Talk:Poison
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I moved ammonia out of the elemental poisons, for obvious reasons, and added a few more in its category.
Question - do we want to add substances which can be fatal by displacing oxygen (N_2, He, etc), or are those not regarded as "poisons?" Pakaran. 16:18, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- If we add every substance which can kill by displacing oxygen, that nasty dihydrogen monoxide would need to be put back into the article at the top of a very long list of chemicals capable of killing this way. Just about any substance could easily serve this nefarious role in either liquid or gaseous form. --66.102.74.57 03:23, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Redundant nitric acid info
Nitric acid, as a strong oxydizer (sic), has particularly harmful effects; it can cause scarring if it splashes someone while being boiled in the lab.
This does not belong here, if someone wants the specifics of nitric acid, they can look it up separately. Besides, nitric acid is not any more dangerous than most other strong inorganic acids. Should we state the specifics of each and every one?
Darrien 05:32, 2004 Jul 17 (UTC)
- Ok, fair enough. I have a high school chem teacher who swears up and down that he'll never boil it again, or keep it unlocked in concentrated form. Pakaran. 14:45, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup really needed
This page really needs to be cleaned up. The definition of poison used in this article is way too vague. Poison shouldn't be used a synonym for anything that causes harm. This may sound weird, but just because it can be said that "experiences whatever poisoning" does not mean that "whatever" is actually a poison. I'll agree with the article on this; toxic and poisonous seem to be synonyms but something that's toxic is not necessarily a poison.
Here's a list of what I think should be moved out:
- neurotoxins (belongs in toxin)
- nerve gas (belongs elsewhere)
- potassium chloride (anything in high enough concentration can do the job, including water and salt)
- anything related to venom (venom and poison should not be considered the same)
- all of the three acids
- halogens (the deadly aspect of KCl is potassium, not the halogen)
- phosporus
- carbon monoxide
- anything in mutagens, carcinogens or teratogens. UV rays definitely not poisons. Cancer and poison are two totally different things. Thalidomide was not poisonous; the mothers didn't die.
It seems odd to me to consider toxins produced by bacteria as poisons. Some of these things are always there, they are just kept in check. Anything relating to bacterial toxins should be moved out of poison and into toxins. A big criteria for poison should be that it can cause harm if ingested and the mechanism of injury once ingested should be somewhat distinctive. Eating fish hooks, broken glass and magnets is dangerous but they are not poisons. They will cause damage by physical means. I have problems with HCl being considered as a poison, especially since there's some of it in my stomach right now. Drinking it would cause extensive bleeding and tissue damage but that's caused by chemical burning. This same idea applies to bleach and ammonia.
On the other hand, I don't mind including common compounds that have a high likelyhood of being ingested in a normal environment because laypersons who visit the article might expect to find household cleaning products under poisons.
Thoughts? --jag123 18:22, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've been thinking that the poison and toxin pages should be merged with toxin being a subset of poison. At least that is my understanding of how the terms are used. As far as venom goes, aren't venomous snakes also called poisonous snakes? I'm just not sure that you can find a subset of toxic substances that can be definitively be called "poisons" as separate from "toxins" or "venoms". That's why I'd argue that it all come under the umbrella of poison, that being the most broad term. Or at least clean things up so that the separate toxin or venom pages are clearly defined and linked. - Trick 00:24, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
-
- An animal that is venomous delivers a toxin via a special apparatus such as a fang, dart or a stinger. An organism that is poisonous may be harmful if the toxins are ingested or absorbed. You can also say that a poisonous organism doesn't use its toxins in an active fashion to kill or maim predators or prey, unlike a scorpion, which uses its stinger to kill food or honeybees that will sting if threatened. Venom and poison are not synonyms. That's why you never hear poison ivy or certain mushrooms as being venomous. Common usage is one thing but someone who finishes reading an article on poison should at least be aware that venomous animals may not necessarily be poisonous. In the same respect, this person shouldn't read that bleach is poisonous, especially when the containers don't even carry the skull & crossbones symbol, only the corrosive symbol. Toxin should definitely not be merged here. I've started seeing definitions that specify toxins as organism-manufacured protein containing compounds that typically induce antibodies. An appropriate umbrella term would be "toxic substance" --jag123 02:05, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
To clarify a little about what I will be cleaning up on the poison and toxin articles: toxins are a subset of poisons. The problem deals with common usage of the terms versus technical usage of the terms. In common writing and talking we use the two as almost synonomous "snake bite poisoning" when technically a snake venom is a toxin. A toxin is truly a natural occuring poison (all other poisons are man made). Most natural poisons are biologically produced. Hence some naturally occuring poisons are not toxins (volcano smoke contains several poisons).
Most technical usage of the words can be split between the medical, technical, and military fields.
El guero "Wayne"
- Toxins are not just natural, they are biological (produced by animals, plants, bacteria, etc.). There can be natural poisons of mineral origin, for example. (Oops, sorry, this comment was redundant. I started writing it because first you said that all other poisons are man made, but later you corrected that by giving an example of a natural poison that's not a toxin...) Itub 00:33, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Poisoning example
Arafat Poisoning inconsistent with Death of Yasser Arafat article: Note that liver cirrhosis is inconsistent with brain hemorrhaging etc. Furthermore, the diagnosis of the French doctors does to my knowledge not state cirrhosis as a reason for Arafat's death. Thus: where does the "reputedly" come from? Please do something about that.
Note 12th Jan 05: Nobody seems to object, so I have changed the detail in the article accordingly. JB
13th Jan 05: Changed portion has been reverted. I won't go into a revert war. But note that Arafat's diagnosis does not state liver cirrhosis as the reason for his death, and that there are also people not supporting Arafat that feel that it is unlikely that he was killed by alcohol abusus. JB
[edit] Sweeteners
I reverted an anon's deletion of the mention of the artificial sweeteners; while their carcinogenic nature is contested, it is quite true that they have been argued to be carcinogens. —Tkinias 21:57, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Yushchenko
Yushchenko's poisoning is not "alleged"; medical tests have shown that he has suffered dioxin poisoning. What is "alleged" is that Ukranian intel was involved, but this article does not mention that. —Tkinias 22:49, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Possibly missing: Contact poison
At the moment the only categories containing the word "contact" are corrosives, acids and bases. I think contact poison (skin contact) should have a section.
[edit] Somebody may want to check out...
the list of chemical weapon agents. The majority of them are no doubt very poisonous, and many would make an interesting addition to the article. – ClockworkSoul 02:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
Good copyedit needed. We're not an advice shop... SP-KP 00:54, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chromium is excreted
Article says that heavy metals accumulate over time. But this article http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HEC/CSEM/chromium/treatment_management.html says that chromium is cleared from the body quite rapidly. Cphoenix 01:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Various heavy metals have various biological half-lives and thus various cumulative potential. While Cr(VI+) has relatively short half-life, Hg(II+) has half-life of about 70-80 days and is readily accumalated in the organism. Pb(II+), Cd(II+) and R-Hg+ have half-lives in order of years, and are strongly cumulative.--Spiperon 21:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Immunity
I was wondering, is it possible to build up an immunity to certain poisons by taking them in small ammounts such as many figures in Ancient History tried to do? 70.48.40.112 05:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
It is tolerance that builds up, not immunity. And it can be done with some but not all poisonous materials. Pzavon 01:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deadliest poison
I was wondering, which poison the most powerful? I read somewhere that botulin is the most powerful natural toxin and that only 450gr could wipe out the human race (in theory). However, I do not now if this is true. I would also like to know which poison(s) kills you the fastest. I got told that cyanide could kill a man before he even has time to fall to the ground, however, I do not know at all if this is true.
Josellis 10:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I doubt the one about cyanide, but I don't really know for sure. The one about botulinum toxin has some truth to it, although it comes of course from a completely idealized calculation (multiplying the population of the Earth by the estimated median lethal dose), which would be impossible in practice. --Itub 10:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
