Talk:Lead(II) acetate

message: The article at http://www.ocregister.com/investigations/2004/lead/part1.shtml makes no mention of lead acetate.  From reading it, it suggests that high lead levels (presumably from soil) in candy ingredients and poor quality control are to blame.  It describes the incidence of lead, NOT lead acetate.  There is no indication from this citation that the contamination is due to negligent use of lead acetate as a sweetner.  I'm removing the cite, and adding a request for a legitiamte citation for the claim. Alvis 04:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accusations 

message: I've revamped the chembox and added one of my own pictures to illustrate the compound. The original box info is here if it is needed:
 Lead(II) acetate 
 
Systematic name Lead acetate trihydrate 
Other names Lead (II) acetate trihydrate, Lead (II) ethanoate 
Molecular formula Pb(C2H3O2)2·3H2O 
Molar mass 379.33 g/mol 
CAS number [6080-56-4] 
Density 2.55 g/cm3 
Solubility (water) 75 g/l 
Melting point 75 °C 
Boiling point decomp 
Hazards 
MSDS [External MSDS] 
Main Hazards toxic 
Flash point Non-flammable. 
R/S statement R61, R33, E48/22, R50/R53, R62,
S53, S45, S60, S61 
RTECS number  
Disclaimer and references
Dormroomchemist 06:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ChemBox

message: I'm confused...is the stuff lethally toxic at reasonable doses, or not? 
We have the story of the painter who accidentally ate .75 oz. of the stuff and nearly killed himself, and the stories that it was used as a sweetener since antiquity (presumably by people who occasionally ate more than .75 oz). Which is it? Bullzeye  (Ring for Service) 10:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lethality 

message: Does this stuff have any calories?  It's said that it was used as a sugar substitute, which suggests it was preferred to sugar...but what is probably meant is that it was ersatz sugar, meaning that there was no sugar, and this was the only other stuff available.  Does it have any nutritional/energy value?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strewberries (talk • contribs) 13:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calories? 

message: Changed statement saying salt could be used to precipitate lead from lead(II) acetate solutions. The acetate ion forms complexes with the lead ion making it difficult to precipitate. The use of sufficient sulfuric acid, however, reduces the acetate ion concentration by formation of unionized acetic acid and forms a more insoluble product than the salt. It is important to analyze treated waste for residual toxins, to ensure that the process is successful, especially where complicated equilibria are involved. This places home treatment beyond the means of most individuals. RPKOZ (talk) 02:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precipitating lead from lead(II) acetate 

message: Come on, don't make believe that you know anything you write about or that you can write except in the most basic sense of 'write'. This article is no exception.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.189.11.145 (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia sucks because every incompetent can write in it 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lead(II) acetate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070808083503/http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=6caa01c2-3fb0-4431-a559-43aeece93860 to http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=6caa01c2-3fb0-4431-a559-43aeece93860
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141031102829/http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single060614.pdf to http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single060614.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080111154608/http://www.npi.gov.au/database/substance-info/profiles/50.html to http://www.npi.gov.au/database/substance-info/profiles/50.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: According to http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch12/complex.php this compound is a complex with a 2 coordinate metal ion, I think this should be added to the article.
Simon de Danser (talk) 11:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Complex

message: Not sure what the individual who pasted the clarification needed tag in the lede thinks the difference is between sweetening and "deacidifying". My coffee is very acidic, so I add sugar to it to make it taste better. A single spoon of sugar cuts the acidity down to acceptable levels. A second spoon makes it taste sweeter. Every additional spoon after that makes it taste sweeter still. Are you suggesting that the first and second spoons belong to completely different processes then, and it can't be called "sweetener" until the second spoon? Or are you claiming that the "sugar of lead" (a telling designation, it would seem) performs an actual chemical reaction in the wine, physically neutralizing and removing the acids? Where is your reference to these "new studies"? Why not direct readers to them instead of just saying "you're wrong. Now go find out why yourself." There is also the question of whether a pair of studies automatically overrides and invalidates decades of previous studies and writings just because it's new. Who made the study and why? How incontrovertible is their "proof"? I have seen many studies which come up with very shaky "findings" that rely on a lot of assumptions and leaps of faith and speculation. I've seen multiple "studies" that flatly contradict each other. Yet we're supposed to just take it as gospel truth because it's new and it calls itself a study? I could judge for myself if you had named or linked to the study you mentioned, of course. In any case, the Romans DIDN'T just use it in wines. They made a crystalized form of it that looked just like table sugar, and they used it in a wide variety of dishes and sauces. It was a common cookin ingredient in Roman households. Was it just for "deacidifying" all these various dishes, or can we assume the sweet flavor had something to do with it?
64.223.219.53 (talk) 00:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Deacidifying" 

message: Was the sweetening of wine simply the result of storing or serving it in lead or pewter vessels — removing the sour acetic acid while adding the sweet acetate. Doug butler (talk) 22:47, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romans