 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / December 2004eating one Eounymus seed
Today I was admiring some bright red bushes. And I did not know what they were although I had learned a few names in my childhood hanging around a nursery. I remember Lantana and Boxwood and Viburnum and vaguely Eounymus. And I saw some orange seeds on the bushes and decided to collect a few to see if I can propagate next year. I was not sure of what bush it was and had to wait to get home and search the Internet to identify. And is usual of me to eat at least one seed, regardless of whether poisonous or not. I know yew are poisonous. So I ate one of these orange seeds and spit it out later for it was acrid. Later I found out it was Eounymus and the seeds are poisonous. But I suspect what they mean by poisonous is if eaten in large quantity of say a bucket ful would kill you. I think scientists should do a better job on something listed as poisonous. They should list as to how much of Eounymus if eaten will come close to killing you. When in the woods and seeing new plants for the first time with seeds on them, I usually give them a sample taste test and if acrid or unpallatable I spit them out and guess they are poisonous until confirmed. I never sample mushrooms but even there, it is my understanding that the deadliest mushroom takes a bit of quantity to do harm. I suspect there is not a single plant seed or leaf when eaten can kill a person. I guess that these plant poisons have to be taken in quantity such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So has any scientist made a precise data sheet on poisons? Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies >Today I was admiring some bright red bushes. And I did not know what >they were although I had learned a few names in my childhood hanging [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >better job on something listed as poisonous. They should list as to how >much of Eounymus if eaten will come close to killing you. They jolly well do. It is your unique combination of ignorance and inertia that keeps you from going to any bookstore or library and reading more than you would ever care to on the subject. Euonymus has been used in medicine for many years. Google turned up many accounts of Euonymus toxicity, including several scholarly works. Not all ornamentals are as safe. The lethal dose of ricin is approx. 200 micrograms. A single castor bean may contain as much as 1000 micrograms. >When in the woods and seeing new plants for the first time with seeds on >them, I usually give them a sample taste test and if acrid or >unpallatable I spit them out and guess they are poisonous until >confirmed. I never sample mushrooms but even there, it is my >understanding that the deadliest mushroom takes a bit of quantity to do >harm. Do that in California, where castor bean is a common weed, and you can wind up dead. >I suspect there is not a single plant seed or leaf when eaten can kill a >person. I guess that these plant poisons have to be taken in quantity >such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So has any scientist >made a precise data sheet on poisons? Many have. Because the occurrence of poisonous plants varies from region to region, and because livestock poisoning is a significant economic matter, the subject has been extremely well studied. For just one of thousands of these works, see Fuller and McClintock, "Poisonous Plants of California". For a very detailed online listing of some important poisonous plants (from a source highly recommended to someone who has so little sense as to ingest unknown plants), see http://www.cookiebabyinc.com/poisonousplants/  SignatureChris Green Interesting theory. Would you like to volunteer to eat increasing amounts of seeds to see if they will kill you? Ora >Today I was admiring some bright red bushes. And I did not know what >they were although I had learned a few names in my childhood hanging [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots >of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies It is far more likely that Archie would rather smoke them instead!!! > Interesting theory. Would you like to volunteer to eat increasing amounts of > seeds to see if they will kill you? [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots > >of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Dear Archimedes, try some Aconita plant on yourself - the leaves, the potato-like roots, any part of it if you like. It is a beautiful decorative plant. It will provide you with a definitive answer to your questions. > I suspect there is not a single plant seed or leaf when eaten can kill a > person. I guess that these plant poisons have to be taken in quantity > such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So has any scientist > made a precise data sheet on poisons? >Dear Archimedes, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >It is a beautiful decorative plant. It will provide you with a >definitive answer to your questions. Don't try this - Aconitum (sic) is one of the deadlier plants. Suggesting the consumption of Aconitum (Wolfsbane), even in jest, is at best irresponsible - not only is it possible that AP might take the proposal at face value, but so might some innocent browsing a newsgroup archive in the future. I recommend you cancel the post, and contact Google to have it removed from their archive. >Archimedes Plutonium <a_plutonium@iw.net> wrote in message news:<417B61EE.394367 >65@iw.net>... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So has any scientist >> made a precise data sheet on poisons? SignatureStewart Robert Hinsley >Suggesting the consumption of Aconitum (Wolfsbane), even in jest, is at >best irresponsible - not only is it possible that AP might take the >proposal at face value, but so might some innocent browsing a newsgroup >archive in the future. I recommend you cancel the post, and contact >Google to have it removed from their archive. Nah, leave it there. If it results in the removal of but one complete moron from the gene pool, it's worth it. Steve Turner Stewart Robert Hinsley <{$news$}@meden.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news: > Don't try this - Aconitum (sic) is one of the deadlier plants. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > archive in the future. I recommend you cancel the post, and contact > Google to have it removed from their archive. Yeah, but Archimedes is a real annoying a.s and since he is doing Darwin-award experiments on himself already, he might just want to go all the way. While we are on the subject: chicken marsala made with few bits of common amanita phalloidum would work just as fine as wolfbane but slower. > >Dear Archimedes, > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > -- > Stewart Robert Hinsley Good post Stewart! I had a hidden agenda in starting this thread. I want to get to the issue of Plant to Animal Duality which should surface in poisons. So far a discussion revolves around the poisoning of animals by plants. But the reverse question of the poisoning of plants by animals is seldom if ever made an issue of. And if Plant Kingdom is the dual compliment of Animal Kingdom then poisoning would be part of that larger picture. And I should also add the warning about my past actions. When I sample something of a plant that is unknown to me if it tastes at all bitter or acrid or unpallatable I immediately spit it out and consider it poisonous. Also is something is colorful or "white" is signs that it is likely poisonous. I had a motive of posting this thread in the manner in which I did and of sampling the Eounymus seed in that I wanted to brew up a discussion of poisonous plants to animals first and then set down the big question. If Plant Kingdom is complimentary dual to Animal Kingdom then their poisons to one another should be of a pattern that is far different from the pattern expected of Darwin-Evolution. I am aware of Darwinian Evolution of poison of animals to animals such as the salamander to gartersnakes in the Pacific Northwest. But if Animals are duals to Plants then overall there should be a different pattern to poisoning of one to another. Because if they are Complimentary Duals then there should not exist any poison of one kingdom to the compliment dual kingdom that is a knock them out and kill with a small quantity. So what is the worst that animals can do to plants in terms of poisoning? The worst that I can think of is that some plants cannot take urination such as dogs. In fact I can not think of anything else wherein some animal poisons a plant. So if that is true that a few Plants have a poison that poisons animals but wherein the poisoning is a rare occurence and the reverse where there are "no animals" able to poison plants suggests the Quantum Dual Compliment theory of Plant Kingdom the dual of Animal Kingdom is more correct than the Darwin Theory. It makes more sense on the broader scheme in that if these kingdoms are duals to one another then they do not want to poison one another. But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom would have created a highly toxic poison to alot of animals and the animals would have created highly toxic poisons to alot of plants. It is the reverse analysis of animals poisoning plants that has seldom if ever be given a deep analysis. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies >But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom would have created >a highly toxic poison to alot of animals and the animals would have created highly >toxic poisons to alot of plants. That is silly. Plants do not eat animals, and so animals do not need poisons to defend themselves against plants. (There are a few exceptions to plants not eating animals. Are there any poisons involved here? I don't know. Given the way these plants work, I doubt it. But this would be the place to look. Can any animal that is trapped by a carnivorous plant kill/inhibit it and escape?) bob >>But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom would have > created [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >work, I doubt it. But this would be the place to look. Can any animal >that is trapped by a carnivorous plant kill/inhibit it and escape?) I suspect there are many more examples of plant/animal cooperation than of one "trying" to kill the other. :) Bruce ------------------------------ Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. -Redd Foxx Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups (if there were any) Bruce Sinclair wrote, > >>But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom would have > > created [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >That is silly. Plants do not eat animals, and so animals do not need > >poisons to defend themselves against plants. Strangely enough some plants do produce deadly toxins to defend themselves. Castor bean secretes Ricin, jimson weed (and other daturas) belladona compounds and we have stramonium in potato eyes. Hemlock didn't grow poisonous with idea the Socrates would make its draught famous. Aminita Phallodies kills mushroom lovers every year. Digitalis is very handy with a toxin so mild it can be used to control heart rate but an overdose will kill a healthy person. All sorts of plants are out there with toxins and sometimes animals, usually insects or insect larva can absorb it to poison their enemies. Finally the chemicals in certain plants are definity toxic but so interesting in their effects that mankind goes out of it way to cultivate them. Tobacco for one and nicotine is a deadly poison even without its long term use. Coca plants give us cocaine which is of course what makes the inhabitation of the Alto Plano possible though the native only chew the leaves and don't extract the alkaloid. Cocao of course is the basis of chocolate and despite the name of the dessert the deadly dose is more than anyone can eat. Willow secretes salicylates and was used for fever before Bayer synthesized aspirin. A lot of the poisonous plants are things that people never consider eating but are used in OTC drugs or were when I was a lot younger. > >(There are a few exceptions to plants not eating animals. Are there > >any poisons involved here? I don't know. Given the way these plants > >work, I doubt it. But this would be the place to look. Can any animal > >that is trapped by a carnivorous plant kill/inhibit it and escape?) Animals make great fertiliser. > I suspect there are many more examples of plant/animal cooperation than of > one "trying" to kill the other. :) There lots of cooperative interactions and plants might have a hard time existing without the insects and a few other creatures that carry pollen from male flowers to female. Acorns that squirrels don't eat have a chance of growing to adulthood. > Bruce later bliss -- C O C O A Powered ... -- bobbie sellers - a retired nurse in San Francisco bliss at california dot com > Strangely enough some plants do produce deadly toxins to defend > themselves. Castor bean secretes Ricin, jimson weed (and other [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > consider eating but are used in OTC drugs or were when I was > a lot younger. You can hardly get past the first page of ANY toxicology textbook without reading that the dose makes the poison. All of the toxins you mentioned, digitalis, nicotine,... are not mild poisons, as they have fairly low LD50's. Butulina toxin is one of the most toxic of all poisons, but properly diluted is used to take the wrinkles out of John Kerry's forehead. In the other extreme, water has a very high LD50, but people have killed themselves by drinking too much of it. Again, it is the dose that makes the poison. John >Bruce Sinclair wrote, >> In article <4gttn05imsp4pvenecsii4fti82eh354ek@4ax.com>, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >themselves. Castor bean secretes Ricin, jimson weed (and other >daturas) belladona compounds and we have stramonium in potato eyes. Aside ... I wrote exactly nothing of what is above :) That said ... Indeed ... but this sort of thing is usually defences against insects, are they not ? > Hemlock didn't grow poisonous with idea the Socrates would make >its draught famous. Aminita Phallodies kills mushroom lovers every >year. Digitalis is very handy with a toxin so mild it can be used >to control heart rate but an overdose will kill a healthy person. And some species can eat things that will kill others. We have a bird that eats toxic seeds and copes just fine thank you :) > All sorts of plants are out there with toxins and sometimes >animals, usually insects or insect larva can absorb it to poison >their enemies. Yep. Nothing so strange as real life :) >> I suspect there are many more examples of plant/animal cooperation than of >> one "trying" to kill the other. :) Aside ... this (above) I wrote :) > There lots of cooperative interactions and plants might have >a hard time existing without the insects and a few other creatures >that carry pollen from male flowers to female. Acorns that squirrels >don't eat have a chance of growing to adulthood. There are some plants so specialised that if you take their (usually insect) friends away, they can't breed ... or sometimes survive. Bruce ------------------------------ Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. -Redd Foxx Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups (if there were any) Of course there is the possibility that toxic plants were planted by Aliens......... > >>But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom would have > > created [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups > (if there were any) > Of course there is the possibility that toxic plants were planted > by Aliens......... I did not! Sean > >>But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom would have > created [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I suspect there are many more examples of plant/animal cooperation than of > one "trying" to kill the other. :) COMMENT: Of course. Indeed you only find plants trying to poison animals eating the wrong parts of them, like roots, stems, leaves. Which is why herbals medicines come from those things-- herbals are dilute plant poisons, as are many medicines, at base. The difference between herbs and spices is which part of the plant they come from-- spices are from parts the plants are more willing to give up, and thus are generally less toxic. Nor is it a coincidence that most medicinal plants come from tropical climates. In temperature climates, plants get rest from insects when winter kills them off, and they don't come back in numbers to do damage until later in the growing season. So some plants get along without much insect poison at all. In the tropics, it's chemical warfare ALL the time. Plants will discourage eating of fruits generally only if at the wrong time, by making them toxic or at least sour. It's pretty rare you find toxic fruits, and even then the plant is trying to discourage animals that don't carry seeds, rather than ones that do. SBH >>But if Darwin Evolution theory was correct then the plant kingdom >>would have created a highly toxic poison to alot of animals and [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > any animal that is trapped by a carnivorous plant kill/inhibit it > and escape?) There are 3 trap systems that carnivorous plants use. Bottles, Sticky Snares, and Closing Boxes. (I made all those terms up for this post) Bottles are passive traps that contain digestive fluids, and generally downward pointing hairs to prevent escape. To escape, an animal must either not sink in the fluid, or be able to chew their way out, Another option would be to be immune to the digestive action of the fluids, which I believe that there are a few mosquitos or other flies that can do that, their larvae eat the plants victims, the adults escape because they float. There is no toxicity toward the plant though, only defense against the digestive action. Pitcher plants such as Sarracenia and Darlingtonia are Bottle traps Sticky Snares are usually hairs that have glands that produce a sticky, digestive substance. The hairs are often, but not always capable of moving to improve the success of the catch. To escape, your victim must be strong enough to pull out of the glue. Using some sort of chemical would be useless, unless it is capable of breaking down the glue. Sundews (Drosera) are common users of Sticky Snares, along with Butterworts (Pinguicula). Closing Boxes are traps that move quickly when they are stimulated by the presence of an animal. They generally have some trigger that sets them off, they trap the unfortunate, and then close more slowly to seal their fate. Venus Fly-trap has long trichomes that prevent escape after the first motion. To escape, you must either be strong enough to open the trap, or be able to chew your way out. To use chemistry, the trapped animal would have to produce some compound that reverses the action of the trap, or fools the trap into thinking that there is nothing there. Bladderworts (Utricularia) and Venus Fly-trap (Dionaea) use a Closing Box type of trap. Sean > But if Animals are duals to Plants then overall there should be a > different pattern to poisoning of one to another. Because if they [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > It is the reverse analysis of animals poisoning plants that has > seldom if ever be given a deep analysis. There are a number of cases of an animal producing some chemical substance that is deleterious to a plant. Many galls are formed by an insect or other arthropod producing some toxin that the plant deals with by growing tissue around it, thereby protecting and feeding the buggie. Some plants can inhibit the growth of their neighbors by a chemical attack, but you are looking for animals that kill plants by doing something other than eating them. I have not heard of any substance that an animal produces that tends to produce death in the plant. Since most plants don't hunt down and eat animals, there isn't any real advantage for animals to produce a poison that will kill a plant. Sean (snip) >I have not heard of any substance that an animal produces that tends >to produce death in the plant. Since most plants don't hunt down and >eat animals, there isn't any real advantage for animals to produce a >poison that will kill a plant. Teeth ? :) Bruce ------------------------------ Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. -Redd Foxx Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups (if there were any) > In article <Xns958FDCBAE1B8Cgrommit383aolcom@66.150.105.53>, Sean > Houtman <grommit383@aol.com> wrote: (snip) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Teeth ? :) The actions of teeth are purely physical, and not so much chemical. Sean > There are a number of cases of an animal producing some chemical > substance that is deleterious to a plant. Many galls are formed by > an insect or other arthropod producing some toxin that the plant > deals with by growing tissue around it, thereby protecting and > feeding the buggie. I always wonder that crown-gall formation in certain plants can be regarded as cancer of the plant. Can this growth be included in the definition of cancer. There is a local tree which produces edible fruits (Zizyphus species), almost all tree tend to develop tumour-like growth having a different color from the stem, I don't know whether eating fruits of such infected plants is harmless for humans for not? > I have not heard of any substance that an animal produces that tends > to produce death in the plant. Since most plants don't hunt down and > eat animals, there isn't any real advantage for animals to produce a > poison that will kill a plant. > > Sean >> There are a number of cases of an animal producing some chemical >> substance that is deleterious to a plant. Many galls are formed [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > know whether eating fruits of such infected plants is harmless for > humans for not? I am going to be brave and opine that there is no homologue to cancer in plants. Here are my reasons for my opinion. Animal tissues are plastic, and in the event of injury, cells from surrounding tissue can either replace the injured cells, or grow some sort of scar tissue. Animal cells generally need to be able to divide and grow at any time during the life of the animal. Plant tissues are not plastic. Generally, once a tissue differentiates, it stays that way, injury does not produce healing by the way of replacement. Though plants can recover from injury, it tends to be through either sequestering the injury, or sloughing the effected part. There are times where plants may begin to grow various sorts of undifferentiated tissue, but the cells of that tissue are unable to invade other parts of the plant. The source of that growth always seems to be from meristematic tissue in the first place. Sean > But I suspect what they mean by poisonous is if eaten in large > quantity of say a bucket ful would kill you. I think scientists [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > in quantity such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So > has any scientist made a precise data sheet on poisons? There are plenty, you can order one from the USDA. A surprising number of plants can kill you with only a bite. Datura, Hemlock, Aconite, the list abounds. As far as mushrooms, some of them can kill with only a mouthful, but you may feel fine for a week or two before your liver dissolves. Not all poisonious things are so courteous to advertise their danger with color or bad taste. I would suggest that you limit your tasting to things that you know are edible. Sean > But I suspect what they mean by poisonous is if eaten in large > quantity of say a bucket ful would kill you. I think scientists [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > in quantity such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So > has any scientist made a precise data sheet on poisons? There are plenty, you can order one from the USDA. A surprising number of plants can kill you with only a bite. Datura, Hemlock, Aconite, the list abounds. As far as mushrooms, some of them can kill with only a mouthful, but you may feel fine for a week or two before your liver dissolves. Not all poisonious things are so courteous to advertise their danger with color or bad taste. I would suggest that you limit your tasting to things that you know are edible. Sean Yes indeed, fungii are notorious here. > > But I suspect what they mean by poisonous is if eaten in large > > quantity of say a bucket ful would kill you. I think scientists [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Sean In sci.chem on Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:44:05 +1000 "Peter Jason" <paul@colonel.com.au> posted: >Yes indeed, fungii are notorious here. There was a Vietnamese family in California a few years ago who found mushrooms like they ate in VietNam. One meal's worth and two or three had died, iirc. They may have looked alike, but they weren't alike. >> > But I suspect what they mean by poisonous is if eaten in large >> > quantity of say a bucket ful would kill you. I think scientists [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> >> Sean Meirman If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary. > But I suspect what they mean by poisonous is if eaten in large quantity > of say a bucket ful would kill you. Cf Rosary pea, widespread in Florida. One of these pretty beans, well- chewed, is said to be lethal to a child. > I suspect there is not a single plant seed or leaf when eaten can kill a > person. I guess that these plant poisons have to be taken in quantity > such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So has any scientist > made a precise data sheet on poisons? Yes. There are books and books and books on poisonous plants. I suggest _The AMA Handbook of Poisonous and Injurious Plants_. And yes, there ARE plants that are so toxic that one seed (e.g., Abrus), if chewed, can be fatal. Likewise, a small smear of Cicuta sap would be enough to do you in. M. Reed Why should Archie bother doing real research when he can post incredibly stupid questions in this newsgroup? For him to do a simple Google search would be too much like doing work. > > I suspect there is not a single plant seed or leaf when eaten can kill a > > person. I guess that these plant poisons have to be taken in quantity [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > M. Reed > Today I was admiring some bright red bushes. And I did not know what > they were although I had learned a few names in my childhood hanging [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > such as the Yew berry in order to kill a person. So has any scientist > made a precise data sheet on poisons? One oleander leaf might do it, 3 or 4 castor beans can kill, precatorius can too, it wouldn't take much hemlock to kill you. Yew fruits are not poisonous when ripe, though the seed very much is. SignatureDance, monkeys, dance! Cheerful Charlie >One oleander leaf might do it, 3 or 4 castor beans can kill, >precatorius can too, it wouldn't take much hemlock to kill you. >Yew fruits are not poisonous when ripe, though the seed very much is. Note. All you needed to know about this post was in the "from" line - Archimedes Plutonium. This guy is a well known loony from way back. Suggest a killfile is the easiest way to deal with him :) Bruce ------------------------------ Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. -Redd Foxx Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups (if there were any) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.