Jump to content
Fly Tying
John Ski

Homemade Head Cement

Recommended Posts

lykos:

 

The only thing that has saved me is that I have had to periodically use some of the chemistry I was subjected to way back when!

 

With respect to the hazards of the chemicals we talk about here, it is a damned shame that the EPA and certain Concerned Citizens have created such a state of paranoia about them amongst our citizenry of today. Let me cite one classic example. PCB! For a human to be subjected to the level of PCB that the lab rats that served as the basis for the EPA exposure limits for this compound, an adult would have to drink 5 gallons of pure PCB for days on end. Is anyone in their right (or left, for that matter) mind going to do this? I think the answer to this is a resounding NO! Drinking 5 gallons of tap water a day will also kill you!! And only one day's consumption of this much water may be fatal. Do we worry about that? I think not!

 

YES, you can turn your brain to jello if you inhale the fumes of Toluene, Xylene, Acetone, Methyl Ethyl Ketone, etc. BUT, to do so, you must saturate a cotton ball, a rag, etc, and place it in a bag and inhale it from such an enclosed environment, and you must do this day in and day out before the brain turns to jello!!! No one using these chemicals, as we fly tiers do, is never going to approach exposure to the concentration levels required to be harmful; unless they do it intentionally.

 

In summation, if all of these things are as harmful as we are led to believe, I think I can identify a couple of generations that should no longer be around!

 

aged sage

 

PS: I just shoved my soapbox back under my bed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have the book: "Prey"? In this book Dr. Carl Richard's stated that he used

R/6000 glue and thinned it with? and it was a supurb. I amn say this: I have mixed it

with thinner and it thins to the consistency I want. Can't recall what the thinner was last I mixed it

up. I use the rubber sqeeze bottle with the long stainless spout and it works well. My problem is, I loaned the book and that sorry so and so never returned it. Last time, I just used a thinner for flexament or was it head cement? because it was around. Worked okay. Unfortunately, the mix was in the next publication which was backcountry fly Fishing in Saltwater by Swisher and Richards. At least that is the book I think I got the mix out from...

 

David

lykos:

 

If my memory does not fail me, white gasoline is the pure distillate before any of the various and sundry additives have been added to it Naphtha, on the other hand, is a different distillate fraction, but very close to 'white gas'; at least close enough for government work! Not too much unlike the organic aromatic triplets; benzene; toluene; and, xylene. Not identical, but close enough for government work.

 

It has been 50 years since I had Organic Chemistry!

 

aged sage

 

Thanks pj, it's been 31 years since my chemistry class, and since I do not use it every day...not much of it stuck in my head :hyst: Oh, and it did make a really nice cement...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lykos:

 

The only thing that has saved me is that I have had to periodically use some of the chemistry I was subjected to way back when!

 

With respect to the hazards of the chemicals we talk about here, it is a damned shame that the EPA and certain Concerned Citizens have created such a state of paranoia about them amongst our citizenry of today. Let me cite one classic example. PCB! For a human to be subjected to the level of PCB that the lab rats that served as the basis for the EPA exposure limits for this compound, an adult would have to drink 5 gallons of pure PCB for days on end. Is anyone in their right (or left, for that matter) mind going to do this? I think the answer to this is a resounding NO! Drinking 5 gallons of tap water a day will also kill you!! And only one day's consumption of this much water may be fatal. Do we worry about that? I think not!

 

YES, you can turn your brain to jello if you inhale the fumes of Toluene, Xylene, Acetone, Methyl Ethyl Ketone, etc. BUT, to do so, you must saturate a cotton ball, a rag, etc, and place it in a bag and inhale it from such an enclosed environment, and you must do this day in and day out before the brain turns to jello!!! No one using these chemicals, as we fly tiers do, is never going to approach exposure to the concentration levels required to be harmful; unless they do it intentionally.

 

In summation, if all of these things are as harmful as we are led to believe, I think I can identify a couple of generations that should no longer be around!

 

aged sage

 

PS: I just shoved my soapbox back under my bed!

 

good points. I laugh when I remember a friend I had a while back who was always worried about "fumes" from flexament, thinner, head cement, paint, etc... he smoked about 2 packs a day!!! LOL

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I have to weigh in here - not so much from the home made head cement line, but from the toxicology line. Perchjerker chose a bad example when he picked PCBs. I'm a toxicologist with the state of Maine and I led the effort to evaluate PCBs in striped bass. We have data in human populations showing developmental effects in children at levels typically found in the diet. Read the report here: http://www.maine.gov/dhhs/eohp/fish/PCBSTBhome.htm

 

The chapter on toxicology reviews all the recent studies since EPA developed there reference dose (a safe level of pcbs) 30 years ago. It has not been updated since. (Think about it, have you learned anything in the last 30 years?) Thankfully general levels of PCB in the diet have decreased significantly over the last 50 years.

 

The point, however, is that the first thing you learn in toxicology school is that everything is a poison - it just depends on the dose. While that is true - there are quite a few chemicals where the dose that is required with repeated exposure can be pretty damn small. That said, there is no doubt about the fact that the things we do voluntarily to ourselves can overwhelm many chemical exposures. Smoking, drinking (alcohol is a very potent carcinogen and quite well studied), eating crap and sitting on the sofa in front of the tube is going to kill many of us before most chemical exposures. But there are others where the science is clear, the risks are just as large, and they are avoidable - radon, lead in children, mercury in pregnant women. My experience is the folks who repeat the claims that it takes 5 gallons to poison a mouse are interested and don't keep up with the science and there isn't much point in debating with them. For those who are interested, read the report. It is pretty thick stuff, but if you have any questions I'll be more than happy to answer them.

 

Sorry - I'll put my soap box away now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EricF;

 

Your points are well made; but, I stick by my statement! Unfortunately, you are comparing apples with oranges. My statement, though lacking a part of the information, had to do with the research data the EPA used, that was based on the development of cancer in white rats, to set the human exposure levels (your "reference point") for PCB exposure back in the early, mid-70's. My statement had nothing to do with the toxic levels of PCB, and their effects on striped bass, or blue fish, or the human effects of consuming such contaminated fish. I suggest a re-read of my statement, and see it's limitations.

 

Moreover, there is considerable evidence that it is NOT the PCB that is toxic, but the contaminating furans that are the culprit.

 

I have no quarrel with the rest of your position statement.other. It lends credence to my statement about tap water, and my underlying point

 

Like you, I know of no researches since those original ones that have been used to reevaluate the exposure standards set back when by the EPA. I have a PhD in marine zoology, and spent my entire career in the environmental field; covering many different areas of pollution, including PCB contamination. I have been retired from that arena for 13 years now, and will confess that I am not up on the current literature. However, that still does not alter the validity of my original statement.

 

aged sage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man... All I wanted to do was save a few bucks on a flexible cement.

 

Alcohol is a carcinogen? My brain could turn to jelly? My fridge looks so sad and empty now. Even if I put in the small can of Xylol I was going to use... the beer shelf still just looks so forlorn.

 

All kidding aside, thanks for the great info. Here's what I'm taking away from all the answers:

 

1. Xylol should work in place of the toluene.

2. All of the chemicals are nasty wether you make your own cement, or buy it. Most of them probably have some methyl-ethyl-bad-stuff and it's good to be aware.

3. Caution and common sense are called for in either case (store bought or home made); don't inhale anymore fumes than you have to, work in a well ventilated area, keep the caps on unless you actually using some, keep the kiddies away

4. Throw out your beer because it causes cancer.

 

Okay, I hope that last ones not really true... thanks again for all the great info. In all honesty, I might just stick with Sally for a bit. This time of year, I do most of my tying at the kitchen table, and have two small boys who like to watch, and grab things as soon as I turn my back. The recipe for home made cement could turn into a recipe for disaster!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Ski:

 

An EXCELLENT summarization of my point!

 

Xylene will do exactly the same thing that Toluene will do.

 

It is a toss up between the home-made 'stuff' and Sally's 'stuff'.

 

If you are going to throw out your beer; be SURE to throw it MY way!! I will take my chances with it.

 

aged sage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed w/ John's summary. Still have issues' w/ Perchjerker's toxicology.

 

I don't see how you can say there is evidence that PCBs are not toxic when there are epi studies showing neurodevelopmental effects. Those are toxic effects. While there are no studies since the 70s revising the estimates of toxicity, there are plenty of studies looking at the toxicity. They are referenced in that chapter of the striped bass report I posted. EPA has been talking about revising the cancer potency factor for PCBs (the cancer version of a reference dose) but that appears to be stalled.

 

Secondly, there are a class of PCBs which, because of the position of the chlorine atoms on the rings, forces them into a flat position (they are called coplanar PCBs) - in essence making them at toxicologically like dioxins and furans. Those particular congeners of PCBs are evaluated on the part per trillion level for toxicity, not the part per billion level like total PCBs.

 

What I object to is the 'common sense' argument that extrapolating from higher dose to lower dose is bogus. While there is some evidence that some carcinogens act on a threshold basis (e.g., via a saturated enzymatic pathway - and that is now addressed in that way when there is data) for many cases the evidence supports a probabilistic mechanism - meaning the more you are exposed to, the more likely you will "win", where winning means cancer. There is no way we are going to spend the resources as a society to do studies with enough animals to evaluate the many thousands of compounds in commerce to evaluate carcinogenicity at levels we see in the environment. So we evaluate at higher doses as a screen and use that for decision making purposes. Is it 100% accurate? No. But there are more examples of estimates of toxicity being revised downward over time (e.g., more toxic than we thought) than the other way around. Do you really think all the toxicologists over the last 50 years who have studied this field just made that kind of blunder? "Golly gee, I fergot about dat..." Come on - it is a cheap simplification of a process that has been used for years and works. It has good simplistic sound bite time, but no thought beyond that.

 

I appreciate your PhD and experience in marine pollution. But that is not toxicology. No more than I would presume to talk about marine biology - that is why we pulled in marine biologists to talk about striped bass and bluefish biology in doing our evaluation.

 

I hope I'm not too testy - but I've pretty much had it with that kind of analysis. It is, in my opinion, a version of the "But I've been exposed to lead all my life and I'm not a moron" argument.

 

Unless folks vote for more back and forth, let's move on. If I bump into on a river somewhere we can duke it out in person ... or go fishing.

 

E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EricF:

 

Again, your points are well made, but still off the mark. The original posit was an extrapolation, from toxicology data, on the level of exposure a human would have to be exposed to on a daily basis to receive an equivalent exposure that the white rats received before cancer was induced, and which the EPA based their exposure limits on. Nothing more; nothing less. This is a very honest, and straight forward extrapolation. I don't understand what it is that you are missing from this simple exercise; which is, in fact, what the EPA did; extrapolated toxicology data from white lab rats to humans. A second, and very logical step would be to extrapolate the daily exposure level that a human would have to be exposed to to be equivalent to what the rats received. This type extrapolation is what i spoke to. There is nothing specious about such an exercise at all, as you seem to believe.

 

Yes, I am familiar with many, but not all, of the molecular configurations of the various PCB molecules; and I am cognizant that PCB contaminates are measured at the PPT, rather than PPB level, as are the PCBs themselves. This is precisely the premise that it is furan contaminants within the PCBs that is the culprit is based on, as opposed to the PCBs themselves. The furans went undetected for several years simply due to the lack of a technology that would permit their detection at the PPT level. Moreover, I did NOT say that PCBs are not toxic, as you claim. I simply said that there is evidence that it MAY BE contaminants, instead of the PCBS themselves.

 

You have yet to tell me anything that I am not already familiar with. It must be remembered that it has, by and large, been withing the past 30-40 years that the technology has been developed to permit analyses to these levels; esp. to PPT.

 

I see no reason for you to be so defensive of the realm of toxicology, as I have not said anything to assault it.

 

For your edification, there are many toxicological issues in marine biology, just as there are in terrestrial biology. No one realm has sole claim on the realm of toxicology; as you seem to infer, or believe. In case you aren't aware of it, both striped bass and blue fish are considered to be marine animals.

I have one question, and then nothing further from me on the subject: Can you say with absolute, 100% certainty, the the PCBs in the studies you cite were, in fact, NOT contaminated with furans?

 

Peace.

 

aged sage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just have a quick question.... Is there a way to make a homemade plasti dip/ softex without blowing something up? If so what should I use and where can I find it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lykos:

 

The only thing that has saved me is that I have had to periodically use some of the chemistry I was subjected to way back when!

 

With respect to the hazards of the chemicals we talk about here, it is a damned shame that the EPA and certain Concerned Citizens have created such a state of paranoia about them amongst our citizenry of today. Let me cite one classic example. PCB! For a human to be subjected to the level of PCB that the lab rats that served as the basis for the EPA exposure limits for this compound, an adult would have to drink 5 gallons of pure PCB for days on end. Is anyone in their right (or left, for that matter) mind going to do this? I think the answer to this is a resounding NO! Drinking 5 gallons of tap water a day will also kill you!! And only one day's consumption of this much water may be fatal. Do we worry about that? I think not!

 

YES, you can turn your brain to jello if you inhale the fumes of Toluene, Xylene, Acetone, Methyl Ethyl Ketone, etc. BUT, to do so, you must saturate a cotton ball, a rag, etc, and place it in a bag and inhale it from such an enclosed environment, and you must do this day in and day out before the brain turns to jello!!! No one using these chemicals, as we fly tiers do, is never going to approach exposure to the concentration levels required to be harmful; unless they do it intentionally.

 

In summation, if all of these things are as harmful as we are led to believe, I think I can identify a couple of generations that should no longer be around!

 

aged sage

 

PS: I just shoved my soapbox back under my bed!

 

Just a side note. I got stomach cancer from over exposure to MEKP over the 10 years I was working. It can happen but it takes a lot! Working 14 hour days 6 days a week in a facility that was not EPA certified

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... MEK is the solvent used in Sally Hansen's Hard as Nails.

 

Moscow

 

 

I beg to differ. Sally Hansen's Hard as Nails that I purchased over the past 3 decades has used acetone, then toluene, and now methyl acetate and butyl acetate. But I have never seen MEK listed as an ingredient on any bottle of Sally Hansen products.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, I wanted to try the homemade head cement recipe I always see posted.

 

Have the Goop, but I can no longer find Toluene. My favorite hardware store had it just a few weeks ago, and when I went in this morning, it was all gone, and the owner said he can't order it either.

 

Chatted with the owner for a bit (he likes talking to me about flies and fishing) and he eventually suggested I try Methyl Ethyl Ketone after looking at various MSDS sheets and the like. I guess it's in the same family of chemicals. I went ahead and picked up a can (he really spent alot of time trying to find some for me) saying I would try it, and he said if it doesn't work to come and back and hell refund me the 8 bucks.

 

But before I play mad scientist, I thought I would check with the experts here.

 

Anyone have any thoughts about this, how long it will last on flies if it works, that kind of thing? Any other places I should check for toluene?

 

Thanks in advance for any help!

 

The first point you need to confirm is that the GOOP version you have is not Styene based (most are now by the way). If the GOOP is a styrene based formulation the only solvent that I am aware of that will actually dilute it instead of turning it into a white glob of slime is PERK (this is modern dry cleaning solvent and is Federally controlled in quantities over 1 oz. contaners.) PERK can be purchased by the ounce from fly shops that carry styrene based head cements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, we are doing a remarkable job at miscommunicating, Perchjerker,

 

There are a class of PCBs that ACT like dioxins and furans. They are NOT contaminants - they are PCBs that toxicologically act like dioxins and furans. Any formulation of PCBs are going to have coplanar PCBs in them. They are not contaminants. It is irrelevant whether or not the original evaluation was or was not contaminated with furans. Studies since then have shown that a class of PCBs act like dioxins and furans. If you take a formulation, remove any contaminants, you will still have PCBs that act like dioxins and furans.

 

There is nothing specious about the extrapolation both from rats to humans or from high dosages to low dosages. It is done all the time. What is specious is using that to discredit the results. Toxicologists make those extrapolations regularly and they are used as a decision making tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...