Skip to content
Cosmetic Peat
Association
← Research library

Balneological Researches of Lehtosuo Mire in Ähtäri

case-study Grade D 2005
Authors: Korhonen, R.
Journal: Geological Survey of Finland (GTK) — client research report
Search for this paper →
No verified direct link on file for this source.

Key Findings

  • Lehtosuo mire (Ähtäri, Finland) peat: Sphagnum-Carex peat, average humification H8 (von Post scale), pH average 5.4
  • Chemical composition (dry weight): humic acids 28.5%, fulvic acids 10%, humin and lignin 40.9%
  • 23 trace elements measured; heavy metals very low; therapeutically relevant elements present include magnesium, manganese, silicon, copper, iron, and zinc
  • Heat retention: the peat-water mixture did not begin cooling for 30 minutes
  • Humification (H8) and humic acid content (28.5%) both clear the balneological-grade threshold proposed in the literature (H6+, humic acid >20% dry weight)
  • Bacteriostatic testing (University of Helsinki, Department of Public Health): raw Lehtosuo peat samples showed no bacteriostatic efficacy against the bacteria tested — a negative finding

A single-site balneological characterization of peat from the Lehtosuo mire in Ähtäri, Finland, commissioned by the Geological Survey of Finland (GTK). Its composition and humification both comfortably clear the balneological-grade threshold used elsewhere in this library, and its heat-retention result is stronger than the larger 23-mire Finnish survey — this peat-water mixture didn’t begin cooling at all for the first 30 minutes.

One finding here needs careful handling: University of Helsinki testing found no bacteriostatic activity in raw Lehtosuo peat against the bacteria tested. This is a genuine negative result, but it isn’t a contradiction of this library’s antimicrobial evidence for peat — that evidence comes from purified, concentrated humic acid preparations tested in vitro, not raw peat at balneological concentrations. The two aren’t directly comparable, but the gap between “purified extract shows antimicrobial activity” and “raw therapeutic peat does not” is a real limitation worth stating plainly rather than glossing over.

Finlandbalneological-peathumificationchemical-compositionthermal-retentionbacteriostaticnegative-finding