Slashdot Mirror

If you think that's bad, you should read about all the dangers of Di-hydrogen Monoxide.

More proof that dihydrogen monoxide is a dangerous substance!

I'm more worried about inhaling dihydrogen monoxide than carbon nanotubes. I mean, these carbon nanotubes aren't around us now; dihydrogen monoxide is around us now, and fatal inhalation of dihydrogen monoxide kills millions of people per year!

Welcome to the web site for the Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division (DMRD), currently located in Newark, Delaware. The controversy surrounding dihydrogen monoxide has never been more widely debated, and the goal of this site is to provide an unbiased data clearinghouse and a forum for public discussion. :)

It is typically soaked in another potential carcinogen DHMO (unproven thus far) and sold to innocent civilians at less-than-lethal doses whenever a cinnamon roll or bagel is sold on an individual basis.

It is much like how Alcoa took waste from the aluminum refining process 70-80 years ago and managed to sell it to cities to put in their water supplies.

Not to mention DHMO. That shit is in our drinking water, too.

Really nasty stuff.
http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

Some choice dangers of the stuff.

  Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects.
DHMO is a major component of acid rain.
Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.
Contributes to soil erosion.
Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.
Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions.

Beware! We should act now to ban the stuff.

Oh my! That sounds almost as dangerous as Dihydrogen Monoxide!

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, a species shown to mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters. The atomic components of DHMO are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol.
For more detailed information, including precautions, disposal procedures and storage requirements, refer to one of the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) available for DHMO:

Kemp Compliance & Safety MSDS for DHMO
Chem-Safe, Inc. MSDS for Dihydrogen Monoxide
Applied Petrochemical Research MSDS for Hydric Acid
Original DHMO.org Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for Dihydrogen Monoxide (html)

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

So is dihydrogen monoxide.

now at last we can focus on the real threat, Dihydrogen Monoxide

NO! That just makes it far more dangerous!

It's not the rum itself which is bad for you, it's the damn dihydrogen monoxide that's in it!

I hear the entire world is consuming a ton of chemicals in their water, mostly DMHO

I'm not a smoker, and I don't vape. I hate being around cigarette smoke.

I still think the anti-vaping hysteria is bullshit.

Is vaping absolutely, totally, 100% safe? Of course not. Neither is dihydrogen monoxide, which (in large quantities) often causes death, is found in all cancer cells, can cause severe burns, and is the primary component of acid rain.

Just take a look at its MSDS! It's all here in black & white -- http://dhmo.org/msdsdhmo.html

(spoiler: dihydrogen monoxide is commonly known by its non-scientific name, "water")

Is vaping several orders of magnitude better than smoking cigarettes? Unquestionably. It doesn't bother me AT ALL when friends vape in my car. If they've been smoking cigarettes, though, I won't even let them get in until 30 seconds after taking their final draw from the cigarette (otherwise, they'll just exhale cigarette smoke into my car).

The real-world alternative to vaping isn't abstinence... it's cigarette-smoking. Unless, of course, we want to extend the disastrous 80+ year miserably-failed social experiment known as "prohibition" to include cigarettes, too.

If the FDA eliminates most currently-available e-cigarette products from American markets, the result won't be smoke-free Americans who don't vape... it'll be more Americans who smoke, plus a lot of Americans buying e-cig juice online by the gallon from China, with literally ZERO regulation and not even IMPLIED guarantees about safety or ingredients.

Is the cigarette industry opposed to e-juice? Not really. It's resisted them the same way all established industries try to fight off disruptive change, but if vaping became the overwhelmingly preferred method for getting nicotine, we'll just have Marlboro-branded $299 vaporizers, with screw-on (branded & visible) tanks of Marlboro e-juice (and lots of parts designed to be proprietary and require frequent replacement). Remember, most non-synthetic nicotine comes from... the same companies that make cigarettes. And at the end of the day, their profit per usage-minute for selling that pure nicotine to the e-cig industry is about the same as their net profit from cigarettes after you factor out the taxes.

IMHO, the REAL source of the panic over e-cigs lies with state governments that have come to depend upon the steady stream of revenue from cigarette taxes. They're doing their best to try and build up a case for taxing e-cig and vaping supplies as much as they currently tax cigarettes.

Spit? I hope you realize that the point of using alcohol (specifically isopropyl alcohol) was that it doesn't damage the metal of the contacts, while dissolving the oxidation on the metal. Spit not only puts corrosive dihydrogen monoxide on the metal contacts, but other nasty stuff too. And it's gross.

I regularly wash my clothes in Dihydrogen Monoxide. It works great, but you have to use it with caution as too much can cause:
Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities. Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage. Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects. DHMO is a major component of acid rain. Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns. Contributes to soil erosion. Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals. Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits. Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes. Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions. Given to vicious dogs involved in recent deadly attacks. Often associated with killer cyclones in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere, and in hurricanes including deadly storms in Florida, New Orleans and other areas of the southeastern U.S. Thermal variations in DHMO are a suspected contributor to the El Nino weather effect. http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

The implied understanding is that income inequality is the root cause for differences in lifespan, when it might be intelligence (decision making ability). By this, it might mean those that are poor, make poor life decisions, like drugs, smoking, and other reckless behavior.

The other implication is, that if we normalize life spans for everyone by redistributing wealth, we'll all have longer lifespans. But that is not likely be true either, as we may just be shortening some lifespans while not increasing them for the others.

And as they don't account for these thigns, I'll just add it to the list of arguments under "correlation doesn't equal causation" and give them a copy of the Dihydrogen Momnoxie danger sheet.

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

Why would you try to conceal GMO products from the consumer? It's confirmation that the makers of GMO products have something to hide!

I'll bite. Because consumers are in general stupid masses that instantly fear what they don't understand and then will research using some form of confirmation bias to suddenly stop buying a product because it contains something that regulatory bodies have classed as "safe".

You need look no further than anti-vaxxers to see that writing complicated things on packaging does not help keep people "informed". Likewise I imagine that the sale of water will suddenly plummet if producers are forced to list every chemical in full on the label: "State law requires us to inform you that this product contains high levels of di-hydrogen monoxide."

Oh my god that sounds scary. I better look that up: *Googles "facts about dihydrogen monoxide"* http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html Yep the FDA is corrupt for letting this product on the shelf and I'm never buying anything containing dihydrogen monoxide again! Open your eyes sheeple, we're being poisoned!

And this is without even considering the fact that label laws are getting so ridiculous in some areas that there's barely any space left on the small bottle for a picture to guide me if I'm buying ketchup or habanero sauce, a mistake that you only make once.

dihydrogen monoxide

Nevertheless, the fact remains that anything that can be used can also be abused. A pillow can be a murder weapon or help you sleep better. An H-bomb can deflect a dangerous asteroid or destroy a city. Water is problematic. :) Government can be tyrannical or ...hmmm!. And so on.

Clearly it is time to designate Pluto as a superfund site now that we have found such large quantities of dihydrogen monoxide on it.

You should read about the horrors of Dihydrogen Monoxide http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

The risks of dihydrogen monoxide are pretty well publicized.

http://www.dhmo.org/

Gun are dangerous tools and step ARE taken to avoid death. Going further, e.g.; banning gun, is not 'taking step' or 'taking a step further' but is akin to ban water.

Yeah, our HS chemistry class used a lot of Dihydrogen Monoxide in our experiments. Nasty stuff... http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

Not to mention dihydrogen monoxide - which is still used in large quantities in many residential and commercial settings, despite its many dangers.

> if an aircraft containing radioactive material as fuel were to crash, spreading such fuel across the crash site

Everyone knows how dangerous deuterium can be. Why it's one common component in dihydrogen oxide, which kills more people every year than any other chemical substance ever invented. http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

For example, DHMO is a constituent of many known toxic substances, diseases and disease-causing agents, environmental hazards and can even be lethal to humans in quantities as small as a thimbleful.

DHMO will kill you! Get the facts here http://www.dhmo.org/

I just hope they remove all the dihydrogen monoxide.

I can't find the product page anymore, but here is the MSDS for it: http://www.dhmo.org/msdsdhmo.h...

More importantly, what are they going to do about all the DHMO in it? That stuff is dangerous in the quantities we're talking about here!

If you drank that much today, guess what you'd die of: Water poisoning.

Of course you would.

We have to consider the fact that water is dangerous.

How will it rate http://dhmo.org/ ? Tim S.

HOLY FUCK MAN! You didn't know? Dihydrogen Monoxide is killing millions every day!

Dangerous levels of dihydrogen monoxide! The government needs to protect us! Billions of dollars spent by this industry to make sure every home has a constant supply, exposing our children in ways that sometimes end in death! Read more here: http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html You have been warned!!

1) that CO2 would be poisonous?

Water in sufficient quantities is toxic. I don't even mean in the drowning sense, or the silly DiHydrogen Monoxide jokes, but if you have too much water, it can kill you.

Nitrogen also works this way. Nitrogen in air, normal pressure, is fine. Nitrogen under pressure can kill you.

Too much oxygen can make you space out.

There are a lot of things that follow this - if you think of normal doses of heat, or electricity, you're fine. If too much, you die. It doesn't take a lot of thinking to come up with examples.

The obligitory "Dihydrogen Oxide" reference:
http://www.dhmo.org/research.h... ...applies here.

Chlorine gas is toxic. It was used in shells to poison troops in WW1.

Whereas both hydrogen and oxygen are perfectly safe and have never been known to case any sort of problem whatsoever... well, ok, there was the Hindenburg, and Apollo 1, and...

So if you do the described experiment while locked in a badly-ventilated room, leave it running for long enough to increase Ever Ready's share price by 1%, ignore the eye-watering stink that even a whiff of chlorine will produce and then light a cigarette, you could be in real trouble. If only from all the crap in the cigarette smoke...

However, all this pales into insignificance alongside the experiment's reckless use of the liquid death that is Dihydrogen Monoxide!

Seriously, guys, when everything is described as dangerous, nothing gets treated as dangerous. If you're not sure what it is, don't wait for someone on the internet to tell you not to snort it.

This is more dangerous than anything "man made global warming" could ever be! Why is John Kerry not waring the Indonesians about this danger?

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, a species shown to mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters. The atomic components of DHMO are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol.

Ref:
http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

Even Californians know this is a dangerous item - they are even signing petitions to BAN it!
http://www.infowars.com/califo...

Well said. I can't believe the article failed to mention the inherent dangers of dihydrogen monoxide. Arguably one of the single greatest killer of our children, but these evil chemical companies don't want us to know about it.

What are some of the dangers associated with DHMO?

Each year, Dihydrogen Monoxide is a known causative component in many thousands of deaths and is a major contributor to millions upon millions of dollars in damage to property and the environment. Some of the known perils of Dihydrogen Monoxide are

:

• Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
• Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
• Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects.
• DHMO is a major component of acid rain.
• Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.
• Contributes to soil erosion.
• Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.
• Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits.
• Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes.
• Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions.
• Given to vicious dogs involved in recent deadly attacks.
• Often associated with killer cyclones in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere, and in hurricanes including deadly storms in Florida, New Orleans and other areas of the southeastern U.S.
• Thermal variations in DHMO are a suspected contributor to the El Nino weather effect.

The number of flagrantly ignorant companies shipping this dangerous chemical is endless. Just a few: Coca Cola, Pepsi, McDonalds, Wendy's...anyone that sells anything liquid for consumption.

Dihydrogen monoxide is a very deadly fracking chemical. Do your research before downplaying the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide.

Also, how do you know that's the only deadly chemical they're injecting into the Earth?? Big energy companies lie all the time!

The hockey stick has stood the test of time. The facts hold. The data continue to support it. Here's Mann recently, and discussion.

Here are myths about the hockey stick debunked.

I'm not denying that the climate is changing, or that we should burn every combustible material we can get our hands on. But we also don't need to throw society a tailspin either. From your link:

after a single study I co-wrote a decade and a half ago found that the Northern Hemisphere’s average warmth had no precedent in at least the past 1,000 years. Our “hockey stick” graph

Which would be pretty scary if the planet was 6,000 yeas old. But it's not, and this type of warming is not new. Even during the time that Homo Sapiens has been on the planet. Also from your link:

James Hansen, who has turned to civil disobedience ... ...in 2011 and 2013 in Washington protesting the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf. He has warned that the pipeline, which awaits approval by the State Department, would open the floodgates to dirty tar sands oil from Canada, something he says would be “game over for the climate.”

This is such over the top hyperbole it's ridiculous. The tar sands in Alberta are going to be extracted whether the XL pipeline is built, or not. IF it's not built, then the oil will be sent by another pipeline to the coast to be shipped to China. It will also be shipped to the US via rail instead of pipeline. Which means more fossil fuels will be used in transporting it by train and ship; and the likelihood of an accident will be increased as well as there will be a pipeline, trains and ships hauling it. .

Jeffrey Sachs, director of Columbia’s Earth Institute, and other scientists, making a compelling case that emissions from fossil fuel burning must be reduced rapidly if we are to avert catastrophic climate change. They called for the immediate introduction of a price on carbon emissions, arguing that it is our moral obligation to not leave a degraded planet behind for our children and grandchildren.

How scientific of them. We have a "moral" obligation? Yes, very scientific. Even if the planet is warming entirely because of man, there is no definitive proof that it will reach worst case. How do we know it will reach a cataclysmic event(s) if we don't' stop right this very second? I've been hearing that "if we don't fix things right now, we are all doomed" (from one thing or another) for almost my entire life. If that's the case, we're already too late. So if we can't leave our children a non-degraded planet, we must give them a pile of cash? Or who is supposed to get this money?

Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science, who has argued that “the only ethical path is to stop using the atmosphere as a waste dump for greenhouse gas pollution,”

You know what else is a greenhouse gas? Water. So should we support the Stop Dihydrogen Mono-Oxide people too? What about CO2? Do we need to stop expiration by all animals on the planet? Should we all go on the Atkins diet? After all, herbivores expel more methane. Hmm, that's probably very sustainable.

This virulent strain of anti-science infects the halls of Congress, the pages of leading newspapers and what we see on TV, leading to the appearance of a debate where none should exist

Don't get me started about all of the dihydrogen monoxide chemical additives in food these days. I mean, some places even sell it in bottles!

Yep, it's found in pesticides and cancer: http://www.dhmo.org/

They must be thinking of the research done on Dihydrogen Monoxide!!

http://www.dhmo.org/environment.html

Surely this situation can't be tolerated anymore?

You're absolutely right! I suggest we ban air right away.

While we're at it, let's ban DiHydrogenMonOxide. It's full of ATOMS!!!

Wait a minute... Ain't air full of atoms too? Maybe we should just ban atoms.

Ah, so your response to my implied criticism that 'processed foods' is a ridiculously broad term that could be applied to the majority of food you buy in the supermarket is condescendingly linking to another term referring to the specific set of tertiary processed food, which is still ridiculously broad enough to render any claim on nutritional value or health effects of the class as a whole instantly false.

Next you're going to say that 'additives' and 'chemicals' are 'bad for you'.

Ah, you are being ironic. Or trolling. Or both.

No. Don't be an idiot. Show me the research that proves that 'additives' or 'chemicals' are 'bad for you'.
Go ahead. Apparently it is extremely obvious, so you should have no problems whatsoever in finding mountains of evidence.
You can start here for the 'chemicals' part of it: http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

Also: reread the first five paragraphs of Cute Fuzzy Bunny's OP or TFS.

I've been trying to warn the public about the inherent dangers of DHMO for years, but my cries have fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps someone at NSA will listen now.

FTFY

I've been trying to warn the public about the inherent dangers of DHMO for years, but my cries have fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps someone at NASA will listen now.