Re: Plant Labels - from used aluminium cans

Page 2 of 3  
Guys - here is a source for plant tags - http://www.nationalband.com/nbtplant.htm#2725
The type that you impress with a ballpoint works very well as there is no ink to wash off or fade.
California Plastics has inexpensive aluminum tags that last years :
http://www.calpp.com/gardenaccessories.htm (first product on the top of the page)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Most mining involves dealing with nasty by-products.
A lot of gold is also obtained by refining ore thru all sorts of chemical processes. Yet we don't refer to it as man-made gold. There's no alchemy involved. It's just recovering the gold that is locked up in other compounds.
Gold can be toxic to the liver and kidneys. Perhaps a prudent person should stop wearing man-made gold while avoiding aluminum.
Don
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Never heard about gold being toxic -- I guess I better not bury my great horde of dubloons in the garden -- but I've seen piles of extremely toxic rubble left over from gold mining.
I still sorta feel there's a difference between gold which DOES exist in a pure state naturally (in addition to dissolved state in the ocean & finely powdered in some environments, & aluminum which as an ore is bauxite of quite a different character altogether. If pure god did NOT exist in nature until purified by human hands, I would regard it as man-made, yes, just as the transuranic elements can mainly only be brought about by the activity of scientists. But anyway, my only point was that the aluminum deposits in alzheimer-sufferers' brains is the stuff people purify, rather than resembling the ore that exists in dusty aspect in everyone's gardens. So either the brain's electrical charges must manufacturer it from the environment, or what SEEMS more likely, our daily exposure to created aluminum is making some of us stupider than we used to be. Here's a web article about the bits I worry about (from a school of biology p.o.v. rather than my ecology worry-wart p.o.v.): http://student.biology.arizona.edu/ad/bbb.html
-paghat
--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

By your reckoning practically all metals are man-made, as is concrete. I find it hard to think of anything other than wood which would by your standards be "natutal"
Franz Heymann
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The difference is refined or man-made gold is more or less indistinguishible from naturally occuring pure gold (and nobody's saying gold isn't found in ore, although I question, historically, how gold has been recovered by refining from ores vs. how much was just laying around, more or less pure), whereas you just don't find sheets of aluminum or aluminum oxide lying around. Well, you might if you live in a junky neighborhood, but you still know it's in an unnatural state.

I can see how that could be a problem if you go around looking like Mr. T or have some Trumpesqe fascination with gilding things like spoons, forks and cups. But unless you're eating gold flakes for breakfast, it's still not quite the same.
Drinking too much water *can* be toxic, but nobody's saying stop drinking water.
- Salty
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There are no such things as gold ores to my knowledge. Gold is an almost inert element. As far as I know, gold is always found as a simple metal.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Gold has low reactivity, but isn't near as unreactive as the 'noble gases' (but I hear you can even make compounds with one of the heavier elements, Xenon?) . The one thing I remember is telluride ore, I'm not sure if that means tellurium or rare earth elements in general. I also don't know if it's chemically or merely mechanically bound.
-- Salty
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lots of label ideas out there. I've probably missed a few, but the painted rock sounds best to me. Available materials, simple to make, non-toxic (depending on the paint) and fairly permanent.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You can also get a mess of rocks about the size of your head and line them up along the driveway & paint them in all sorts of bright colors! But to be subtle, paint every other one white, the rest yellow, using that rubberized paint that's for highway centerlines, it lasts quite a while. If the yellow & white painted rocks clash with the house, repaint the house schoolbus yellow.
-paghat the ratgirl
--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu (Ned Flanders) wrote in

According to top yahoo hits, the only mineral listed above that contains gold is calaverite (gold telluride), the other four are "ores" of copper (chalcos being Greek for copper). But of course, if you're willing to trade some of your gold nuggets for my copper pans, you've got a deal. :-)

- Salty
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Here's a site that agrees with us: http://mineral.galleries.com/minerals/elements/gold/gold.htm
"There are very few true gold ores, besides native gold, because it forms a major part of only a few rare minerals, it is found as little more than a trace in a few others or it is alloyed to a small extent with other metals such as silver. "
and
"A few of the tellurides are nagyagite, calaverite, sylvanite and krennerite. These are all minor ores of gold but their contributions to the supply of gold pales next to native gold's own contribution. "
-- Salty
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What is the relevance of gold mining to Plant labels???????? I can see a gold mine would help to buy all the plants we would like to have.
--
David Hill
Abacus nurseries
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

sorry, I should have modified the subject line earlier
here's an idea from NutGen:
self labeling tomato plants - as a tomato plant grows, the name and cultivar gradually appears on the stem. Currently, the names are only available in Italian, but English versions should be available 2Q 2005.
and here's a martha stewarty idea:
take a picture of a plant or pluck off a leaf dry it in isopropyl alcohol (if using a leaf) or otherwise dessicate write name on picture (if using picture) laminate the sucker or intomb in polyurethane. scratch name into polyurethane (if using leaf) rub some native gold into the scratched name add a couple more layers of poly for good measure put outside next to plant
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Huh. And I thought all the best nuts came from California. Go figure.
Regards,
Deadend
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

magnification, that is locked up in other minerals to be native gold--hence the list of known ores.
95% of the gold mined in the world occurs as native

What? why not 100%? You cite ALL of the places where gold IS. The minerals I listed ARE ores and they fall under mechanical mixtures which you cite as being part of your 95% of mined gold.
The only gold ore of any significance id Calaverite, which

But the gold is a prisoner of some formations of the minerals I listed which than makes them gold ores. Mind you it's not in all of the formations, so a large concentration of the minerals can differ which is why you have copper mines, gold mines, and silver mines. But it may be that the miners are working the same minerals in each mine with a different end product in mind. Here in Pennsylvania, the largest gold production was from the Cornwall Iron mine, which is the longest running iron mine in this country 1742-1972. Along with Magnetite, Iron Pyrite, and Chalcopyrite was mined. And at the French Creek Mine, some fifty miles away, the same minerals were mined, first for iron production, than as a copper mine. However, the Chalcopyrite, Iron Pyrite, and Magnetite were not auriferous, therefore there was no gold mined at the French Creek Mine.
Cheers,
Ned
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's compounds are, but gold worn as jewelry or eaten on desserts or drunk in liquor are for the most part inert and not readily absorbed by the body therefore not a concern.
Cheers,
Ned
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Gold is not absorbed well by the body and its compounds are not normally particularly toxic. Up to 50% of arthritic patients treated with gold-containing drugs may show toxic effects however resulting in damage to the liver and to the kidneys. http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Au/biol.html
I was being sarcastic. I'm not concerned about the toxicity of aluminum or gold and I'm not going to avoid either one just because someone comes up with an inconclusive factoid that it may be toxic.
If the scientific or medical community ever makes a judgment that these metals should be avoided, then I will listen. Until then, it's just another crackpot idea for alarmists to get themselves worked up over.
Don
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's very well and good for yourself, but I'm glad people here are willing to bring up "crackpot" ideas. I for one didn't know about the possible detriments of plastic soda pop bottles and I'm glad I can make my own decisions regarding consumption without relying on the "scientific or medical" communities' opinion. I wonder if those people have decided if smoking causes cancer or not yet. Are eggs good or bad for you? etc etc
Your car has a seat belt, it should be up to you and nobody else whether you use it or not. You want to take the risk of not wearing it, that's fine. Probably nothing's going to happen, but if something does, well, tsk tsk.
-- Salty
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I, too, like to make my own decisions. The post I was initially responding to, said, "anyone with aluminum kitchen pots & utensils should toss them immediately".
Since there is no reputable scientific organization that has come to the same conclusion, it qualifies as a crackpot advice.

All reputable safety organizations recognize that seatbelts and similar safety devices save lives and they generally recommend their use. I concur, so I take that advice.
On the other hand, some people feel that if you step on a crack, it breaks your mother's back. I don't feel that's been scientifically proven, so I ignore that advice.
Don
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Depends on if you think some of the leading scientific institutions are reputable. If you DO bother to base your decision on having actually checked the scientific data, you will find many who doubt cans & pots can be a source of the aluminum deposits in alzheimer brain tissue, but do think it could be aluminates from medications, deodorants, antacids, etc; others think it could be neither; still others think the door is wide open for it to be either or both. Several studies do show categorically that the aluminum enters the bloodstream then the brain tissue through diet, with no source entirely ruled out. Now you may think it crackpot, but in this case, I've read the studies or their abstracts, & wasn't relieved of my sense that it's on the REASONABLE side of safety to avoid aluminum. So I wouldn't cook in aluminum (not that I ever did), I won't drink from aluminum cans, I won't use a an antacid with aluminates. Is it paranoid? Not according to Dr. Barry Thomas whose Australian study showed CONCLUSIVELY that aluminum ingested by rats accumulates in their brains. Not paranoid according to gerontologist William Forbes of the University of Waterloo whose 1995 study showed that a population exposed to aluminum in their diet for 35 years had impaired mental functions 10 times higher than in areas without the exposure (in this case it was a water treatment method that included aluminum & ended up delivering trace amounts of aluminum to the area's water supply).
An animal modeled study by Dr Ian Taylor of the Medical University of South Carolina, Dr Peter Mannon of Duke University Medical Center, Fred Boehem of the Trace Metal Division of the Great Smokies Diagnostic Laboratory, et al, showed the mechanism by which aluminum enters the blood system intestinally, then is deposited in the brains of mice. They believe their findings provide a suitable model for further study of the same mechanism increasing the intestinal absorption rate of aluminum in Downs syndrome people & in alzheimer's sufferers.
Many similar studies have resulted in aluminum cookware being banned in some European countries. Sensible political response? It would be according to Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary, which notes that aluminum corodes into water that is heated 356 degrees. Furthermore, if your water is flouridated, the flourine in water further corodes the cookware.
There is no NO QUESTION but that man-made sources of aluminum are associated with alzheimers. The only question is which or how many possible sources are absorbed. The studies by Thomas, & by Forbes, as well as a study by Dr. Paolo Prolo of the University of California at Los Angeles (which institute you've apparently categorized as crackpot -- perhaps you'd rather rely on your own decision-making powers based on something rumor of safety spread by aluminum industry) have shown categorically that aluminum in the water supply is a key source of the aluminum deposits in human brains & associated with dementia.. Dr. Prolo however felt that the amount of aluminum from cookware was not yet proven (not by his study). Paul found that death rates from Alzhiemers raised signally in areas with aluminum in the water supply (both from water treatment methods & naturally occurring bauxite among the trace metals), so this does not speak to cookware or pop cans as sources, no similarly large populations being available to single out as controls for exposure vs non-exposure.
So the confusion (or the unwillingness of Alzheimer's researchers to categorically condemn aluminum cookware) stems from the difficulty of studying it separately, vs the ease of drawing stats from regions that have added aluminates to the water system over time. Nevertheless, Dr. Stephen Levick of the Yale University Medical Center was so creeped out by his findings about aluminum that he threw away all his aluminum cookware -- the KNOWLEDGEABLE want to be safe rather than sorry. Dr. John Koning of the Riverside General Hospital in Corona California worried more about antacids. And Dr. Creighton Phelps of the Alzheimer's Association says only that WE KNOW aluminum has abnormally high deposits in the brains of alzheimer sufferers, so make your decision accordingly.
Of course those medical practitioners are all crackpots in your estimation. You're bound to prefer the opinion of the Aluminum Association invested in protecting the can & cookware industry. They like to point out that a single antacid tablet or buffered aspirin tablet delivers thousands of times more medical grade aluminate to the system than all the aluminum cookware you could use in a whole year. But their propaganda is a lie. Here's the science: If you cook with aluminum, you add an estimated 3.5 milligrams of aluminum to your diet every day. That is one-third the amount of pharmaceutical grade aluminate in a buffered aspirin, & a fraction of the amount in the average antacid pill (which can have 50 mg of aluminates). But it's still a hell of a lot of aluminum ingested from cookware day in day out, & I personally never take buffered aspirin, never take any antacid except Tums the one that includes no aluminates, & use an aluminate-free deodorant since it is also possible to absorb aluminates through the skin. If in fact most people take only a couple buffered aspirins PER MONTH, that'd be ten or twenty milligrams of aluminates per month, but if using aluminum cookware every day, that'd be 105 milligrams per month. So even the way the Aluminum Association wants you to look at it isn't very heartening to me. And less they get sued for lying, even the Aluminum Association advocates NEVER cooking rhubarb or other acidic foods in aluminum cookware, which increases the amount of aluminum in your diet dramatically above the 3.5 milligrams daily they otherwise admit to.
The Aluminum Association is fond of this FDA quote: "There is no information at this time that the normal dietary intake of aluminum [from the] use of aluminum cookware, or from aluminum food additives or drugs, is harmful." They're not fond of quoting the updated FDA stances, which for instance BAN the use of aluminum coming in contact with dairy products, this despite that the FDA is highly conservative & slow to act in this kind of area.
What can be said today is that very few scientists believe the 3.5 milligrams daily intake of aluminum from use of aluminum cookware could be the primary source of the aluminum in alzheimer brain cells, not when the amount in medications or water supplies is so much greater. Professor Leonard Berg at Washington School of Medicine in St Louis does not believe getting rid of one's cookware would lower the daily aluminum exposure enough to make one whit of difference. Does that mean the cookware has been given a clean bill of health by those same scientists? Absolute not. Most of whom followed Dr. Levick's lead & upgraded their cookware long ago. Zaven S. Khachaturian of the Ronald & Nancy Reagon Alzheimer Institute says it this way: "Unfortunately there is no clear-cut answer." But Khachaturian's real point is that it is thus far unknown whether aluminum exposure CAUSES alzheimers, or alzheimer's causes aluminum absorption. The real question for these scientists would be "Do you use aluminum cookware?" I worked a while at the University of Washington Health Sciences as an medical editor, & was amused to discover that ALL the researchers in a herpes study had become 100% monogomous -- just to be on the safe side of something they came to find more & more horrifying -- so too I suspect that Dr. Levick's decision to toss out all his aluminum cookware was not a novel decision among researchers.
Certainly there are many researchers whose opinion falls to the side of the issue that pleases the Aluminum Association, & many such could be cited. For me it's enough that many qualified experts believe the issue is credible, & even the Aluminum Association "spin" ends up recommending not to cook acidic foods in their products because of health risks.
So when YOU threw out the idea that GOLD is a toxin, YOU were apparently being a crackpot, alarmist, or jester without much concern for facts. When I threw out the possibility that it would be wise to toss one's aluminum utensils, I had many sources of good science to base this very real possibility upon. The bottom line is this: Is there proof that aluminum in the diet is the source of the deposits of aluminum in alzheimer's brains? The answer is a resounding YES! Is there proof the aluminum CAUSED the alzheimers? There is not, just as there is no proof it did not cause it. Yet a study reported in LANCET in 1985 found that trace amounts of aluminum in the diets of infants caused retarded mental development, so there's more to this than a side-effect of senile dementia. Is there proof that any of this aluminum exposure comes from cookware? Yes, 3.5 milligrams per day if you use alumumum in your kitchen. Is there proof that cutting back 3.5 milligrams per day would lower the risk of alzheimers? There is no evidence one way or the other. Does that mean you SHOULD exposure yourself to foods cooked or stored in aluminum? There's a gene pool argument to be made that if you have this information, & still want to cook in aluminum, then you really should do so -- for the sake of the gene pool. And there's an aesthetic principle at work, too, as many people really do need those aluminum pots & pans to match their rusty ol' trailer houses.
--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.