• Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Exactly. Gasoline, for example, is remarkably non-toxic, but it will cause instant chemical burns to your throat and lungs, possibly killing you far below the (chemically) lethal dose.

      Methanol will turn you blind at a quarter of the listed dose, and those two are just from the top of my head.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Or aspects like arsenic staying in your body a very long time, or the fact that LSD is psychoactive in microgram doses, so you’d need thousands of tabs to die.

    • neo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I wonder how they came up with the LD50 of all those materials, like THC and LSD. Is this based on theoretical calculation, in vitro tests, or on a (assumably) very small sample of known deaths?

      • yetAnotherUser@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Step 1: Feed/Inject mutliple rat populations with different concentrations
        Step 2: See how many die.
        Step 3: The concentration which causes 50% of the population to die is the LD50

        • neo@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          While I was thinking you were yet another user, you were a rat the whole time! Wait, we are all rats!

          Jokes aside, animal testing as a data source seems reasonable to me. Thanks