Jump to content

Talk:Lead(II) acetate

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Accusations

[edit]

The article at http://www.ocregister.com/investigations/2004/lead/part1.shtml makes no mention of lead acetate. From reading it, it suggests that high lead levels (presumably from soil) in candy ingredients and poor quality control are to blame. It describes the incidence of lead, NOT lead acetate. There is no indication from this citation that the contamination is due to negligent use of lead acetate as a sweetner. I'm removing the cite, and adding a request for a legitiamte citation for the claim. Alvis 04:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ChemBox

[edit]

I've revamped the chembox and added one of my own pictures to illustrate the compound. The original box info is here if it is needed: 

Lead(II) acetate

Systematic name Lead acetate trihydrate Other names Lead (II) acetate trihydrate, Lead (II) ethanoate Molecular formula Pb(C2H3O2)2·3H2O Molar mass 379.33 g/mol CAS number [6080-56-4] Density 2.55 g/cm3 Solubility (water) 75 g/l Melting point 75 °C Boiling point decomp Hazards MSDS [External MSDS] Main Hazards toxic Flash point Non-flammable. R/S statement R61, R33, E48/22, R50/R53, R62, S53, S45, S60, S61 RTECS number Disclaimer and references
Dormroomchemist 06:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC) (forgot my sig when I did this)[reply]

Lethality

[edit]

I'm confused...is the stuff lethally toxic at reasonable doses, or not?

We have the story of the painter who accidentally ate .75 oz. of the stuff and nearly killed himself, and the stories that it was used as a sweetener since antiquity (presumably by people who occasionally ate more than .75 oz). Which is it? Bullzeye (Ring for Service) 10:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is the lethality depends on stomach acid levels. Normal or high levels, all the acetate becomes insoluble lead chloride. If, on the other hand, you happen to have low or no stomach acid when you ingest it -- you get a massive dose of lead. Hence highly variable lethality. Otherwise lead poisoning with lead acetate should've been far more common, and it just wasn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.216.55 (talk) 02:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead is a particulary dangerous poison because it is a cummulative toxin. It has an affinity for certain body tissues and there it accumulates, and whilst it might not kill you immediately it will increasingly damage your health. Heavy ingestion causes severe stomach cramps and pains whilst long term saturation causes nerve/brain damage and even "insanity". One particularly tragic observation of lead poisoning is that the effects on the brain are irreversable and far more pronounced in the young developing brain. This is the principal reason why "lead" was removed from petrolium. Many doctors claimed that increased delinquency observed in city children as compaired with country children was due to brain damage sustained by those who had grown up at more risk of breathing lead fumes. Whilst the metal lead was known to be poisonous from early times it was not known that various compounds containing lead were just as toxic, in some cases more so. Sugar of Lead was used as make-up designed to try and conceal Smallpox scarring and by this means it entered the body, particularly women with tragic consequences if they were pregnant. Cider Drinkers Colic or Devon Colic was caused by lead poisoning. It was discovered that the cider presses used lead gutters to channel the acidic apple juice and the juice was erroding the lead and carrying it off in solution. Much worse was the discovery that cider producers were deliberately adding Sugar of Lead to apples known to produce sour apple juice in an effort to increase sweetness, a valued selling point for cider in the 19th C. Lead plumbing pipes were the norm in Britain until fairly recently. It is still common to find lead plumbing pipes in an old Victorian house. This does not necessarily constitute a health hazzard in an area of Hard Water (Significant dissolved Calcium Carbonate-Lime Scale in the water) as long as the pipes remain undisturbed. The dissolved Calcium Carbonate forms a Scale or plaque on the lead pipe interior totally isolating it from the water. However if you lived in a acid or Soft Water area the lead can enter the water. I lived on the Isle of Lewis which had the most acidic water in the UK and there it was common to regularly add a bag of lime to water cisterns to deliberately "fur up" the pipes. Lead is very easily distributed by contact. It is so soft that just handeling it will impart the metal into your skin. Likewise it melts at such very low temperatures, for a metal, that it is easly made airbourne as invisible fumes. A problem encountered when burning-off old lead paint for example. So the toxicity of lead was well known, and whilst it is not immediately fatal it could be argued that living with the effects of long term lead poisoning could be more unpleasant than death! Therefore I would suggest that NO amount of lead, or any of its compounds are safe to ingest and any level whatsoever, although I conceed that remark is POV. My other remarks are common knowledge already well known in the public domain and do not therefore constitute original reasearch. I think this article would benefit from some additional points and observations, and perhaps some of what I mentioned could be incorporated. In good faith. AMM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.109.188 (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Calories?

[edit]

Does this stuff have any calories? It's said that it was used as a sugar substitute, which suggests it was preferred to sugar...but what is probably meant is that it was ersatz sugar, meaning that there was no sugar, and this was the only other stuff available. Does it have any nutritional/energy value? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strewberries (talk • contribs) 13:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! It's deadly yet used as a sugar substitute and is apparently 'sweet' in taste :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.44.179 (talk) 01:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Precipitating lead from lead(II) acetate

[edit]

Changed statement saying salt could be used to precipitate lead from lead(II) acetate solutions. The acetate ion forms complexes with the lead ion making it difficult to precipitate. The use of sufficient sulfuric acid, however, reduces the acetate ion concentration by formation of unionized acetic acid and forms a more insoluble product than the salt. It is important to analyze treated waste for residual toxins, to ensure that the process is successful, especially where complicated equilibria are involved. This places home treatment beyond the means of most individuals. RPKOZ (talk) 02:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia sucks because every incompetent can write in it

[edit]

Come on, don't make believe that you know anything you write about or that you can write except in the most basic sense of 'write'. This article is no exception. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.189.11.145 (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lead(II) acetate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Complex

[edit]

According to http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch12/complex.php this compound is a complex with a 2 coordinate metal ion, I think this should be added to the article. Simon de Danser (talk) 11:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Deacidifying"

[edit]

Not sure what the individual who pasted the clarification needed tag in the lede thinks the difference is between sweetening and "deacidifying". My coffee is very acidic, so I add sugar to it to make it taste better. A single spoon of sugar cuts the acidity down to acceptable levels. A second spoon makes it taste sweeter. Every additional spoon after that makes it taste sweeter still. Are you suggesting that the first and second spoons belong to completely different processes then, and it can't be called "sweetener" until the second spoon? Or are you claiming that the "sugar of lead" (a telling designation, it would seem) performs an actual chemical reaction in the wine, physically neutralizing and removing the acids? Where is your reference to these "new studies"? Why not direct readers to them instead of just saying "you're wrong. Now go find out why yourself." There is also the question of whether a pair of studies automatically overrides and invalidates decades of previous studies and writings just because it's new. Who made the study and why? How incontrovertible is their "proof"? I have seen many studies which come up with very shaky "findings" that rely on a lot of assumptions and leaps of faith and speculation. I've seen multiple "studies" that flatly contradict each other. Yet we're supposed to just take it as gospel truth because it's new and it calls itself a study? I could judge for myself if you had named or linked to the study you mentioned, of course. In any case, the Romans DIDN'T just use it in wines. They made a crystalized form of it that looked just like table sugar, and they used it in a wide variety of dishes and sauces. It was a common cookin ingredient in Roman households. Was it just for "deacidifying" all these various dishes, or can we assume the sweet flavor had something to do with it?

64.223.219.53 (talk) 00:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Romans

[edit]

Was the sweetening of wine simply the result of storing or serving it in lead or pewter vessels — removing the sour acetic acid while adding the sweet acetate. Doug butler (talk) 22:47, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lead(II)_acetate&oldid=1192654409"