From: Rita Kay Calhoun <r.calhoun**At_Symbol_Here**MOREHEADSTATE.EDU>
To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Sent: Tue, May 20, 2014 1:41 pm
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Occupational handling of nickel nanoparticles: A case report
The original report indicated that one of the reactions she had was to her
earrings. This suggests that previously she had had no reaction to the nickel
in the earring posts, so the sensitization does appear to be related to the
material being in nano form.
Just a guess.
From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf Of
Ralph B. Stuart
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Occupational handling of nickel nanoparticles: A case
> Does the report indicate that the exposure was exacerbated the material being
in the nano form?
The report is based on a single case and the fact that the symptoms arose after
work with Ni nano-particle began; she had previously worked with non-nano Ni.
For a particular incident, I'm not sure how you would determine whether the nano
aspect exacerbated the situation. It's more of a suggestive data point report
than a conclusive study...
Ralph Stuart CIH
Chemical Hygiene Officer
Department of Environmental Health and Safety Cornell University
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post