Have you seen the MSDS on acetic acid? Drinking a strong acid isn't good for your health.
Chronic Effects on Humans:
MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast. May cause damage to
the following organs: kidneys, mucous membranes, skin, teeth.
Chemically, a "strong acid" is one that dissociates completely in solution. HCl, H2SO4, HNO3, HBr, HI, HClO4, HClO3 comprise the complete list. That's it. All other acids have a dissociation constant, pKa.
The pKa for acetic acid is 4.76 . It is a "weak acid", but then again, so is HF, with a pKa of 3.17 . If you have ever seen Breaking Bad, you have seen what even a "weak acid" can do to the human body at high concentrations.
The usual story about acetic acid is that your chem prof was pipetting glacial acetic acid by mouth, and they accidentally got some in their mouth, and all the cells lining their oral cavity peeled off the next day. And they used bulbs or thumbwheel pumps on their pipettes ever since. Not sure if this story is especially common or if it is made up to scare students into using the lab equipment safely.
But anyway, the point is that the ill effects for caustic chemicals are largely dependent on concentration. "Vinegar" is acetic acid diluted to between 4 wt% and 18 wt%. You can drink vinegar, and just have skin rashes and weak teeth. If you drink enough glacial acetic acid (>99 wt%), you're going to die.
Well then it's a good thing we're talking about vinegar, which is 4-6% acetic acid, unless you're talking about wine vinegar (we're not), and not talking about 100% pure acetic acid, which is what you linked.
Vinegar isn't pure acetic acid so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up. I mean I know why, because then you can argue against a point I didn't make instead of the point I did.
A teaspoon of regular vinegar a day is not going to have any lasting effects on your health other than making you despise anything that tastes even remotely like vinegar.
Saying "salt + vinegar is more toxic than glyphosphate" is only true if you bastardize the definition of both and willingly forget for a moment that one of the chemicals is specifically designed to kill things.
"Vinegar isn't pure acetic acid so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up. I mean I know why, because then you can argue against a point I didn't make instead of the point I did."
Ah, but now you've pointed out the problem with your own argument. Nobody uses 100% glyphosphate either. It's highly diluted.
"Saying "salt + vinegar is more toxic than glyphosphate" is only true if you bastardize the definition of both and willingly forget for a moment that one of the chemicals is specifically designed to kill things.
"
Saying salt + vinegar is worse than glyphosphate is only true if you bastardize how glyphosphate is used. So yes, i'd agree with you that your point makes no sense :)
" forget for a moment that one of the chemicals is specifically designed to kill things."
Intent is irrelevant in nature. It's also not made to kill humans.
This point is just more of the same. Acetic acid is meant to destroy things too!
You are arguing "in the concentrations used, it's not destructive". That's quite literally the same as glyphosphate.
