🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <62ld31$gqi@larry.cc.emory.edu>, "Lloyd R. Parker"
<lparker@larry.cc.emory.edu> writes
>Stuart Adams (sadams@rogers.wave.ca) wrote:
>: 
>:   Ok, here goes - the deadliest toxin KNOWN to man (I stress known because 
>there's probably some pretty
>: nasty shit out there that has yet to be discovered) is Botulinum Toxin A, and 
>a dose of 0.00000003 mg/kg
>: is considered the LD50 (the dose at which you would expect a 50% mortality 
>rate among lab animals).
>: That means that 0.0000024 mg is enough to kill an 80 kg (175 lb) individual 
>(could be less, could be
>: more, depending on your luck).
>
>Hard to believe, since they GIVE botulism toxin (in very tiny amounts) to 
>correct crossed eyes, by injecting it into the optic muscles, temporarily 
>blocking muscles that are pulling too hard.  Are you suggesting they 
>somehow give far less than a ng?

If what you say is true, what's wrong with a *very* dilute solution. 

Doses of less than one nanogram of active ingredient are fairly simple
really (and I'm not talking homeopathy here).

It does make you wonder who first discovered this (and how?) :)

By the way, I thought that the potency of botulinum toxin had been
slightly surpassed by certain military nerve agents, but don't have any
hard evidence for that. Some plant lectins aren't far off either.

I would also suggest that Pu poses little threat to health other than
from it's radioactivity, and suggestions to the contrary are in all
probability propaganda to support some political agenda.
-- 
Mike H
        
        "If truth equals concensus and the populace is wrong....
                - I am still condemned"

N.B. Remove ".spamless" from address to reply.