3 ms·
And if Wikipedia didn't warn that Sodium Bromide was poisonous, would that not be irresponsible? Chemistry websites seem different because, presumably, their ta
by dpassens 1y ago
And if Wikipedia didn't warn that Sodium Bromide was poisonous, would that not be irresponsible? Chemistry websites seem different because, presumably, their target audience is chemists who can be trusted not to consume random substances.
- permo-w 1y agono. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_salt#Inorganic_sodium_salts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_salt#Inorganic_sodium_s...
- dpassens 1y agoAnd yet, when you click through, it says > NaBr has a very low toxicity with an oral LD50 estimated at 3.5 g/kg for rats.[6] However, this is a single-dose value. Bromide ions are a cumulative toxin with a relatively long biological half-life (in excess of a week in humans): see potassium bromide. At no point does the paragraph you linked suggest it's safe to substitute NaCl with any other sodium salt.
- permo-w 1y agofirst of all, the average idiot is going read that sentence and switch their brain off after hearing "has a very low toxicity", it's hardly a ringing alarm. second, this is quote from clicking through to the sodium bromide page, not the page I linked listing sodium salts. the parallel here would be asking chatgpt to list sodium salts, which is almost certainly what he did, and then clicking through again would be the equivalent of asking for further information about that salt, which it seems likely he did not do and I sincerely doubt that ChatGPT said anything about it being safe to substitute for NaCl