5 ms·

I get the sense that someone has confused boric acid with diatomaceous earth, and spread their confusion to Wikipedia. For an insect with a waxy cuticle over t

I get the sense that someone has confused boric acid with diatomaceous earth, and spread their confusion to Wikipedia. For an insect with a waxy cuticle over their exoskeleton, walking over diatomaceous earth is basically like John McClane in Die Hard, running in bare feet over broken glass. Except instead of bleeding to death from the lacerations, the water in their hemolymph diffuses out at a faster rate through the scratches in their cuticle, and they dehydrate to death. The glasslike skeletons of diatoms are hard, sharp, and insoluble in water at neutral pH. Boric acid has to be ingested. It's a chemical poison. It works fine when added to bait. Sprinkling it as a powder won't work as well, as the insect would have to be dusted with it over their body, and then groom themselves shortly thereafter to remove the powder. Walking through it just dusts the ends of the legs. It works especially well with ants, who will carry poisoned baits back to the colony, but only if you add it to sugar or peanut butter. As boric acid is softer than glass, and soluble in water, I wouldn't count on it as an insect-killing abrasive. We can all blame Wikipedia user Rfc1394, who added the text to the Boric Acid article at 10:05, 23 June 2017, apparently with a citation to the EPA R.E.D. factsheet, which does not contain anything remotely close to the text added.

CriticalCathed 7y ago
I think you're mistaken. There are many other independent sources that talk about its action as an abrasive. You may be the one spreading confusion. Here's one of many. This one is from the National Pesticide Information Center which operates out of Oregon State University in partnership with the EPA (OSU has a large focus on agricultural research.) > It can also scratch and damage the exterior of insects. http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/boricgen.html http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/boricgen.html
- logfromblammo 7y ago
  I'd take a source that has been peer-reviewed by entomologists containing the evidence of independently repeatable measurements. The falsifiable hypothesis is that crystalline boric acid can kill an insect without being ingested, by a purely mechanical action. Sassolite (boric acid) has a Mohs hardness of ONE. Please understand why I might be skeptical of its supposed reputation for killing things by scratching them. Minerals with low Mohs hardness, like graphite, talc, and yes, also boric acid, are used as lubricants.[0] I also question whether those multiple sources in support are truly independent, as I have seen several search results that quote the Wikipedia article verbatim. [0] http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~wsawyer/boricWear2006.PDF http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~wsawyer/boricWear2006.PDF
  - CriticalCathed 7y ago
    You think the EPA, the University of Oregon, and the National Pesticide Information Center are wrong?
    - joecool1029 7y ago
      Seems likely. Rather, they stated that 'fact' without anything more than anecdotal evidence. This paper investigates a far more likely method of action: http://zero.sci-hub.tw/673/f8d7a6469e96789d8c958eb3c4efdc46/cochran1995.pdf http://zero.sci-hub.tw/673/f8d7a6469e96789d8c958eb3c4efdc46/...
      - CriticalCathed 7y ago
        You're flat wrong. I didn't bother checking the other claims that logfromblammo made before my previous comments, I accepted them at face value, but I did this time; Boric acid has a hardness of 3 not 1 as he claimed. Diatomaceous Earth has a hardness of 1-1.5. [0][1] I looked at the source for the wikipedia claim that logfromblammo described so: "which does not contain anything remotely close to the text added". The source does support the claim in wikipedia. [2] >Pesticide products containing boric acid and its sodium salts are registered in the U.S. for use as insecticides, fungicides and herbicides. As insecticides, some act as stomach poisons in ants, cockroaches, silverfishand termites, while others abrade the exoskeletons of insects. The foundational premise behind his original post "unsourced wikipedia edit mislead other websites" is flat wrong. And on top of that, his reasoning for why boric acid wouldn't be a good abrasive "mohs hardness of 1" is also wrong, and egregiously so when the infamous Diatomaceous Earth that he claims is being mistaken for boric acid has a mohs hardness of 1-1.5! It's an irrelevant argument. My initial diagnosis of logfromblammo being the one who was confused was absolutely correct. Very disappointed in both of you. Hopefully many people weren't mislead by being convinced by logfromblammo as you were. [0] http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-applications/borates-in-pesticides/ http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-appli... -- another source about the abrasive properties + boric acid hardness [1] https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm -- boric acid hardness [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/0024fact.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.go... -- the wiki source that was incorrectly identified as not supporting the claim
CriticalCathed 7y ago
After talking with another user, it's become clear that yes you are mistaken. Your confusion about the wikipedia source led you down an incorrect path. I shouldn't have taken your statements at face value as true. You are ironically the problem you were attempting to point out -- being confused about a source, and then spreading that confusion. First: The wikipedia source (EPA R.E.D. factsheet) you said didn't "contain anything remotely close to the text" actually does. >Pesticide products containing boric acid and its sodium salts are registered in the U.S. for use as insecticides, fungicides and herbicides. As insecticides, some act as stomach poisons in ants, cockroaches, silverfishand termites, while others abrade the exoskeletons of insects. [0] Second: Boric acid has a hardness of 3 not 1 as you claimed. Diatomaceous Earth has a hardness of 1-1.5. [1] [2] This just about blows a hole in every point you've yet tried to make. I know I won't get an apology, or probably even a concession of your error, but I am posting this reply for posterity -- so other's aren't mislead. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/0024fact.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.go... -- the wiki source that was incorrectly identified as not supporting the claim [1] http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-applications/borates-in-pesticides/ http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-appli... -- another source about the abrasive properties + boric acid hardness [2] https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm -- boric acid hardness
- logfromblammo 7y ago
  Is it possible that the statement is about a pesticide product containing boric acid or a sodium salt of boric acid, and that the abrasive element in said product is not the boric acid? Boric acid, or B(OH)3, is the mineral sassolite, and has Mohs hardness 1. [0] Boric anhydride, or B2O3, has a Mohs hardness of 4. [1] It is not boric acid. It converts to boric acid in the presence of water, and is hygroscopic, so will also do so in the presence of humidity. Borax, or Na2B4O5(OH)4•8(H2O), has a Mohs hardness of 2-2.5 . It is not boric acid. It converts to boric acid in the presence of strong acid, and is considered a hydrated sodium salt of boric acid. Diatomaceous earth is a sedimentary material, not a pure mineral. It has components of different hardness, the relevant factor being the crushed frustules of ancient diatoms, or diatomaceous silica. "The ultimate hardness of the diatom skeleton is between 4.5 and 5 on the Mohs' scale.... The friability, or the propensity of the skeleton to break down, rather than to abrade, renders a measurement of hardness meaningless without also a consideration of the particle size." [3] The "not even close" text was the actually quoted text "the gift that keeps on killing". Quoted from the cited source? No. The other dubious hyperbolic phrase was "the effect is like shards of glass cutting them apart", which also does not appear in the cited source. "Shards of glass" does bring to mind a broken diatom frustule, which is literally a shard of sharp silica when viewed under a microscope. There's quite a step up in intensity from "related chemicals may be abrasive" to "this exact chemical is like sharp shards of glass". Your sources are a company that sells microscopes and "about us" copy for a company that sells mineral borates. I'm not certain what borate it has with a Mohs hardness of 3, but that means it can scratch a fingernail. Try it at home. Grow the biggest boric acid crystal you can, and then try to scratch your fingernail with it. About the only thing holding it together as a solid at all is hydrogen bonding and van der Waals forces. There is nothing there chemically to give it hardness. Individual molecules flake off readily. So no, I will not apologize or concede. [0] http://webmineral.com/data/Sassolite.shtml http://webmineral.com/data/Sassolite.shtml [1] https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/boric%20anhydride#section=Other-Experimental-Properties https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/boric%20anhydride#... [2] http://webmineral.com/data/Borax.shtml http://webmineral.com/data/Borax.shtml [3] https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/old/ap42/ch11/s22/reference/ref02_c11s22_1995.pdf https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/old/ap42/ch11/s22/reference/r...

CriticalCathed 7y ago

I think you're mistaken. There are many other independent sources that talk about its action as an abrasive. You may be the one spreading confusion. Here's one of many. This one is from the National Pesticide Information Center which operates out of Oregon State University in partnership with the EPA (OSU has a large focus on agricultural research.) > It can also scratch and damage the exterior of insects. http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/boricgen.html http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/boricgen.html

logfromblammo 7y ago
I'd take a source that has been peer-reviewed by entomologists containing the evidence of independently repeatable measurements. The falsifiable hypothesis is that crystalline boric acid can kill an insect without being ingested, by a purely mechanical action. Sassolite (boric acid) has a Mohs hardness of ONE. Please understand why I might be skeptical of its supposed reputation for killing things by scratching them. Minerals with low Mohs hardness, like graphite, talc, and yes, also boric acid, are used as lubricants.[0] I also question whether those multiple sources in support are truly independent, as I have seen several search results that quote the Wikipedia article verbatim. [0] http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~wsawyer/boricWear2006.PDF http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~wsawyer/boricWear2006.PDF
- CriticalCathed 7y ago
  You think the EPA, the University of Oregon, and the National Pesticide Information Center are wrong?
  - joecool1029 7y ago
    Seems likely. Rather, they stated that 'fact' without anything more than anecdotal evidence. This paper investigates a far more likely method of action: http://zero.sci-hub.tw/673/f8d7a6469e96789d8c958eb3c4efdc46/cochran1995.pdf http://zero.sci-hub.tw/673/f8d7a6469e96789d8c958eb3c4efdc46/...
    - CriticalCathed 7y ago
      You're flat wrong. I didn't bother checking the other claims that logfromblammo made before my previous comments, I accepted them at face value, but I did this time; Boric acid has a hardness of 3 not 1 as he claimed. Diatomaceous Earth has a hardness of 1-1.5. [0][1] I looked at the source for the wikipedia claim that logfromblammo described so: "which does not contain anything remotely close to the text added". The source does support the claim in wikipedia. [2] >Pesticide products containing boric acid and its sodium salts are registered in the U.S. for use as insecticides, fungicides and herbicides. As insecticides, some act as stomach poisons in ants, cockroaches, silverfishand termites, while others abrade the exoskeletons of insects. The foundational premise behind his original post "unsourced wikipedia edit mislead other websites" is flat wrong. And on top of that, his reasoning for why boric acid wouldn't be a good abrasive "mohs hardness of 1" is also wrong, and egregiously so when the infamous Diatomaceous Earth that he claims is being mistaken for boric acid has a mohs hardness of 1-1.5! It's an irrelevant argument. My initial diagnosis of logfromblammo being the one who was confused was absolutely correct. Very disappointed in both of you. Hopefully many people weren't mislead by being convinced by logfromblammo as you were. [0] http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-applications/borates-in-pesticides/ http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-appli... -- another source about the abrasive properties + boric acid hardness [1] https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm -- boric acid hardness [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/0024fact.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.go... -- the wiki source that was incorrectly identified as not supporting the claim

CriticalCathed 7y ago

After talking with another user, it's become clear that yes you are mistaken. Your confusion about the wikipedia source led you down an incorrect path. I shouldn't have taken your statements at face value as true. You are ironically the problem you were attempting to point out -- being confused about a source, and then spreading that confusion. First: The wikipedia source (EPA R.E.D. factsheet) you said didn't "contain anything remotely close to the text" actually does. >Pesticide products containing boric acid and its sodium salts are registered in the U.S. for use as insecticides, fungicides and herbicides. As insecticides, some act as stomach poisons in ants, cockroaches, silverfishand termites, while others abrade the exoskeletons of insects. [0] Second: Boric acid has a hardness of 3 not 1 as you claimed. Diatomaceous Earth has a hardness of 1-1.5. [1] [2] This just about blows a hole in every point you've yet tried to make. I know I won't get an apology, or probably even a concession of your error, but I am posting this reply for posterity -- so other's aren't mislead. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/0024fact.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20080406065032/http://www.epa.go... -- the wiki source that was incorrectly identified as not supporting the claim [1] http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-applications/borates-in-pesticides/ http://www.americanborate.com/all-about-borates/borate-appli... -- another source about the abrasive properties + boric acid hardness [2] https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm https://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm -- boric acid hardness

logfromblammo 7y ago
Is it possible that the statement is about a pesticide product containing boric acid or a sodium salt of boric acid, and that the abrasive element in said product is not the boric acid? Boric acid, or B(OH)3, is the mineral sassolite, and has Mohs hardness 1. [0] Boric anhydride, or B2O3, has a Mohs hardness of 4. [1] It is not boric acid. It converts to boric acid in the presence of water, and is hygroscopic, so will also do so in the presence of humidity. Borax, or Na2B4O5(OH)4•8(H2O), has a Mohs hardness of 2-2.5 . It is not boric acid. It converts to boric acid in the presence of strong acid, and is considered a hydrated sodium salt of boric acid. Diatomaceous earth is a sedimentary material, not a pure mineral. It has components of different hardness, the relevant factor being the crushed frustules of ancient diatoms, or diatomaceous silica. "The ultimate hardness of the diatom skeleton is between 4.5 and 5 on the Mohs' scale.... The friability, or the propensity of the skeleton to break down, rather than to abrade, renders a measurement of hardness meaningless without also a consideration of the particle size." [3] The "not even close" text was the actually quoted text "the gift that keeps on killing". Quoted from the cited source? No. The other dubious hyperbolic phrase was "the effect is like shards of glass cutting them apart", which also does not appear in the cited source. "Shards of glass" does bring to mind a broken diatom frustule, which is literally a shard of sharp silica when viewed under a microscope. There's quite a step up in intensity from "related chemicals may be abrasive" to "this exact chemical is like sharp shards of glass". Your sources are a company that sells microscopes and "about us" copy for a company that sells mineral borates. I'm not certain what borate it has with a Mohs hardness of 3, but that means it can scratch a fingernail. Try it at home. Grow the biggest boric acid crystal you can, and then try to scratch your fingernail with it. About the only thing holding it together as a solid at all is hydrogen bonding and van der Waals forces. There is nothing there chemically to give it hardness. Individual molecules flake off readily. So no, I will not apologize or concede. [0] http://webmineral.com/data/Sassolite.shtml http://webmineral.com/data/Sassolite.shtml [1] https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/boric%20anhydride#section=Other-Experimental-Properties https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/boric%20anhydride#... [2] http://webmineral.com/data/Borax.shtml http://webmineral.com/data/Borax.shtml [3] https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/old/ap42/ch11/s22/reference/ref02_c11s22_1995.pdf https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/old/ap42/ch11/s22/reference/r...