showed, in the majority of cases, a preponderance of quartz.

3. Jones' claim that sericite particles predominate in the lower size range of particles in silicotic lungs is not confirmed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , July 1939 , pp. 405 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1939

References

REFERENCES

Burke, H. E. & Kerr, P. F. (1938). J. industr. Hyg. Toxicol. 20, 535.Google Scholar
Cooke, W. E. (1935). J. Hyg., Camb., 35, 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummins, S. L. (1937). Brit. J. exp. Path. 18, 395.Google Scholar
Drinker, C. K., Field, M. E. & Drinker, P. (1934). J. industr. Hyg. 16, 296.Google Scholar
Fallon, J. T. & Banting, F. G. (1935 a). Canad. med. Ass. J. 33, 407.Google Scholar
Fallon, J. T. & Banting, F. G. (1935 b). Canad. med. Ass. J. 33, 404.Google Scholar
Feil, A. (1935). Bull. Acad. Méd. Paris, 113, 105.Google Scholar
Fowweather, F. S. (1936). J. Hyg., Camb., 36, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, L. U. (1934). J. Amer. med. Ass. 103, 743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisler, W. (1935). Arch. Gewerbepath. Gewerbehyg. 6, 87.Google Scholar
Green, H. L. & Watson, H. H. (1935). Spec. Rep. Ser. med. Res. Coun., Lond., no. 199.Google Scholar
Hurlburt, C. S. & Beyer, D. S. (1934). J. industr. Hyg. 16, 169.Google Scholar
Irwin, D. A. (1934). Canad. med. Ass. J. 31, 135.Google Scholar
Jephcott, C. M. (1935). Canad. Publ. Hlth J. 26, 606.Google Scholar
Jones, W. R. (1933). J. Hyg., Camb., 33, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettle, E. H. (1934). J. Path. Bact. 38, 201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koppenhöfer, G. F. (1935). Arch. Gewerbepath. Gewerbehyg. 6, 18.Google Scholar
Lemon, W. S. & Higgins, G. M. (1935). Amer. Rev. Tuberc. 32, 243.Google Scholar
Oller, A. (1936). Arch. Gewerbepath. Gewerbehyg. 7, 383.Google Scholar
Policard, A. (1934). J. industr. Hyg. 16, 160.Google Scholar
Rao, S. S. (1934). Brit. med. J. 1, 1094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udluft, H. (1935). Zbl. Gewerbehyg. 12, 81.Google Scholar
Weiland, P. (1937). Arch. Gewerbepath. Gewerbehyg. 8, 412.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, A. G. R. (1938). J. industr. Hyg. 20, 556.Google Scholar
Williams, C. R. (1937). J. industr. Hyg. 19, 44.Google Scholar