--- Ronn!Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 02:13 PM 9/25/03 -0700, Deborah Harrell wrote:
>
> >A PubMed search is a little frustrating because
many
> >of the more recent articles don't have available
> >abstracts; here are a few, however:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
>
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list _uids=12500801&dopt=Abstract
> >Selected soil samples, collected in Kosovo
> locations
> >where DU ammunition was expended during the 1999
> >Balkan conflict, have been investigated
<snip>
> >The particle size distribution showed that most of
> >the DU particles were <5 microm in diameter and
more
> than 50% of the particles had a diameter <1.5
microm.
>
> I know that the use of "micron" for 1�m = 10^-6
> meter is discouraged, and
> of course the proper term "micrometer" can be
> confusing because that word
> is also the name of a tool used by machinists for
> measuring lengths or
> thicknesses of small items precisely (and the
> approved abbreviation "�" for
> 10^-6 is an extended ASCII character which is
> neither found on most
> typewriters or displayed properly by many e-mail
> programs), but is "microm"
> the new preferred term? The preferred term in
> medical usage? Or just a typo?
Their typo. AFAIK. :P And how did you get the proper micron symbol?
Alt-0181.
-- Ronn! :)
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
