RE: Formaldehyde. Does methanol really matter?
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From: | Hewlett Bryan <HEWLETT@HHSC.CA> |
To: | Philip Oshel <oshel@terracom.net>, "'J. A. Kiernan'" <jkiernan@julian.uwo.ca> |
Reply-To: | |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Phil, John,
I tend to agree with John on this one.
Anecdotes aside, see our friend Freida Carson on this topic.
"Formalin fixation for Electron Microscopy: A re-evaluation."
Carson, F.L., Martin, J.H., Lynn, J.A. Am J Clin Pathol 59:365,1973.
Best regards,
Bryan
> ----------
> From: J. A. Kiernan[SMTP:jkiernan@julian.uwo.ca]
> Sent: February 17, 2000 12:47 AM
> To: Philip Oshel
> Cc: histoNet@pathology.swmed.edu
> Subject: Re: Formaldehyde. Does methanol really matter?
>
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Philip Oshel wrote:
>
> > Well, yes, but this ignores the MeOH in formaldehyde, and it's because
> of
> > the MeOH that us electron types use paraformaldehyde. (There, I
> condemned
> > myself. I do do LM also, honest!)
> >
> > And I made the mistake of trying to fix cultured macrophages with 10%
> NBF.
> > Distorted them horribly, because of the methanol.
>
> Does the methanol really make all that difference? Conc. formalin
> contains about 10%, so there's only 1% in NBF. Back in 1968 or so,
> I remember seeing some pretty good EM pictures of human thyroid
> that had been surgically removed and had sat in NBF for some time.
> It was then osmicated etc. The work was done by my PhD supervisor,
> the late Brian A. Young, in Birmingham (UK) and a student called
> David Kill, who went on to become a dentist. I'm pretty sure they
> published it - almost certainly in J. Anat. They also examined
> bits of thyroid fixed in glutaraldehyde and in Karnovsky-type
> mixtures, which were better, but not impressively so.
>
> *** Has anyone done a severe comparison of 4% formaldehyde made from
> formalin vs paraformaldehyde, for EM or LM? There are lots of
> anecdotes; mine is that I can't tell the difference for several
> LM applications. Others will surely disagree, but is this because
> of having made a controlled comparison?
>
> 1% methanol might well be toxic to living (cultured) cells, but
> that's hardly a fault in a fixative. 1% ethanol would be below
> physiological levels; beer is 4% to 5%.
>
> John A. Kiernan,
> Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology,
> The University of Western Ontario,
> LONDON, Canada N6A 5C1
>
>
>
>
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>