The measurement of actual acidity in acid sulfate soils and the determination of sulfidic acidity in suspension after peroxide oxidation

Improvements to the routine methods for the determination of actual acidity in suspension for acid sulfate soils (ASS) are introduced. The titratable sulfidic acidity (TSA) results using an improved peroxide-based method were compared with the theoretical acidity predicted by the chromium reducible sulfur method for 9 acid sulfate soils. The regression between these 2 measures of sulfidic acidity was highly significant, the slope of the regression line not significantly different from unity (P = 0.05) and the intercept not significantly different from zero. This contrasts with results of other workers using earlier peroxide oxidation methods, where TSA substantially underestimated the theoretical acidity predicted by reduced inorganic sulfur analysis. Comparison was made between the 2 principal measurements from the improved peroxide method (TSA and S-POS), with S-POS converted to theoretical sulfidic acidity to allow comparison. The relationship between these 2 measurements was highly significant. The effects of titration in suspension, as well as raising titration end points to pH 6.5, were investigated, principally with respect to the titratable actual acidity (TAA) result. TAA results obtained by KCl extraction were compared with those obtained using BaCl2, MgCl2, and water extraction. TAA in 1 M KCl suspensions titrated to pH 6.5 agreed well with titratable actual acidity measured using the 25-h extraction approach of the Lin et al. (2000a) BaCl2 method. Both BaCl2 and KCl solutions were ineffective at fully recovering acidity from synthetic jarosite without repeated extraction and titration. The application of correction factors for the estimation of total actual acidity in ASS is not supported by the results of this investigation. Acid sulfate soils that contain substantial quantities of jarosite or other acid-producing but relatively insoluble sulfate minerals continue to prove problematic to chemically analyse; however, an approach for estimating this component is discussed.

Unraveling the barriers to reconceptualization of the problem in chronic pain: The actual and perceived ability of patients and health professionals to understand the neurophysiology

To identify why reconceptualization of the problem is difficult in chronic pain, this study aimed to evaluate whether (1) health professionals and patients can understand currently accurate information about the neurophysiology of pain and (2) health professionals accurately estimate the ability of patients to understand the neurophysiology of pain. Knowledge tests were completed by 276 patients with chronic pain and 288 professionals either before (untrained) or after (trained) education about the neurophysiology of pain. Professionals estimated typical patient performance on the test. Untrained participants performed poorly (mean +/- standard deviation, 55% +/- 19% and 29% +/- 12% for professionals and patients, respectively), compared to their trained counterparts (78% +/- 21% and 61% +/- 19%, respectively). The estimated patient score (46% +/- 18%) was less than the actual patient score (P < .005). The results suggest that professionals and patients can understand the neurophysiology of pain but professionals underestimate patients' ability to understand. The implications are that (1) a poor knowledge of currently accurate information about pain and (2) the underestimation of patients' ability to understand currently accurate information about pain represent barriers to reconceptualization of the problem in chronic pain within the clinical and lay arenas. (C) 2003 by the American Pain Society.