From owner-drosophila@net.bio.net Thu Feb 01 22:00:00 1996
Path: biosci!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!fnnews.fnal.gov!unixhub!news.Stanford.EDU!usenet
From: Axel Franke <franke@cmgm.stanford.edu>
Newsgroups: bionet.drosophila
Subject: ether vs. CO2
Date: 2 Feb 1996 17:09:57 GMT
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <4etgh5$6l0@nntp.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bio-bb3.stanford.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12(Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:bionet.drosophila

Hi everyone,
this certainly is a never ending discussion, whether to use ether or 
CO2. 
I would like to get some comments on 
-health risks (for both pregant and non-pregnant fly workers)
-costs of CO2 set up
-costs of CO2 use
-effects on flies etc.
Thanks a lot

Axel Franke



.