The problems of quantitating chrysotile in water by fiber count techniques are reviewed briefly and the use of mass quantitation is suggested as a preferable measure. Chrysotile fiber has been found in almost every sample of natural water examined, but generally transmission electron miscroscopy (TEM) is required because of the small diameters involved. The extreme extrapolation required in mathematically converting a few fibers or fiber fragments under the TEM to the fiber content of a liquid sample casts considerable doubt on the validity of numbers used to compare chrysotile contents of different liquids.