Digital BW, The Print

I'm signing off. Don't worry, be happy. 


Pyro has been connected through common wisdom or urban legend, take
your pick, to Parkinsonism for decades.

Pyro/Parkinsons comes up regularly in online B&W discussions. 

Some cautious person will anxiously bring it up again, and the another
type of person ("badge of honor") will make the same unsupported
denials that we see here. 

Anyone seriously interested in the topic will Google "The Case of the
Frozen Addict" and rent it.

Play with pyro all you like...but don't tap Medicare when your number
comes up.

Djon wrote:

>I'm signing off. Don't worry, be happy. 
>
>
>Pyro has been connected through common wisdom or urban legend, take
>your pick, to Parkinsonism for decades.
>
>  
>
And would you use powered rhino horn to help with impotence?

>Pyro/Parkinsons comes up regularly in online B&W discussions. 
>  
>

So does a whole bunch of crap.

>Some cautious person will anxiously bring it up again, and the another
>type of person ("badge of honor") will make the same unsupported
>denials that we see here. 
>
>  
>
Oh? Let's see. I've read the book of Pyro, I've engaged in discussions 
with Ph.D's in toxicology on the matter, I've engaged in discussions 
about this issue with Ryuji Suzuki and Richard Knoppow, and I've looked 
into a number of the claims made. There's been no reputable evidence 
that I've come accross that pyro exposure causes parkinson's disease. It 
still might, of course, but so might any number of regularly used 
substances.

These issues are important, and what we need is rational, level-headed 
thinking about them. Yelling that "they sky is falling" or going into 
complete denial about negative consequences are both rather extreme 
reactions.

Peter

I do agree---but I'm a long time textile dyer (textile designer/weaver/dyer) and I've lost a number of close friends in the art/crafts world who were all dyers (relatively young, all dyers, all cancers).  I have no idea if casual use of dyes had anything to do with their deaths, but I have been reasonably careful wearing 'Darth Vader' masks and gloves, but I decided to give it up totally about 5 years ago and err on the conservative side of things.  I always feel that one is better NOT using chemicals if possible.  I have to also admit to being an organic gardener for 35 years though *smile*.  I started out being a 'natural' dyer many many years ago, but----I also used 'heavy' metals in the pursuit of natural dyes.  Then---because I couldn't produce the colors I wanted I switched to chemical dyes with great care.  Nonetheless---I still decided enough was enough.  

I never had the opportunity to have a darkroom--but I'm thrilled to be able to use a 'digital darkroom' with no chemicals.  They are rarely good for the environment or us.  I won't come down on either side because there isn't evidence, but for me---if I can do my creative work without chemicals or dust (cotton 'chuff' from using fine cotton yarns in weaving)--I will choose that route.

Diane

  These issues are important, and what we need is rational, level-headed 
  thinking about them. Yelling that "they sky is falling" or going into 
  complete denial about negative consequences are both rather extreme 
  reactions.

  Peter


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]