clean with magazine sheets but not newspaper?

[john hamilton]

After reading our newspapers we end up with an oily dirt on our hands, but
not after reading the magazine supplements that come inside the newspapers
or the television guide magazines.

I wondering what the significance is with regard to using sheets from the
magazines with regard to wrapping food. I know you are not suppose to use
newspaper. But is it alright to use the magazine sheets for wrapping food?
Also are they both alright to use in garden composting? This question is
also relevant when using dampened magazine sheets to clean down food
surfaces and clean windows etc.

Would anyone know how to explain simply how the method of printing is done
differently between the magazines and the newspapers? Thanks for any
advice.

[Owain]

On 27 July, 13:11, "john hamilton" wrote:
> After reading our newspapers we end up with an oily dirt on our hands, but
> not after reading the magazine supplements that come inside the newspapers
> or the television guide magazines.
> I wondering what the significance is with regard to using sheets from the
> magazines with regard to wrapping food. I know you are not suppose to use
> newspaper. But is it alright to use the magazine sheets for wrapping food?

If this is in commercial premises:

No. You're not allowed to use anything that isn't 'food grade' for
wrapping food. And recycled material is specifically excluded.

> Also are they both alright to use in garden composting? This question is
> also relevant when using dampened magazine sheets to clean down food
> surfaces and clean windows etc.

It's not acceptable to use newspapers or magazines for cleaning food
surfaces.

> Would anyone know how to explain simply how the method of printing is done
> differently between the magazines and the newspapers?    Thanks for any
> advice.

More likely different inks.

Owain

[george [dicegeorge]]

I guess that the coloured inks in magazines are nastier than newspaper ink.

[g]

[Spamlet]

"john hamilton" <blues...@mail.invalid> wrote in message
news:i2midd$r35$1...@news.eternal-september.org...

I think you only need to use your nose: though with widespread colour the
line between magazine and newspaper is increasingly blurred. Most magazines
smell horrible, and many give me a headache, therefore the ink isn't dry,
and you don't want it in your food. (Some may be done on photocopiers, but
even cured plastic toner can transfer on to say over head projector slides
if you leave them stacked together too long.) I'm a bit out of date but
one of the more headachy solvents I used to hate and smell in magazines was
cyclohexanone. There are large numbers of inks and formulations as there is
still a touch of alchemy involved. Many magazines still have ink that
doesn't dry completely and you can quite often get a reversed image if you
insert a piece of plastic and weigh it down for a while. You probably don't
smudge it because most of the time your fingers are on the border of a
magazine whereas you tend to touch the ink when you are folding the
newspaper to read it.

Shiny magazine paper is a pain to anyone who likes to make notes in margins
etc. as biro smudges all over the place and pencil either won't write on it
or rips it to pieces.

Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's World.
Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.

S

[harry]

Newspaper is made almost entirely out of bleached wood fibres and
won't take a sharp image.
Magazine paper has a high proportion of china clay in it which give
the smoother finish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coated_paper
Traditionally at least newspaper ink had traces of antimony and lead
from the type metal. (poisonous)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_metal
I think this is why they gave up wrapping fish & chips in newspaper!

[Matty F]

On Jul 28, 12:11 am, "john hamilton" <bluesta...@mail.invalid> wrote:
> After reading our newspapers we end up with an oily dirt on our hands,

When I were a lad, my mother used to make our sandwiches on newspaper.
I was sometimes able to read the writing on my sandwiches by using a
mirror!

[Mark Thorson]

john hamilton wrote:
>
> Would anyone know how to explain simply how the method of printing is done
> differently between the magazines and the newspapers? Thanks for any
> advice.

The paper is much different. Glossy magazine paper
is filled with kaolin (a mineral) and casein (protein
from milk) as sizing and surface treatment. The printing
process is also much different, with many more steps
for a magazine page. For example, when there is both
a glossy and a dull surface texture on the same page,
that means they've done an extra pass to print a layer
of shellac. Magazine papers may also have odorant
additives. I would not use those papers for anything.

[Owain]

On 27 July, 18:06, "Spamlet" wrote:
> Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's World.
> Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.

* The Breathalyser (1967)
* The ATM (1969)
* The pocket calculator (1971)
* The digital watch (1972)
* Teletext (Ceefax) (1975)
* The personal stereo (1980)
* The compact disc and player (1981)
* The camcorder (1981)
* Barcode reader (1983)
* Radio Automation, pioneered on Pirate FM 102 (1992)
* Clockwork radio (1993) (wikipedia)

Admittedly we are still waiting for the car that folds up into a
suitcase

Owain

[Michaelangelo]

Owain burst on the scene, and said:
> On 27 July, 18:06, "Spamlet" wrote:
>> Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's
>> World. Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.
>
> * The Breathalyser (1967)
> * The ATM (1969)
> * The pocket calculator (1971)
> * The digital watch (1972)
> * Teletext (Ceefax) (1975)
> * The personal stereo (1980)
> * The compact disc and player (1981)
> * The camcorder (1981)
> * Barcode reader (1983)
> * Radio Automation, pioneered on Pirate FM 102 (1992)
> * Clockwork radio (1993) (wikipedia)

Makes you wonder how they kept TW going for so long! :)

--
Michaelangelo
www.flickr.com/photos/mikenagel

Self-catering, holiday accommodation in the Scottish Highlands - for
disabled people:
www.woodhead-cottage.co.uk

[The Real Bev]

On 07/28/10 03:22, Owain wrote:

> On 27 July, 18:06, "Spamlet" wrote:
>> Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's World.
>> Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.
>
> * The Breathalyser (1967)
> * The ATM (1969)
> * The pocket calculator (1971)

Electronic calculator, roughly the size of an adding machine, came out
much earlier. Nixie tubes.

> * The digital watch (1972)

Pulsars -- red LEDs of some sortg -- came out in the early 60s. Expensive.

> * Teletext (Ceefax) (1975)
> * The personal stereo (1980)
> * The compact disc and player (1981)
> * The camcorder (1981)
> * Barcode reader (1983)
> * Radio Automation, pioneered on Pirate FM 102 (1992)
> * Clockwork radio (1993) (wikipedia)
>
> Admittedly we are still waiting for the car that folds up into a
> suitcase

...and flies.

--
Cheers,
Bev
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
-- Lionel

[234]

The Real Bev wrote:
> On 07/28/10 03:22, Owain wrote:
>
>> On 27 July, 18:06, "Spamlet" wrote:
>>> Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's
>>> World. Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.
>>
>> * The Breathalyser (1967)
>> * The ATM (1969)
>> * The pocket calculator (1971)

> Electronic calculator, roughly the size of an adding machine, came out
> much earlier. Nixie tubes.

Nope, not that much earlier.

>> * The digital watch (1972)

> Pulsars -- red LEDs of some sortg -- came out in the early 60s.

Nope, later than that.

[The Real Bev]

On 07/28/10 17:39, 234 wrote:

> The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 07/28/10 03:22, Owain wrote:
>>> On 27 July, 18:06, "Spamlet" wrote:
>>>> Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's
>>>> World. Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.
>>>
>>> * The Breathalyser (1967)
>>> * The ATM (1969)
>>> * The pocket calculator (1971)
>
>> Electronic calculator, roughly the size of an adding machine, came out
>> much earlier. Nixie tubes.
>
> Nope, not that much earlier.

Yeah it was. We may still have it :-(

>>> * The digital watch (1972)
>

>> Pulsars -- red LEDs of some sort -- came out in the early 60s.
>
> Nope, later than that.

Nope yourself. Well, maybe they took that long to hit Oz, but I
remember being at a gas station in Bakersfield and asking a guy to push
the button on his Pulsar. This is before our first kid was born in
1964. We also acquired a stray calico kitten there, which we gave to my
mother-in-law. She was an exceptionally good cat, and now Bakersfield
cats have assumed a position of superiority in our family.

Gotta add 234 to my killfile, Rod. Sorry, but you earned it. The brain
inside isn't worth the trouble of scraping off the crap outside.

--
Cheers, Bev
=====================================================
"You can make a signature quote seem authoritative by
attributing it to a famous person." --- Sun Tzu

[Matty F]

On Jul 29, 3:58 pm, The Real Bev <bashley...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/28/10 17:39, 234 wrote:
>
> > The Real Bev wrote:

> >>> * The pocket calculator (1971)
>
> >> Electronic calculator, roughly the size of an adding machine, came out
> >> much earlier. Nixie tubes.
>
> > Nope, not that much earlier.
>
> Yeah it was. We may still have it :-(

I used an electronic calculator with Nixie tubes in 1962 at
University.
Quite possbly this model:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumlock_ANITA_calculator

[Mike Barnes]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com>:

>On 07/28/10 03:22, Owain wrote:
>> * The digital watch (1972)
>
>Pulsars -- red LEDs of some sortg -- came out in the early 60s.

Are you sure? Wikipedia says:

In the spring of 1972, the first Pulsar watch was marketed by The
Hamilton Watch Co. [...] With an 18-karat gold case, the world's
first all-electronic digital watch was also the first to use a
digital display — created with LEDs.

--
Mike Barnes

[Michaelangelo]

The Real Bev burst on the scene, and said:

>> Nope, later than that.
>
> Nope yourself. Well, maybe they took that long to hit Oz, but I
> remember being at a gas station in Bakersfield and asking a guy to
> push the button on his Pulsar. This is before our first kid was born
> in 1964. We also acquired a stray calico kitten there, which we gave
> to my mother-in-law. She was an exceptionally good cat, and now
> Bakersfield cats have assumed a position of superiority in our
> family.

Your memory isn't as accurate as the watch. The first Pulsar watch was
announced in 1970.

[Michaelangelo]

Matty F burst on the scene, and said:

> I used an electronic calculator with Nixie tubes in 1962 at
> University.
> Quite possbly this model:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumlock_ANITA_calculator

Electronic calculators appeared in the '60s but *pocket* calculators
were a product of the '70s.

[Sam]

The Real Bev wrote

> 234 wrote
>> The Real Bev wrote

>>> Owain wrote
>>>> Spamlet wrote

>>>>> Years ago they did feature non dirty newspaper ink in Tomorrow's
>>>>> World. Like everything else in that prog, it never caught on.

>>>> * The Breathalyser (1967)
>>>> * The ATM (1969)
>>>> * The pocket calculator (1971)

>>> Electronic calculator, roughly the size of an adding machine, came out much earlier. Nixie tubes.

>> Nope, not that much earlier.

> Yeah it was.

No it wasnt. It has to be after 64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculator#The_development_of_electronic_calculators

> We may still have it :-(

Irrevant to when it first showed up.

>>>> * The digital watch (1972)

>>> Pulsars -- red LEDs of some sort -- came out in the early 60s.

>> Nope, later than that.

> Nope yourself. Well, maybe they took that long to hit Oz, but I
> remember being at a gas station in Bakersfield and asking a guy to
> push the button on his Pulsar. This is before our first kid was born
> in 1964.

That must be your altzhiemer's talking, the Pulsar LED watch was only a prototype in 1970.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch#Digital

And that says that they were out of the price of the consumer until 1975.

> We also acquired a stray calico kitten there, which we gave
> to my mother-in-law. She was an exceptionally good cat, and now
> Bakersfield cats have assumed a position of superiority in our family.

> Gotta add 234 to my killfile, Rod. Sorry, but you earned it. The
> brain inside isn't worth the trouble of scraping off the crap outside.

You never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.

[Graham.]

"Spamlet" <spam.m...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:i2n3mt$7u8$1...@news.eternal-september.org...

Clutch-head security screws. Saw them on TW in the 70s I think.
Never saw them in the wild for years, now they are a common sight fastening
public toilet cubical panels together.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

[The Real Bev]

Ours had a normal 10-key keyboard plus the usual memory functions. It
cost $100 at The Akron, a store long out of business which sold neat and
interesting stuff at really low prices. I can't remember how much the
regular-brand calcs cost, but it was a lot more.

--
Cheers, Bev
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
666øF -- the oven temperature for roast beast.

[John Savage]

"john hamilton" <blues...@mail.invalid> writes:
>After reading our newspapers we end up with an oily dirt on our hands, but
>not after reading the magazine supplements that come inside the newspapers
>or the television guide magazines.

Even were the printing processes identical for newspapers and the magazines,
you would still find a marked difference in the extent their pages soil your
fingers during handling. Most newspapers still use an oil-based ink, the oil
being a slow-drying hydrocarbon solvent, and it takes days to evaporate.
For the articles in newspapers to be current, they are usually printed on the
morning that you read them, meaning their ink has not had a chance to dry.
The supplements, on the other hand, are printed days ahead and the solvent
in their ink has had plenty of time to dry (almost).

Historically, inks have contained traces of toxic substances, especially the
coloured inks, and I expect that in some countries that is still the case.
But here in Australia, I have not heard anyone caution against the use of
newpapers or magazines for gardens and composting. Presumably, the industry
here is regulated to use only non-toxic inks. (The same does not apply to
dyes in inks and cosmetics imported from China.)

The search for a more environmentally-friendly printers ink has been a topic
of much discussion over the years in our local daily, where invariably the
response has been that available water-based inks still have one or more
shortcomings in comparison with the traditional oil-based product. Only
recently was it announced that an acceptable substitute has been developed.

I don't know whether it's the ink, or the fibrous paper itself, which gives
newspaper its recognised capacity to shine window panes and mirrors. Guess
I could discover for myself by tearing off a handful of unprinted sheet
borders and trying to polish a mirror with them. :-)

>Would anyone know how to explain simply how the method of printing is done
>differently between the magazines and the newspapers? Thanks for any
>advice.

I can't address that as I don't know. Maybe someone else can or already has?

Because our fingers (i.e., our skin) secrete both natural oils and also water
(perspiration), we tend to get stained by dyes which are soluble in oil (i.e.
the stuff from 'permanent' markers) and also by dyes which are soluble in
water. The best (or worst) of both worlds, as it were.
--
John Savage (my news address is not valid for email)