1640: Does Asbestos Taste Good? Let’s ask the Earl of Sandwich about Asbestos Stone Juice.

Where History Means Knowledge. Be Informed.

1640: Does Asbestos Taste Good? Let’s ask the Earl of Sandwich about Asbestos Stone Juice.

I was going to skip doing a blog this week, but I found some extra time. All of my History PhD applications are filed and I have been playing around with some of my older books and electronic materials. I decided to start off with one of the big issues about asbestos: the toxicity when ingested but not inhaled. I believe that a couple of upcoming meetings, such as the European Asbestos Forum, will be discussing this issue. With this in mind, I decided to research whether asbestos was ever intentionally ingested and, if so, the timing, details, and rationale.

To cut to the chase, The art of metals in which is declared the manner of their generation and the concomitants of them in two books first authored in Spanish during 1640 seems right on point. This book was translated into England from Spanish by the Earl of Sandwich during 1669 and then published in London during 1674. You can find it on the internet by searching “The art of metals.” Depending which link you select, it is searchable under “asbestos” or under “amianto” (which is Italian for asbestos). This is the first time that I have run into different translations and, unless you search both words, you might not find what you are looking for.

It turns out that asbestos stone juice was considered a health drink or medicine to be obtained from the local Apothecaries. As stated:

Neither is the Allum seissile, or de pluma, a Juice (which is yet taken for such in Apothecaries shops) but is the Stone called Asbestos; and it is not astringent to taste, nor consumed in the fire, although it be kept there very long, which are the particular qualities of an Asbestos.

Below is the asbestos page followed by the amianto page:

Nice to see that asbestos stone juice was not astringent, but someday I would like to track down where the juice came from, why is was thought to provide a health benefit, and its background.

Let me know what you think either by leaving a comment or sending me an email at TheAsbestosBlog@gmail.com. Thanks. Marty

 

2 Responses

  1. Mike crill says:

    Asbestos found in unborn fetuses proving baby exposure from mothers exposure..not inhaled.

    • Martin Ditkof says:

      There are so many subsets of exposure, that I will never run out of fields/areas to research. You just hope that some decision makers are listening.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *