Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

412 Beacon of Hope


About DrP

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
  • Interests
    Golf, Science, Coins, Music, Fossils, Warhammer 40K,Chess, Magic, Love and Peace.
  • College Major/Degree
    Chemical Physics + PhD
  • Favorite Area of Science
  • Occupation
    Coatings Chemist.

Recent Profile Visitors

20019 profile views
  1. News of the Future Today!

    Seek Ale!
  2. Rinse or not rinse?

    Just to play advocate here 2 points spring to mind: - Different people use different amounts. - Although diluted when the water evaporates you can be left with a concentrated residue. I used to moan at my brother for leaving plates face up so residue would be left on a plate that is left to dry (and it made drying with a cloth harder). Laying it 'down' means water runs off and there is less there to leave a residue and it is easier to dry with a cloth because there is less water to remove.
  3. Rinse or not rinse?

    The problem with this idea (if you will allow me to play advocate) is that it allows opinions to be thrown in from all angles. With toxicity or carcinogenity we have figures listed on a sheet that state what is or isn't toxic and at what doses - people's opinions are irrelevant as the figures have been measured an quoted. With YOUR question though it isn't as open or shut as "Yes, rinse or you will get cancer of the throat" or "Don't bother it is safe" - I do not know if it is completely clear - thus the discussion... Also - as Strange just beat me to saying - if you want opinions then you CAN set up a poll.
  4. Sorry if this has been covered before - do these reporters think the public are THAT stupid that they can totally U-Turn on their opinion of a political stance or opinion based upon whether the idea was put forward by a Republican or a Democrat? Obama: "I'll talk to NK" / Fox: "Idiot! Traitor! Who does he think he is?!" Trump: "I'll talk to NK" / Fox "Revolutionary ideas from the pres' to bridge gaps with the enemy! - 3 cheers - Outstanding diplomatic work! - why has no other pres' suggested this?!" Surely the American people are not THAT stupid to be taken in by this nonsense? It is a little depressing.
  5. Rinse or not rinse?

    It's hardly irrelevant imo. Things in everyday use that are now banned and considered carcinogens. Do you think soaps should be banned based on what you read on the SDS? I don't - but I don't want to eat them either. Anyhow - you know the doses that are dangerous from the data on the SDS that you posted in the OP. Some people may well be more sensitive than others but it doesn't look as though anyone actually knows for sure. I, personally, would rinse it all off just to be safe and to ensure a better eating/drinking experience. I gave you my vote - Rinse.
  6. Rinse or not rinse?

    Yea - people used to wash their hands in carbon tetra chloride.... until workers got kept getting skin cancer over their hands... (Hmm - this is what my school teacher said anyway - I have quoted her before and been wrong :-/) - no-one has ever died of getting cancer from TiO2 as far as I am aware.
  7. Rinse or not rinse?

    What about them? They all have their own individual Safety Data Sheets and the SDS for the final product and the label is written accordingly. The SDSs for the final products have strict rules for the writing of them. We have had strict tightenings on the limits that you use to declare or not the contents of a product on the SDSs from the new REACH laws over the last few years - mainly this is a very good thing and it is standardized across the whole EU now and everything is 'safer'... although it is almost too much when you have to label a harmless mixture as a carcinogen when there is no risk in using the product and the risk pertaining to the raw material is under question.
  8. Stephen Hawking Passed Away 3/14/2018

    A fitting tribute.... an honour deserved!
  9. Rinse or not rinse?

    They are pushing for higher classification though I think - this is what I was told at a coating meeting last year anyway. The classification is for pure powdered TiO2 as a breathable dust. The guys in our factory have used it for many years - sometimes they have even got it on their faces and haven't been wearing their masks. What the law is pressing for is for us to label PAINT tins as carcinogenic... even though the TiO2 is bound in the paint. The only danger I can see is if a piece of painted wood was sawn and some dust was liberated... which I would put money on not being enough exposure to give you cancer unless you were doing it every day and actively bending over to snort up the dust from the sawing.... so why the need to put it on a paint tin.......... and why aren't any of my workers dead after 20 years of exposure to it? No-one in the paint industry has ever died of TiO2 induced cancer as far as I can tell. A painter will be well safe from it.
  10. Rinse or not rinse?

    Its a PROCESSED CHEMICAL!!!11!2!!"!!1! lol - I bet the people who make the noise about it do not know that it is considered an organic molecule. We are having a serious issue now with EU REACH law - they are classifying TiO2 as a carcinogen... which is serious for paints.. they are basing the classification on TiO2 powder injected at overload directly into rats back in the 80s. I have no problem with labelling things as carcinogens if they are... but any non soluble dusts injected into the blood at high doses is bad... I would like to see a modern repeat of the test to make sure. Soon - EVERYTHING you buy will have a carcinogen sticker on it... problem here is - what happens when something is properly carcinogenic? Will people ignore the labels because they think that is as safe as washing up liquid or white paint?
  11. Rinse or not rinse?

    I always rinse off any soapy bubbles. My mother and father used to moan about wasting water but we were told at school (in the 1980's) to rinse off any residual soap to avoid the possibilities of throat/mouth cancers from residual detergents. They said it was not definite, but different people use different amounts of soap and to be safe there should be a rinse. ....saying this - it wouldn't be the first time what I was taught at school turned out to be wrong after I repeated it here. .lol. It makes sense to me to rinse off any soap from my plates and glasses etc anyway. What about after 30 years of not rinsing your plate?
  12. how to turn a believer

    Says the same book that says that all the animals were put 2x2 on a boat and that the earth was made in 6 days and that Methuselah was 900 years old. How do you personally decide which bits to ignore as obvious rubbish and what bits to believe?
  13. how to turn a believer

    No, I agree - but outlawing this behaviour seriously reduces the cases of it happening I would think. If rape was legal then more people would do it. It isn't and that is deterrent enough to stop some people. Personally I despair at the state of people's psyke that they would get off on it let alone carry out such an act. (maybe it is an evolutionary hang over for propagating genes). Maybe I am guilty of moral snobbery, I used to be a Christian and cannot think how someone could hurt someone physically and mentally in such a way and take pleasure in doing so - I really think it is disgusting. So in short - outlawing it was a good thing in my book!
  14. Cool - +1 for looking up some facts. So... only one bride in a thousand was married at 12. Still... that's still quite a few. I am also thinking that before 1275 it might have been more common.... else why the need for the law change? - I will have to research it.... maybe you are right and girls as young as 12 or 13 weren't found attractive a thousand years ago.... my point is that it wasn't seen as that bad a thing compared to todays thoughts... and what was the consensus 1000 years ago or 2K years back or even 3K? I know it would be hard to know... but I am pretty certain that this isn't a long enough period for man's sexual drive to be influenced much by evolution. I think our thinking has evolved faster than our drives maybe. Also - remember I am playing advocate here and am interested in what the science has to say about the evolution of our sex drive... I might get time to read more about it at a later date. I personally am not attracted that way to young teen girls... but is this due to my mental conditioning or my evolved sexdrive?