Talk:Corrosive substance

Untitled
I corrected various grammar errors and also removed the section on the caustic spill as being too specific for this article. In addition, I clarified and corrected the "protection" section. It contained dangerously inaccurate information - for example PVC gloves are not very chemically resistant. Delmlsfan (talk) 01:33, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Destroying?
By "destroy" does it mean that the object contacting the corrosive material destroys it atoms? Or does it mean that it just dissolves, rearranging the molecules? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeleoj123 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Unclear caption
In the second image caption, please expand the acronym "DOT". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.67.99.21 (talk) 12:24, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Corrosive substance. 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/20130509024826/http://www.dynamicscience.com.au/tester/solutions/chemistry/sulfuricacid1.html to http://www.dynamicscience.com.au/tester/solutions/chemistry/sulfuricacid1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Citation needed for: "but people are mostly concerned with its effects on living tissue"?
Hello.

Why is a citation needed for this simple, logic statement?

I think the sentence is logic, because after all: Therefore, I don't think it needs a citation. - João Jerónimo (talk) 11:59, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Stuff that corrodes living tissues sometimes doesn't corrode other materials, but is it not so frequent for a chemical that corrodes other materials not corroding living tissue. And if is corrodes my skin I won't want to pour that substance onto it or drink the substance, even if it does not corrode other materials. Therefore, we *are* in fact more concerned with living tissue than other materials, and if it appears otherwise then it is because it is unlikely that I would even think about drinking it!
 * 2) Why does this third statement need a citation but the previous one doesn't? For example I'm not sure whether "destroy", "damage" or "attack" are the better scientific terms to describe what corrosive means.
 * 3) The pictograms clearly indicate that destruction of living tissues is part of the common meaning of "corrosive". That's why it is used as a symbol.
 * 4) Is there an official definition by IUPAQ of what means "corrosive"? If the article does not reflect that official definition, then I think it must reflect the most common meaning of the term in day-to-day speech.