Talk:Ethoxyquin

Ethoxyquin is harmless?

This article links to an FDA statement from 1989 to show that it is not harmful. It is also used as a pesticide [http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC35089]. I just happened across this article and I don't know much about it. However, I find it worrisome that a lot of people rely on Wikipedia for information, and this chemical is potentially harmful. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 04:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

This is interesting...

"Aquatic Ecotoxicity
All Toxic Effects for Organism Group
Organism Group - Effects Noted
Fish - Mortality
Molluscs - Behavior
Zooplankton - Intoxication"[http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC35089]

Plankton get drunk? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 04:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The article does not state that ethoxyquin is harmless, just that the FDA reported that they did not find any connection between ethoxyquin in petfood and health problems in pets. Those are two very different things. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, sorry, I was seriously half-awake, and stumbled across this page. I didn't mean to say that it was actually propaganda, just that it looked that way in my sleepy head. The article mentions nothing about ethoxyquin's use as a pesticide, and references an FDA report from 1989 that say there is no problem with ethoxyquin, when that same organization has released numerous reports in the 18 year interim that state otherwise. As this article was not written in 1989, it looked suspicious. But again, I didn't mean to imply that it was propaganda, just that it looked that way at first. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 14:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I have done my best to neutralize the tone, I have left the arguments against ethoxyquin in, but removed the "antipropoganda" bite they were filled with. Also, i added in a citation needed tag, because idea that third world countries have poor food controls and allow ethoxyquin, and that this reflects badly on the US using such "poison" (wording removed) as the only first world country to use it, is definitely not common knowledge.

Plus, as the great renaissance physician Paracelsus intuited, the difference between remedy and poison is dosage. User:inthedryer 23:41, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Paracelsus was indeed wise, and intuited well: such is the rationale of chemotherapy at its best. On the other hand, Paracelsus was not dealing with modern synthetic organotoxins, which tend to store in fatty tissues and cause problems as ppm's add over time. So we were taught in intro chemistry, ergo eater beware.

EU Regulation 2017/962

In 2017 the EU suspended authorisation for use as a feed additive, with various dates between 2017 and 2019 for final allowance of sale of goods so that alternatives may be phased in. I'll leave this link here for better writers than I to make appropriate use of it: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32017R0962 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.190.127.213 (talk) 01:43, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Usually better to BE BOLD and insert information, as most readers don't loiter on the talk-pages the way I do, so they will never see what is not in "article-space." Also, it provides fodder for wikignomes, also like myself, who learn to edit by making minor stylistic/grammatic/composition/punctuation tweaks in article-space. Of course, those with an agenda may revert your contrib rather than grooming it into encyclopedic shape, but that is a battle that is always ongoing. Cheers! rags (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

To add to article

A big problem with articles about lab-produced chemicals: what they are made from/how they are made. This article is no exception. Please improve by explaining how this chemical is made, and from which raw materials. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 06:51, 3 December 2020 (UTC)