Air tests alone may miss part of mercury exposure; a review of 2,330 air samples supports adding urine testing. For our Mercury (Blood/Urine) community, the key point is about measuring exposure. The study looked at records from US Department of Energy workplaces. It compared air samples taken near workers’ faces with related urine test records. The focus was mercury in its pure metal form. Researchers reviewed 2,330 air samples and 265 urine monitoring records. These are counts of records, not a stated number of workers. The data covered 16 job titles at first. After excluding groups with fewer than 10 samples, 11 job titles remained. The authors concluded that air testing alone may give an incomplete picture. They suggested including tests from the body, such as urine tests. The supplied summary does not give actual urine levels. It also does not say how often air and urine results differed. That means we cannot put a number on how much exposure air testing might miss. This was a review of workplace measurements, not a test of treatment. It does not show that any habit lowered test results. It also does not answer questions about mercury from food. For members tracking their own numbers, the useful takeaway is context. A lab result and an air reading are different pieces of information. When comparing notes here, test dates, sample type, and work setting can help keep those differences clear. Sharing that context alongside your numbers can make community discussions more useful. What have your own test results shown, and what workplace or exposure details helped you understand them?