Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;NorthKorea, post: 1303768, member: 29643&quot;]Clad, the problem with the above two quotes is that they are basically contradictory. In the first, you state, as a matter of fact, that the US Mint used PVC (even in extremely thin layers, as you state) to bond plio-film. In the second, you state that this is experiential, and not based on any source. Given that we&#039;re discussing packing materials and not merely a grade (or something similarly subjective), experience can&#039;t be stated as a source.</p><p><br /></p><p>If your experience includes researching the specific materials used in the US Mint packaging or, alternately, working for the US Mint contractor who packaged the coins, then that&#039;s fine, and it should be stated. However, without a specific source, it&#039;s actually just your opinion that the US Mint is lying about its claim that no PVC has ever been used in its packaging process.</p><p><br /></p><p>All of that said, I&#039;m not entirely convinced that Pliofilm is safer for coins than PVC. After all, Pliofilm replaces the vinyl part of the equation with rubber, but both materials contain chlorine. It&#039;s always been my understanding that it is the chlorine part of the PVC that causes acid damage on coins. Wouldn&#039;t the same hold true for Pliofilm?</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, I&#039;m not sure on the overall stability of either material, but it would seem that both would have some level of impact on the stored coins. Maybe the rubber compound of the Pliofilm leeches less than PVC, maybe not.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in