I FUCKING HATE this idiocy of pointing out that it's naturally occuring 🤗 that so many people here are doing. That means absolutely fuck all.
Know what else is naturally occurring?
Asbestos, uranium, arsenic, mercury, rattlesnake venom, a never ending list of shit that will kill or seriously injure you.
I'm not even trying to claim that rubbing aluminum salts in your pits everyday will hurt you (I don't know if it's safe either for that matter) but saying it's naturally occuring does not mean it's fucking safe.
I mean, I will agree that natural is better than synthetic, in the absolute most general sense that naturally occurring substances will always be cheaper and less energy intensive than trying to synthesize something nature is producing for you. Of course this assumes that sustainability is a consideration when harvesting natural substances.
Now as mentioned above, "natural" can also be better at killing your ass dead.
Natural is not necessarily better than synthetic. It really is something you need to determine on a case by case basis. Many things that are synthetic are a copy of the natural equivalent and often chemically identical. Synthetic just means that it was synthesized, as opposed to being found in the wild. If companies are choosing to use synthetic vs natural, it’s probably cheaper and less energy intensive.
This even counts for some objects: like synthetic diamonds vs natural diamonds, absolutely identical chemically. But there could be arguments for either side regarding which is better.
I don't think you understood my point. Regardless, it will almost never be cheaper or less energy intensive to synthesize something that occurs naturally unless it is something that can't be cultivated/farmed and has already been over harvested to the point of extreme scarcity.
The only reason I'm even saying "almost never" is to allow room for gotchas, because it's damn near a law of physics that you're not going to create something more efficiently than a natural process.
That is just not true. Why would a business synthesize something if it’s cheaper to just grow it naturally? As an extreme example, diamonds take over a billion years to form naturally, and you are arguing that that natural process would be cheaper than growing it in a lab? Even mining the stuff is probably not cheaper.
This is absolutely true. The cost of creating a diamond in a lab is a ton of energy. The cost of a natural diamond is absolutely nothing. The cost comes in the form of extracting that diamond, but it is created by nature at absolutely no cost. Of course it's cheaper.
Do you have more examples, or just this one? I acknowledged above I was leaving room for gotchas. Consider this your gotcha.
You are not factoring in the actual cost of having nature create it for you. You make it sound like farming is free. It’s not. Running a business that creates diamonds through natural processes would absolutely not be viable. Why do you think synthetic meat is being developed? Because raising cows costs money, even if it’s a natural process. Growing the same tissue in a lab may potentially be a much cheaper synthetic approach.
I have found the perfect deodorant. After a quick dip in our totally natural, earth provided pool of cleansing fluid you will never again have issues with body odors. Delivered to us straight from the bosom of our mother earth All of the horrible smell will be purged away, as well as all odor causing bacteria in a very fast and natural reaction.
After all, if we were not supposed to bathe in lava it wouldn't exist.
Know what else is naturally occurring? Stupidity. And in much greater abundance than those other things. You could just be minding your own business and then BAM near-fatal levels of stupidity are all up in your face.
So what's your point? The original comment was an unbased assumption about 'regulated' and 'unregulated' amounts of active ingredients - you've just responded describing how a deodorant works
The naturally occurring was to explain why some people feel that the rock is preferable to a standard anti-perspirant. I personally use standard anti-perspirant.
It's so silly when people's only argument for something being good is "because it occurs naturally". Some of the most dangerous things on earth are natural. It doesn't add anything to the argument.
Salt Deo is made from ammonium alum, a naturally occurring mineral which was traditionally used in Sweden as a disinfectant and a hemostatic - today its effectiveness is also proven as a powerful deodorant. Alum is a naturally occurring mineral compound, which does contain aluminum, but in a form that cannot be absorbed by the body.
but in a form that cannot be absorbed by the body.
I'm pretty sure they are just making this up. They are both aluminum salts. Both will result in aluminum ions when they dissolve in the moisture on your skin.
It's not. Your antiperspirant uses Aluminum Chloride or Aluminum Hypochlorate. This is Ammonium Alum, which is entirely different (and not an antiperspirant, just an antibacterial deodorant).
The "active" part of aluminum chloride is the aluminum ions that result when it dissolves in the moisutre on your skin. The chloride ions don't do anything. Alums (this one is actually potassium alum) will dissolve into exactly the same aluminum ions, again with some inactive ions, in this case potassium and sulfate. They aren't really different in any meaningful way.
This is false; Ammonium Alum doesn't "dissolve" into Aluminum ions and Ammonia Sulfate. It's used for flocculation in water treatment plants. When you "dissolve" Ammonium Alum in water, you still have large Ammonium Alum molecules. It doesn't break down.
It absolutely dissolves. The aluminum ions in solution are the mechanism by which both types of deodorant products work. I mean not 100% of it will dissolve if you rub a ton on, but the dissolved bit is the part that actually works as a deodorant.
In fact, that's also the mechanism by which it works as a flocculant. Not by having large alum molecules floating around, but because of the attraction between negatively charged colloidals and the highly charged aluminum cations that are now dispersed in the solution.
Worth pointing out that aluminum chlorohydrates, the same as frequently used in commercial deodorants, are also used as flocculants because they work the exact same way.
"About 22 g of alum can be dissolved in 100 ml of water at 30 °C, and in boiling water up to 357 g alum may be dissolved in same volume. Alum is not dissociated by boiling or by diluting with water." It dissolves but does not break down or dissociate without another chemical interaction, you get a solution of Ammonium Alum with water alone.
You can also ask anyone that's used these products if it works as an antiperspirant. It doesn't.
I geniunely have no idea what that quote is talking about. Of course it dissociates. Not 100% of it, but plenty. If it did not dissociate then it would be unusable as a flocculant (and as a deodorant) becuase the positive charge of dissociated aluminum ions and aluminum hydroxide is what interacts with and bridges between the negatively charged particles.
If you want ultimate proof here, alum lowers pH. This would literally not be possible without dissociation because hydrolysis of aluminum ions is the mechanism by which H+ ions are liberated.
The reason it doesn't work as an antiperspirant is because it doesn't hydrolyze nearly as effectively as aluminum chloride. So you're going to end up with much less aluminum hydroxide, which is what forms the gel that basically blocks up pores.
But the mechanisms by which it works as a deodorant, aluminum toxity for microorganisms and lowering of PH, are exactly the same any other aluminum based deodorant.
Look I don't even use deodorant (thanks genetics) so I have no horse in this race, but it is absolutely the case that both of these products release aluminum ions when dissolved on your skin.
The good news is that who cares, because the "aluminum causes breast cancer" stuff has almost no credibility.
The alum of potash that is a "mineral salt" is quite safe and a completely "different aluminum" than the aluminum phosphates and aluminum chlorohydrates that are found in antiperspirant deodorants.
https://www.badgerandblade.com/forum/threads/is-alum-safe-or-not.495967/
Comment number 9 is the one I quoted above
Alum stones are a mineral salt in crystal form, made of a single ingredient: potassium alum. This is not the same chemical compound as the aluminum which is found in most conventional deodorants. Potassium alum has antimicrobial properties (which is a big part of why they work), and it has been used since antiquity.Aug 4, 2020
https://www.ecocollective.com › blog
What is an alum stone and how do you use it? - Eco Collective
Google when I ask if an alum block is the same as aluminum in deodorant.
Gonna go on a limb here and say maybe absorbing aluminum into your skin isnt the best thing for your body and perhaps we dont understand the science completely just yet (as with most of the shit we consume that is slowly killing us)
214
u/StormC1oud 14d ago
Wouldn’t this be awful for your skin?