Are Organic and Natural Products Really Safer Than Chemicals?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights the misconception that organic and natural products are inherently safer than chemicals, emphasizing that many substances labeled as "chemicals" are actually benign or beneficial, such as water and vinegar. It points out that the term "chemical" often carries negative connotations, despite the fact that many harmful substances are natural, like ricin and botulinum toxin. The conversation stresses the importance of understanding the context and potential dangers of all substances, regardless of their classification. It also notes that chemicals can be managed safely and disposed of responsibly, countering the idea that all chemicals are harmful. Ultimately, the discussion calls for a more nuanced understanding of the safety of products rather than relying on simplistic labels.
shen
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
we ofen hear the terms organic, natural and chemical in the media. Organic and natural are usually used to imply that a product is "healthy" and/or "environmentally friendly" while chemical often implies negative implications for health and for the environment. In your opinion are these implications justified? use examples to support ur answer
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the computer you are on is probably made from plastics
asprin, vinegar, salt, water, they are all chemicals
the "negative implications" come from the sterotyping of all chemicals, for example some people may think that all chemicals are as harmful as NaOH or H2SO4 or something to that effect, but in reality there are only a few chemicals that are that harmful, but be warned the chemicals that are harmful can KILL you and sometimes very easily and/or painfully, others can caused a delayed death, so you may think you are fine but you can go to sleep and not wake up, others can cause massive lung failure, and the select few can put you in a coma before the chemical even reaches your lungs (H2S). some on the other hand can be used for the greater good, Nitrous oxide is analagesic and a relaxent, hence the nick name "laughing gas". Water is a chemical. If you drive a vehicle you should appreciate the chemical H2SO4 (battery acid), altough this chemical can be harmful, it also has it's uses. NaOH is used as a drain cleaner and in alkaline batteries. You can react NaOH (sodium hydroxide) with HCl (hydrochloric acid, very caustic) and yeild salt and water two harmless compounds. Any chemical can kill you, water can drown you, oxygen (pure) can kill you. Basically i am saying "be careful and you may live past 90, be wreckless and you won't make it to 30."
Chemicals can be disposed of in an "enviromentally friendly" manner not just dumping them in a stream somewhere or on the ground.
Water isn't organic, chemistrywise. Organic simply means that it contains one or more carbon atoms in the compound, or at least that was what i was taught.

I am not sure what my true feelings on this subject are, but you try to figure it out.
Media isn't always right, just be sure you know what you believe then you don't go through life wondering what could have been.
Chemicals are dangerous in the hands of a novice, and that's what i think the media is reporting on not some trained professionals experementing with potentially dangerous chemicals.

These are my thoughts, please don't hold them against me.
 
Last edited:
The most toxic substances on Earth are ricin, tetrodotoxin, botulinum toxin and tetanus - all natural organic substances and capable of killing you with less than 0.001 gram.

Plutonium the scariest nasty nuclear artificial stuff is well down the list - below caffeine if you stage the experiment correctly. https://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-156042.html
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...

Similar threads

Back
Top