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

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:03:58 -0500, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:

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.

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/

--
Chris Green

It is far more likely that Archie would rather smoke them instead!!!

wrote in message
...
Interesting theory. Would you like to volunteer to eat increasing amounts
of
seeds to see if they will kill you?

Ora



On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:03:58 -0500, Archimedes Plutonium

wrote:

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

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.



Archimedes Plutonium wrote in message ...

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 wrote in
:

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?


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

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in
:

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?


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

Archimedes Plutonium writes:

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.

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:


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.


"Monique Reed" wrote in message
...


Archimedes Plutonium wrote:


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

In article , Muhammar
writes
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.

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 wrote in message news:417B61EE.394367
...

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?

--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:25:07 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

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 wrote in message news:

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.


Yeah, but Archimedes is a real annoying ass 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.

Bruce Sinclair wrote,

In article ,
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:18:37 -0500, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
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.

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

Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:25:07 +0100 Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:

In article , Muhammar
writes
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.

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 wrote in message news:417B61EE.394367
...

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?

--
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

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:18:37 -0500, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:


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