[Contrast analysis on two air fluorine content measurement methods].
OBJECTIVE
To take the two kinds of sampling and measurement methods of air fluorine content in the endemic fluorosis area to carry on the comparison, understanding their difference and inside relation.


METHODS
Sampled 22 households random on the scene in the disease area with two samplers by two methods, at the position of which, at the same time, equidistance, same highness, as close as possible, but not produce interactive effect, to collect 34 of the air sample, and then gained the results by their respective methods of laboratory analysis and statistical analysis.


RESULTS
The test of significance between two methods was P > 0.05, the coefficient of correlation was r = 0.7752, the test of significance was P < 0.01, the equation of linear regression between the GB method (X) and the manual method (Y) was Y = 1.1623X + 0.0008, the test of significance of coefficient of regression was P < 0.01.


CONCLUSIONS
Two kinds of methods had no significant differences. They preset the medium degree positive correlation and a linear regression. The air fluoride in different granularity of suspended particles was not the same. The GB method was more applicable to research of synthesis damage towards the exposing crowd in burning coal fluorine, and manual method was more applicable to research of the damage resulting from the exposing crowd in burning coal fluorine through the breath system. Generally speaking, the results of the manual method was higher than the GB method.
Li
Yue
Y
Shanxi Institute for Endemic Diseases Control, Xi'an 710003, China.
Bai
Ai-mei
AM
Yang
Xiao-dong
XD
D000393:Air Pollutants / Q000032:analysis*; D016902:Air Pollution, Indoor / Q000032:analysis*; D002623:Chemistry Techniques, Analytical / Q000379:methods; D003031:Coal / Q000032:analysis*; D004566:Electrodes; D005458:Fluoride Poisoning / Q000209:etiology; D005461:Fluorine / Q000032:analysis*; D007474:Ion Exchange
D000393:Air Pollutants; D003031:Coal; D005461:Fluorine