[Closed] Synthetic chemicals in our lives

The natural ones are bad enough!

Stick some loctite 242/243 down on a similar surface.

Similar outcome.

Leaking solvent.
Try putting petrol in a polystyrene mug to see how fast it dissolves.

Or even put a rubber-sealed reusable wine cork in an olive oil bottle, to see what happens to the rubber.

not unexpected. But I wouldnt expect blue loctite to be vapourised and pumped around the dunny.

Mmmm... lovely.

I hate those automatic bog sprayers.

We had one at work that was meant to give a brief refreshing spray whenever it detected someone in the loo.

Unfortunately they positioned it directly over the urinals, providing an effective way to automatically blind you with floral mace whilst mid-stream.

Those things make me think of the 60s Batman movies with the orange gas.

Try putting petrol in a polystyrene mug to see how fast it dissolves.

I seem to remember from reading the Anarchist's Cookbook as a teenager that that's how napalm is made.

its a shame someone has decided to make it look a right mess by rubbing the damaged paint off.

why?

I agree re airfreshners. Generally air flow is a better solution than a masking agent. However, with regards to yor paint defect...

I can't quite see what the substrate beneath the paint is but the coating looks like a ruin of the mill 1k domestic gloss. It is likely that the air freshner is creating a damp zone at the base. If it is an aerosol then it will cool as it spray leading to condensation on the surface. Equally it will heat up and cool down at different rates, again, condensation.

From my experience of coating failures (and I have lots!) that looks like blistering due to condensation and water. I doubt it is due to the chemicals in the air freshner.

One of the worst materials for attacking paint is acetic acid - nice on chips though. Another is stearic acid - go check a bottle of moisturiser or soap as it is probably in there.

Chemicals, synthetic or natural should be judged based on their harm to humans, not on how they were acquired or how they act on other materials.

Chemicals, synthetic or natural should be judged based on their harm to humans, not on how they were acquired or how they act on other materials.

Indeed. Who in their right minds would wash with water after seeing the damage it does to iron?

So this thread isn't about MDMA?

93% of us have cancer-linked Monsanto glyphosate weedkiller in our urine 🙂

We do?

93% of us have cancer-linked Monsanto glyphosate weedkiller in our urine

that'd be why my pissing in the compost bay is not helping things...

[quote=jonba ]I can't quite see what the substrate beneath the paint is but the coating looks like a ruin of the mill 1k domestic gloss. It is likely that the air freshner is creating a damp zone at the base.

It's not that, it's some chemical in it reacting with the paint.

Source: spilled some air freshener liquid on some gloss paint once

Who in their right minds would wash with water after seeing the damage it does to iron?

Some idiots drink it, despite the fact that accidental inhalation of [url= http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html ]Dihydrogen Monoxide[/url] kills thousands of people a year.

We do?

A test on MEPs gave 100% I think. Probably a lot more info online I'm just recalling headline stories.

Bayer bought Monsanto though so they'll be able to sell us anti-cancer drugs as well as giving us cancer in the first place 8)

I thought glyphosphate broke down quickly. Otherwise how would you be able to grow stuff after you've used it?

The likely culprit is this one:

[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Butoxyethanol ]2-butoxy ethanol[/url]

Pretty low toxicity to humans and animals, but a pretty decent paint solvent.

My objection to those air fresheners is that turds with a hint of rose-petal sprayed on them still smell like turds.

nothing smells quite like "old man's poo and toothpaste". The scent of the morning bathroom in many a family household.

93% of us have cancer-linked Monsanto glyphosate weedkiller in our urine

44% apparently (from [url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/02/agrichemicals-intensive-farming-food-production-biodiversity ]here[/url])

93% of us have cancer-linked Monsanto glyphosate weedkiller in our urine

Makes plans to bottle my piss and sell it in Dobbies

44% apparently (from here)

well every study has a different value but the take home message is that a WHO listed possible carcinogen is very likely present in your body

I thought glyphosphate broke down quickly. Otherwise how would you be able to grow stuff after you've used it?

Plenty online about it, it's not as simple as that, plus Monsanto produce many GM crops that are immune to glyphosate - search Roundup Ready

nothing smells quite like "old man's poo and toothpaste".

the aroma of campsites all over the country. boak.

nothing smells quite like "old man's poo and toothpaste".

Kobain realized his destiny too early.

far worse are expanding foams used in various forms of spray insulation coatings in homes.

insulation coatings

It's more likely "load-bearing" in my home 🙂

well every study has a different value but the take home message is that a WHO listed possible carcinogen is very likely present in your body

I hope you never put alcohol in your body apparently that is definitely carcinogenic!!

During our house move the kettle was packed with the wife's fake tan. The fake tan leaked and stripped the paint off the kettle. 😯

Watched an interesting documentary on Netflix a couple of nights ago about the rise in exposure to chemicals and what it might be doing to us. Some quite staggering stats in there but this one was eye opening. In 1995, the incidence of autism was 1 in 400 children. Nowadays it's 1 in 88 😯

During our house move the kettle was packed with the wife's fake tan. The fake tan leaked and stripped the paint off the kettle

Good job your wife isn't made of paint or you might have a problem.

Watched an interesting documentary on Netflix a couple of nights ago about the rise in exposure to chemicals and what it might be doing to us. Some quite staggering stats in there but this one was eye opening. In 1995, the incidence of autism was 1 in 400 children. Nowadays it's 1 in 88

We're getting ever-better at detecting and reporting syndromes and illnesses. Autism or ASD?

What "chemicals" exactly are allegedly causing this increase? The entire world is made out of chemicals and has been for, eh, quite some time. You might as well blame exposure to "substances" or "matter."

Better at diagnosing Autism. Also the internet helps geeks find geek partners... (joking aside there might actually be something in that...)

Worked for me.

I hope you never put alcohol in your body apparently that is definitely carcinogenic!!

I put that in my body knowingly and usually deliberately - glyphosate isn't a listed ingredient on my food though, but is going to be in a large proportion of it.

^ Exactly

Regarding the smell of poo in bathrooms, some (eco friendly if that's more in line with your ethics) deodorant sprayed into the toilet bowl can pretty effectively stop the smell at it's source, so the funny mixture of smells doesn't float around the bathroom - quite handy if you're a guest somewhere.

I've read that buying organic bread is a worthwhile thing to do, because of how the glyphosate works it's way into the wheat kernels and can't be washed off or removed particularly.

There's a 'dirty dozen' list online somewhere of the foods to avoid when buying non organic due to their tendency to 'hold onto' things like pesticides, and a list of 17 which are less potentially worrying.

Geez the lack of scientific understanding in some of you is frightening. OK so there may be Glyphosate residuals in your food, we do actually have qualified people looking at stuff like this who make up reasoned rules on what is acceptable and what is not after properly assess the risks. Yes this changes from time to time with new information but it's done methodically, not based upon pseudo science from the internet.

As for exposure to 'chemicals' aside from Cougar nailing that stupid concept what do you think people were exposed to in Victorian times, some horrific chemicals were released into the atmosphere from coal fires which were way more hazardous to health than modern pesticides.Not to mention food adulteration which was big back then, outright toxic chemicals in medicines and cosmetics, total lack of understanding and controls of industrial manufacturing processes and lead based paints and pipework. We've been exposed to non-background levels of 'chemicals' since the start of the industrial revolution so to connect more readily (over?) diagnosed medical conditions with modern exposures without any evidence is a real bad case of correlation / causation confusion.

In the meantime people continue to smoke, or more recently vape. I saw a great advertisement on a shop in Leeds the other day proclaiming vaping was smoking with all the poisons removed, all the poisons with the exception of that tried and tested pesticide nicotine - people swallow all sorts of rubbish, literally and metaphorically.

Cougar - Moderator
Watched an interesting documentary on Netflix a couple of nights ago about the rise in exposure to chemicals and what it might be doing to us. Some quite staggering stats in there but this one was eye opening. In 1995, the incidence of autism was 1 in 400 children. Nowadays it's 1 in 88
We're getting ever-better at detecting and reporting syndromes and illnesses. Autism or ASD?

What "chemicals" exactly are allegedly causing this increase? The entire world is made out of chemicals and has been for, eh, quite some time. You might as well blame exposure to "substances" or "matter."

Feel free to check it out for yourself

http://thehumanexperimentmovie.com/

Can I have the Cliff Notes?

Ok, so what no -synthetic chemical air freshener?

Burned toast

Burned toast

here is some stuff to make you think....

We discover more diseases and can detect then - or are these things we always had but never looked for.
Cause of death - what if died of old age really meant died of something we now have a name for.
What if back 100 years ago people lived as long as we do now - what sort of things would we find?

Watched an interesting documentary on Netflix a couple of nights ago about the rise in exposure to chemicals and what it might be doing to us.

In 1995, the incidence of autism was 1 in 400 children. Nowadays it's 1 in 88

OK so there may be Glyphosate residuals in your food, we do actually have qualified people looking at stuff like this who make up reasoned rules on what is acceptable and what is not after properly assess the risks

Thank goodness for that. All of them do it completely remotely from any self-interest in outcomes too I imagine... 😉

All of them do it completely remotely from any self-interest in outcomes too I imagine

I know what you're saying and it always sounds a touch paranoid, but I'm fairly sure that biased outcomes happen in all sorts of testing. I think it's a good thing to be slightly paranoid of scientific studies, though I prefer to call it questioning. 🙂

Good science calls out bias, good reviewing finds bias.
Generally the people who present the most bias are the like of the
[url= https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136032/ ]Andrew Wakefileds[/url]
and the press

In 1998, Andrew Wakefield and 12 of his colleagues[1] published a case series in the Lancet, which suggested that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may predispose to behavioral regression and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Despite the small sample size (n=12), the uncontrolled design, and the speculative nature of the conclusions, the paper received wide publicity, and MMR vaccination rates began to drop because parents were concerned about the risk of autism after vaccination.[2]

Almost immediately afterward, epidemiological studies were conducted and published, refuting the posited link between MMR vaccination and autism.[3,4] The logic that the MMR vaccine may trigger autism was also questioned because a temporal link between the two is almost predestined: both events, by design (MMR vaccine) or definition (autism), occur in early childhood.

The reporting of lots of stuff
[url= http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/ ]The Famous Daily Mail's Kill/Cure/Both List[/url]
means that sometimes the science gets lost in the search for a headline.

The process of review & peer review is the best mechanism to deal with bad science.

whereas anyone with an idea, no matter how half baked or idiotic, access to a computer, and a few 'followers' can write a blog about this sort of stuff and destroy reputations with no comeback. Because it's 'opinion'

I work in the chemical industry, with 'chemicals' that are around us all every day and the steps we take and continue to take to make safe stuff even safer just because someone *thinks* it might be linked to some sort of condition is bewildering.

Yes, there is 'self-interest' but there's no worse self-interest than someone who's on a non-reviewed crusade. And any attempt to review or criticise it is always met with - 'well you would say that wouldn't you'

Can't win. We should let the internet experts decide it for us. Cancer will die out because no-one will live long enough to get it any more, once these bastard scientists stop peddling their dangerous chemicals to us.

We've been exposed to non-background levels of 'chemicals' since the start of the industrial revolution

Way before that. Wood smoke is really bad for you, and our ancestors spent their lives sitting in caves or huts with fires on and *no chimneys*. There's evidence of their lungs being full of shitty chemicals from pure natural organic fuels.

I think it's a good thing to be slightly paranoid of scientific studies

Moderate scepticism - good
Cycnicism - less good
Paranoia - bad

Ok, so what no -synthetic chemical air freshener?

Windows, time or mtfu.

Pot pourri.

Love people who deride you for eating say Frosties saying things like "I am so anti chemicals, you don't know what you're putting in your body".

They then will go and buy a random white powder from a random unlicensed bloke/woman and unknown source. Then proceed to smash it up their nose, bomb it or whatever.

People are odd.

I'm having an issue with markers pens just now, and whether kids should be using them or not in school. A soapbox parent is on to prove they are all bad, lots of pseudo science info being sent to me, but I have to admit that some of it is actually not bad.

It does raise the question of whether little people, close to the floor, should be using marker pens in groups, where the heavier solvents fall to. Nowt fancy, bit of isopropol, ethanol or similar.

God forbid the kids should go near ethanol eh? 🙂

I remember sniffing 1,1,1 Trichloroethane* at the back of class at school, happy (but possibly dangerous) days.

* Little bottles of Tipp-ex thinners, the ones with the green lids.

I'm having an issue with markers pens just now, and whether kids should be using them or not in school. A soapbox parent is on to prove they are all bad, lots of pseudo science info being sent to me, but I have to admit that some of it is actually not bad.

It does raise the question of whether little people, close to the floor, should be using marker pens in groups, where the heavier solvents fall to. Nowt fancy, bit of isopropol, ethanol or similar.

Ahhh, the halcyon days of when bubbles was legal, sigh

Geez the lack of scientific understanding in some of you is frightening. OK so there may be Glyphosate residuals in your food, we do actually have qualified people looking at stuff like this who make up reasoned rules on what is acceptable and what is not after properly assess the risks.

Yes and now these people you refer to have realised they were probably wrong. I'm not really sure what your point is though, are you saying people dying from smoking or asbestos are just making a big old fuss because it used to be considered OK by qualified people?