Talk:Capsaicin

message: In the "Treatment after exposure" section:
"Plain water is ineffective at removing capsaicin,[26] as are bleach, sodium metabisulfite and topical antacid suspensions.[citation needed] Capsaicin is soluble in alcohol, which can be used to clean contaminated items.[26]"
If this is a list of things that do not work to remove capsaicin, it seems like it should be a bigger list. If, on the other hand, it's been created for trolling purposes, it can probably be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:A499:B00:E1D6:EE30:DE4F:C385 (talk) 16:09, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ￼It sounds like somebody trying to be helpful, speaking from experience. WD Bashford (talk) 01:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment after exposure  

message: From the acticle: "Thus, capsaicin does not actually cause . . . .any direct tissue damage at all, when chili peppers are the source of exposure.   . . . .   In essence, the body inflames tissues as if it has undergone a burn or abrasion and the resulting inflammation can cause tissue damage in cases of extreme exposure, . . . ."
Which is it? Can it cause tissue damage or not? If it excites the body to cause damage by secondary channels, it is still causal to that damage. 2603:7080:7440:66:4148:717B:C311:D6D7 (talk) 20:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not inconsistent. The human body reacts to capsaicin with inflammation, which then causes damage. The capsaicin itself doesn't cause the damage, it doesn't burn. If you were to place capsaicin on a dead enough corpse, enough hours from death, it wouldn't result in damage. The damage is an indirect effect. ---Lilach5 (לילך5) discuss 21:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  inconsistent information 

message: I basically just had to entirely gut this section as the majority of it was false or suspicious claims made with no citation provided since they were added.
Some of the information included the claim that water doesn't wash capsaicing away and alcohol or milk must be used. Which fine, it's an oil. But the preferred method for law enforcement and paramedics to decontaminate OC is copious amounts of water. Do they really expect that you're going to wash your eyes out with alcohol?
The most egregious claim was the original header of the article, which was "Toxicity". By definition, a toxic substance causes death, or deatruction or cells, tissue or organs. I understand there is some conjecture about high doses causing geuine toxic effects IN MICE. But there is no evidence for toxicity of any sort in humans.
If it were a toxic substance which damages cells, tissues and organs of people, it would be subject to chemical weapons conventio s. Because that's the very definition of a chemical weapon.
i also removed any medical advice from the article, since Wikipedia should not be providing any medical.advice besides "see a doctor" in serious matters at the very least.
Needless to say, after such a severe revamp, the whole section is a mess. I left anything with a citation, but even that is suspicious, citation or no. But I don't have time to go through it all with a fine toothed comb.
I just made the talk page to explain the changes, since talk pages rarely lead to any sort of discussions in my experience. So, teying to drum up a discission on it would have taken months or more. If it was ever addressed. At least, that's been my consistent experience any time I've tried making a talk page. People are quick to criticize you when you're wrong, bit wholly apathetic and neglectful if you're right. Hence, action before talk.
Even when the page is read, people rarely read, or bother to interpret all but the first paragtaph or two.
A ma VoidHalo (talk) 11:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment after exposure section needs a LOT of attention. 

message: "Natural function" and "Evolution" should be combined into a single section. They currently repeat some of the same information. –Yutsi - Talk/Edits 20:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combine sections