Subscribe now

A quick reminder: Did you know that you don’t have to read my newsletters?

If you prefer listening in podcast-like format, the Substack app will read these articles aloud. Don’t let not having time to read stop you! Just open any article in the app and click the play icon.

Share

We are back at it with the next edition of Fundamental Elements, a new section of ImmunoLogic. The goal? Break down science basics, address logical fallacies, and improve critical thinking, so that you are better equipped to navigate the misinformation minefield that our society is living in.

There is a logical progression in topics—think of it as following a course syllabus.

We can’t discuss more complex topics if we are at different places in our science understanding. If you missed the last one, I recommend you read it (below) first, as today’s article on the concept of toxicity, will build on that.

The timing couldn’t be better. I just returned from Vancouver, BC where I presented at the American College of Medical Toxicologists annual conference this past weekend.

My talk “Toxic Misinformation: How Chemical Fears Undermine Public Health” specifically discussed how this concept is manipulated by bad actors to scare people about things that don’t pose a risk to health — and how it harms all of us. I promise to write up a summary of it soon!

You’ve heard it. You’ve maybe even said the phrase yourself:

“I don’t use [insert product here] — it’s toxic!”

The word toxic is a powerful word. It evokes fear, anxiety, and a sense of urgency. And why wouldn’t it? We all know, abstractly, that something that is actually toxic would cause harm, right?

The problem is, the word toxic is flung around like glitter, and almost always without essential context or understanding by the people using it. (parents, you get the glitter analogy, right?)

The word “toxic” is misused. A lot.

Let’s go back to basics.

What actually makes something toxic?

Spoiler: it isn’t what wellness influencers and media outlets claim.

Toxicology is the study of adverse effects of chemical, physical, or biological exposures on living organisms. Toxicology examines potential hazards, potential risks (the difference between a hazard and a risk is a big one, and we will revisit that too), understands how something may cause harm (the mechanism), and how people or regulatory agencies can reduce or avoid those potential risks.

From there, toxicity refers to a chemical, physical, or biological exposure that might cause harm to an organism, either directly or indirectly.

Scientifically, anything can be toxic at a certain exposure. Anything can be non-toxic at a certain [different] exposure.

Say it with me:

The dose makes the poison. With everything.

Toxicity is not about vibes. It’s about exposure — how much of a substance, how often, and how it enters your body. All of these elements are needed to determine if something is toxic:

• The dose: how much of the exposure and for how long.

  • Dosages are usually normalized to exposure relative to body size (grams or milligrams or micrograms per kilogram of body weight)

• The route of exposure: how are you interacting with the exposure

• The specific chemical: remember, the source of a chemical does not matter — the actual chemical identity is what gives a substance it’s physical properties.

• The species exposed: a human is not a plant, or an insect, or a mouse. Every organism interacts with chemicals differently.

That’s what matters. Because the same substance can be harmless in one scenario and harmful in another.

Science literacy tip: if someone claims something is toxic without all four of these elements, they are misleading you. Take that information with a very large grain of salt.

Toxicity is assessed by dosage per body weight.

Without that dosage, you cannot make any claims about whether something is “toxic” or “non-toxic,” because anything can be toxic at a high enough exposure.

This is usually represented by an exposure relative to the size of the organism (and species). Commonly, you’ll hear a value called LD50: this is a very important metric for toxicologists. This LD50 value is the 50% lethal dose: how much of a substance would kill half of a group of test subjects.

This value is typically assessed in toxicology safety studies in rodents (mice, rats) and other non-human mammals. It is also often converted into a human equivalent dose, especially for ingredients in medicines and foods, based on the chemical identity.

This is because animals and humans aren’t identical: it’s why onions and garlic are totally safe for you to ingest at high levels, but a low dose can cause kidney failure and death to your cat.

A higher LD50 value means the substance is less toxic.

That’s because that value is the dosage that can cause death, so a lower dose means a smaller amount can kill you. Keep that in mind as we discuss some examples.

Water is essential for life and…toxic.

Water (officially oxidane, if we use IUPAC naming) is essential for life.

Water makes up about 60% of our body. We must ingest water regularly in order to maintain our health and bodily functions.

But if you drink too much water too quickly? That water can turn from life-giving to toxic, quickly. That’s right: even water can be toxic. Drinking too much, specifically, more than 76 grams of water per kilogram of body weight, can kill you.

• That’s roughly 5-6 liters (about 1.5 gallons) in ~3 hours for the average adult.

You can experience water intoxication, where excess water dilutes out critical chemicals (electrolytes, salts). Water intoxication causes nausea, vomiting, headache, confusion, seizures, coma and death.

Now try inhaling water — that’s called drowning.

Just a few tablespoons aspirated into your lungs can be fatal. Water obstructs airways, prevent breathing, and causes suffocation. Water interferes with gas exchange in our lungs (how our lungs extract oxygen and excrete carbon dioxide). Water can prevent alveoli (the air sacs that do gas exchange) from functioning, causing low oxygen (hypoxia) and excess carbon dioxide (hypercapnia), both of which cause respiratory distress. Without medical intervention, this can lead to asphyxiation: brain damage, loss of consciousness, and death.

See how the dose and route of exposure matter?

Even substances or exposures essential for life or beneficial at a certain dose can become harmful [or toxic] at higher exposures or when you’re exposed through a different route.

Snake venom: deadly or digestible?

The Eastern Diamondback rattlesnake is one of the most venomous snakes in the US, but globally, doesn’t even break the top 10 (yes, I know, US has nothing on Australia).

If an Eastern diamondback bites and voluntarily injects venom (yep, snakes choose to inject venom, or not (a dry bite), venom will be injected intramuscularly, intravenously, or subcutaneously. When venom is injected, it can cause cellular death, tissue destruction, paralysis, and death — thanks to over 100 different chemicals.

Eastern diamondback venom is toxic at an injected dose of 1.2 milligrams per kg of body weight (that’s 84 milligrams total, if you’re a 70 kg (154 lb) person).

A bite can deliver up to 1,000 milligrams of venom, so that’s not great news for pretty much every human, considering less than 10% of that dose can be fatal. Mortality can be up to 30% among those with untreated bites.

Toxicity of venom is a result of over 100 chemicals (most of them proteins) with biological effects in our bodies. Eastern diamondback venom includes chemicals like:

• Metalloproteinases: enzymes that degrade connective proteins like collagens, causing tissue damage, hemorrhage, and promote the spread of venom through the body.

• Phospholipases: enzymes that degrade phospholipids, fats that make up membranes of our cells, causing cell death, tissue damage, and organ failure (since every part of our body is made up of cells).

• Serine Proteinases: enzymes that degrade proteins involved in blood clotting. This is a double-edged sword: it can cause clots where you don’t want them (thrombus or embolus) but also causes bleeding where you don’t want it. The end result? Hemorrhaging, potential strokes, and death.

• Myotoxins: proteins that degrade muscle cells, causing muscle failure, tissue damage, etc.

• Neurotoxins: proteins that interfere with nerve signaling and nerve cell death, etc., causing paralysis, respiratory failure, and death.

• and more.

Fun fact: the word toxin specifically means a chemical produced by a living organism that can be harmful at a certain dose. Think: botulinum toxin, tetanus toxin, myotoxins and neurotoxins (listed above). It doesn’t mean generic “synthetic” chemicals, which is the way wellness influencers frequently use it.

In fact, all true toxins are natural chemicals. Did I just blow your mind?

However, if you consume the same dose of snake venom, it’s unlikely to cause harm.

That’s because your stomach acid and proteinases (enzymes that degrade proteins) in your digestive tract would break down these chemicals and digest them into amino acid subunits like any other protein.

See the pattern? The dose and the route of exposure matter.

Your body is made up of chemicals that can be toxic at different doses.

Life, including human life, is a function of complex networks of chemicals. Proteins in your body? Made of chemicals. Every individual cell that fits together to create your organs, tissues, your entire body? All networks of chemicals.

Yes, your body is thousands of chemicals arranged in complex and intricate ways that make you who you are: a sack of chemicals. And yes, many are the same ones that are used to spread fear about foods, or vaccines, or consumer products in inflammatory and fear-laden posts across social media: formaldehyde, arsenic, alcohols, hydrochloric acid, ammonia, and more.

Say it with me: the dose makes the poison.

While you don’t want to exceed certain dosages of all of these chemicals, many of these are essential for life or are a function of metabolic processes in your body. And because the human body is way better at doing its job than wellness influencers would have you believe, it is really good at getting rid of stuff you don’t need.

Let’s take formaldehyde, since it is frequently used to scare people about vaccines.

There is naturally about 12,000 micrograms of formaldehyde in a pear. An infant produces about 1,100 micrograms daily. Adults? We produce up to 1.5 ounces (42,524 milligrams, 42,524,284 micrograms) of formaldehyde daily as a part of essential metabolic processes. Formaldehyde is found in trace levels in vaccines, as a result of some of the purification and inactivation processes during vaccine manufacturing (more here). Less than 0.1 milligrams would be found in any vaccine.

That’s 425,000 TIMES less formaldehyde than what an adult produces in their body on a DAILY BASIS.

So, do we need to fear formaldehyde outright? No. Even the levels in our bodies don’t pose a risk.

Nothing is automatically toxic OR non-toxic.

Non-toxic swaps you see all over social media? Those are marketing gimmicks or straight-up misinformation. Those “non toxic” swaps can absolutely be toxic - and many of them at lower doses compared to the alternatives those individuals are fear-mongering about. It’s easy to toss logic out the window when something sounds scary.

We have to consciously combat the tendency: remind yourself that everything is chemicals. Chemicals just are: they aren’t “bad” and they aren’t “good.” Remember the appeal to nature fallacy: the SOURCE of a chemical means nothing: whether a chemical is naturally-derived or entirely synthetic has no bearing on potential risk or safety of the chemical.

The actual chemical, the route of exposure, and the dosage of exposure are what matters.

Many chemicals have a specific mechanism or impact in one species, but not in another.

A common example is glyphosate, because it is used so frequently to scare people about food and their health. See here for a detailed piece on this chemical.

For example, glyphosate is frequently cited as being toxic, cancer-causing, and more. Glyphosate inhibits a key enzyme in plants required to make certain amino acids (plants photosynthesize, meaning they produce their own food, which is why they have this enzyme).

The enzyme glyphosate acts on does not exist in humans.

There is no physiological mechanism in which glyphosate would have that effect in people, even if we were exposed to a dose that could have that impact.

This is also why we interpret animal studies with caution. For example, when assessing food chemicals like aspartame, we factor in physiological differences between rodents, humans, and non-human primates.

It illustrates why media headlines claiming a chemical is “toxic” based on Petri dish studies cannot be taken at face value. It doesn’t mean the chemical has an impact in a realistic scenario. You can do ANYTHING to cells growing on a piece of plastic.

If you pour pure water onto cells in a Petri dish? They will explode. We know that’s not what happens to us when we drink water.

We can FURTHER refine our definition:

The dosage, the route of exposure, the chemical itself, and the mechanism in a certain species makes the poison.

Aspartame is demonized by wellness influencers as being toxic, yet is incredibly safe. It is 33 times less toxic than table salt, and 8.47 times less toxic than RFK Jr’s current supplement of the week, methylene blue.

Similarly, red dye 3 is claimed to be toxic, yet is 32 times less toxic than caffeine. And you’re exposed to far less red dye 3 than the caffeine most people willingly consume every day (and that dose of caffeine isn’t harmful, either).

Glyphosate is one of the safest herbicides in use, including compared to acetic acid, which is used as an herbicide in organic farming, and as your salad dressing. Glyphosate is nearly two-time less toxic than food-grade vinegar. And no one is actually ingesting meaningful levels of glyphosate (remember, those trace levels are in the parts per trillion: 1 gram per trillion grams of food).

If you hear someone saying some substance is TOXIC without context: they are misleading you, either intentionally or unintentionally.

Ask them: at which dosage? In which organism? If it is an insecticide or herbicide, does it have an impact in humans?

These questions help to tease out the reality from the sensational. Too often, sensational and unsubstantiated claims spread like wildlife on social media and through media outlets, but they do not reflect reality.

In this current infodemic of pseudoscience and anti-science rhetoric, we must all do our parts to fact-check and promote critical thinking. And that starts with basic chemistry and toxicology principles.

Science isn’t scary, but misinformation makes it seem that way. We are going to fix that.

Now, more than ever, we all must join in the fight for science.

Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.

More science education, less disinformation.

- Andrea

ImmunoLogic is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below:

Subscribe now

Before we get into it, a quick reminder:

Did you know that you don’t have to read my newsletters?

If you prefer listening in podcast-like format, the Substack app will read these articles aloud. Don’t let not having time to read stop you! Just open any article in the app and click the play icon.

Share

We are back at it with the next edition of Fundamental Elements, a new section of ImmunoLogic. The goal? Break down science basics, address logical fallacies, and improve critical thinking, so that you are better equipped to navigate the misinformation minefield that our society is living in.

There is a logical progression in topics—think of it as following a course syllabus.

We can’t discuss more complex topics if we are at different places in our science understanding. If you missed the last piece, I highly recommend you read that one first, as today’s will build on that.

If you spend any time on social media or even on legacy media, you’ve seen the posts:

• Beware the “toxic chemicals” in your foods

• Watch out for the “toxins” in your skincare products

• Even your gym clothes are filled with carcinogens!

• Vaccines are filled with toxic chemicals

• GMOs and conventional pesticides are laden with toxins

The villain in these claims? Synthetic chemicals.

At the same time, the people circulating these messages are promoting alternative “natural” products—that they claim are safer, healthier, beneficial, and even more eco-friendly—because they are trying to convince you that modern science and tools developed by it are evil.

The belief that “natural” is inherently better than “synthetic” is false — and it’s called the appeal to nature fallacy.

The appeal to nature fallacy convinces people that things (chemicals, substances, organisms) that are “natural” are better, good, beneficial, right, or safer simply because they are 'natural'.

The opposite extends to anything “unnatural” — synthetic or artificial substances. People who fall prey to this believe that synthetic substances are inherently bad, harmful, dangerous, inferior, and unsafe.

The reality? Natural doesn’t mean safe, and synthetic doesn’t mean dangerous.

This appeal to nature fallacy is closely tied with chemophobia—the irrational fear of chemicals—which is a central theme in wellness disinformation and anti-science rhetoric and policy (more can be found about this in the main newsletter section!)

This plays on your emotions too: you are made to FEEL that natural is better, so you’ll be more likely to believe claims supporting this idea, even if it is entirely false.

But remember: everything is chemicals.

Your body? Chemicals. Your food? Chemicals (yes, even the “all natural” flavors and food dyes—all chemicals). Those unregulated dietary supplements? Chemicals.

That “chemical-free” soap? Marketing nonsense intended to scare you.

There’s no such thing as “chemical-free” — but these messages try to suggest that there is a difference between naturally occurring chemicals (from plants, animals, and the Earth) and synthetic chemicals (made or modified in a lab).

Does that difference matter? No.

The source of a chemical—whether derived from nature or synthesized in a laboratory—has no impact on whether it is safe or beneficial.

The potential harms (or benefits) of a chemical is entirely dependent on the chemical itself.

Some of the most dangerous substances on the planet come from nature.

People assume synthetic chemicals are more toxic than natural ones because of rhetoric that has been ingrained into their minds for years and years. This is entirely false, but let’s use some examples.

Lots of natural chemicals can kill you at low doses.

With everything, the dose makes the poison. That’s true for natural chemicals or synthetic ones. They are all still chemicals, and plenty of natural things have high toxicity. (For reference: one-quarter teaspoon of granulated sugar weighs about 1 gram)

Arsenic is a naturally occurring element found throughout our environment in soils, sediments (rocks and minerals), and in our groundwater. Arsenic trioxide is formed when arsenic in these natural sources combines with air (another chemical). Arsenic trioxide is readily absorbed in the digestive tract, and can be fatal if ingested at a dose of 0.002 grams per kilogram, meaning a 70 kg adult (154 lbs) can die if they ingest 0.1 grams of arsenic trioxide.

Botulinum toxin is a protein toxin produced by the bacteria Clostridium botulinum (all natural!). Colloquially referred to as “Botox”, Botulinum toxin is a neurotoxin, as the protein interferes with nerve function. It causes muscle weakness, lack of muscle contraction, and flaccid paralysis.

Botulinum toxin causes Botulism. The illness is not caused by the bacteria Clostridium botulinum itself, but that toxin it produces. A dose of Botulinum toxin as low as 0.000001 grams per kilogram, if ingested, can be fatal. A 70 kg adult would only need to consume 70 micrograms (0.00007 g) of this natural protein to die. This is how Botulism is fatal - through ingesting food products contaminated with Clostridium botulinum that has produced toxin.

Purified Botulinum toxin is used cosmetically and medically for chronic migraines, colorectal surgeries, esophageal procedures, overactive bladder, hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating), and more. These involve targeted and controlled injection of Botulinum toxin.

Copper sulfate is a naturally-occurring chemical found ubiquitously throughout our planet and is used as a pesticide in organic farming. Copper sulfate can be fatal to humans if ingested at 0.011 grams per kilogram. That 70 kg (154 lb) adult? 0.77 grams of copper sulfate can cause acute toxicity and death. (Yes, organic farming uses a lot of pesticides, and they are not “better” —that’s just the appeal to nature fallacy talking!)

Countless chemicals produced by plants are extremely toxic at low doses. It’s evolution. Plants can’t actively fight off predators, so they produce chemicals to deter them.

The rosary pea or jequirity bean is a flowering plant native to Asia and Australia, Abrus precatorius. These brightly colored seeds contain a chemical called abrin. Abrin is a protein that consists of 2 subunits, and is a potent toxin. Abrin can be toxic through ingestion, inhalation, intravenously, and topically. Abrin can be fatal if ingested at 10-1000 μg/kg if ingested and even lower dosage if inhaled. A single seed chewed (not even swallowed as abrin simply needs to be released and swallowed in saliva) can kill someone.

You’ve heard of ricin, right? That’s another natural toxin, that’s produced by the castor bean. It’s fatal if ingested at 1 milligram per kilogram of body weight. Abrin is 100 times more toxic than ricin, for comparison.

Cyanide is natural too! In fact, chemicals produced by plants called cyanogenic glycosides are converted into hydrogen cyanide, which can be fatal to humans if ingested at 1 mg per kg body weight. The good news? If you’re a 70 kg adult, that’s the amount you’d ingest by eating 40 apples worth of seeds.

Other natural things? Snake venom. Every pathogenic microorganism that causes disease. Bears. Asbestos. Radiation. Poisonous mushrooms. Tetrodotoxin (that’s the puffer fish toxin). Box jellyfish venom.

Isn’t nature fun?!

Our body doesn’t know—or care—whether a chemical is synthetic or natural.

How we interact with chemicals is completely irrespective of the source of a chemical. Our body doesn’t know whether the chemical was isolated from a natural substance or whether it was synthesized entirely in a lab. The things that matter are the dosage of the chemical, the route of exposure of the chemical, and the chemical nature of the chemical.

And that is particularly true when we are looking at the same chemical.

Naturally-derived and synthetic versions of a chemical are exactly the same chemical.

Vitamin C, chemical formula C₆H₈O₆, also know, as ascorbic acid, scientifically called (5R)-[(1S)-1,2-Dihydroxyethyl]-3,4-dihydroxyfuran-2(5H)-one is found in a variety of plants including citrus, broccoli, cabbage, brussels sprouts, bell peppers, guava, etc.

Vitamin C can be extracted from these foods or synthesized in the lab (using a chemical reaction called the Reichstein process, where bacteria or yeast ferment glucose to make ascorbic acid). Guess what? That vitamin C is exactly the same.

Let’s take another example that is relevant to recent public discourse: formaldehyde, formula CH₂O.

Formaldehyde is sometimes used to inactivate viruses or toxins in vaccine manufacturing. The trace amount of formaldehyde that might be in a finished vaccine is less <50 µg per dose.

An adult produces 1.5 ounces of formaldehyde daily during our normal metabolic processes (42,520,000 micrograms (µg), in case you’re wondering. 850,000-times more formaldehyde every day than what might be a residual in a vaccine).

We also maintain levels of formaldehyde in our blood at all times, ~2.5 µg per mL of blood volume. Any extra, from any source, is rapidly excreted in urine.

A 2-month old infant has roughly 1.1 milligrams (1,100 µg) of formaldehyde in their blood at any point in time from their metabolism. That’s more than 22 times the maximum residual level of formaldehyde that might be in a vaccine, if applicable.

When this information is presented to people, often they respond with: “well, natural formaldehyde is different than the formaldehyde in a vaccine.” This is wrong.

Formaldehyde is the same exact chemical whether it is produced by you or whether it comes out of a bottle in a laboratory.

There is no such thing as “natural formaldehyde” and “synthetic formaldehyde” in the context of how your body responds to it. If the chemical name is formaldehyde, that’s what it is.

Did you know that natural and artificial flavorings are also the same chemicals?

This one might blow your mind, but it’s important to discuss since the current HHS Secretary is going all in on spreading unfounded fear of chemicals in foods, medicines, and more.

When you read a food label and you see “natural butter flavoring” or “artificial butter flavoring” — you might be inclined to seek out the one that says natural, right? That’s the appeal to nature fallacy, again. It’s not your fault, it’s been a concerted effort to undermine science and scare people for decades.

But in the context of flavorings, they are actually the same combinations of chemicals. What determines whether it is labeled as natural or artificial is determined by the starting materials.

Butter flavor in food is characterized by 2 primary chemicals, 2,3-butanedione and 3-hydroxy-2-butanone. They can be produced in 2 main ways: the biotechnological (natural) way or through chemical synthesis.

• The biotechnological way simulates how butter gets its flavor normally: taking dairy products—specifically the glucose in them—and allowing added bacteria (usually species like Bacillus subtilis or Klebsiella pneumoniae) to ferment them into those chemicals.

• The chemical synthesis method merely uses other chemicals in chemical reactions to produce those chemicals

The end result? The same chemicals. So while the appeal to nature fallacy is telling your brain “natural flavorings” are superior, in this case, they’re exactly the same chemicals.

Countless synthetic substances are not only safe at similar doses, but beneficial.

Vaccinations. Antibiotics. Pharmaceutical medications. Medical devices. Computers. Antiseptics. Conventional pesticides.

Many of these things were derived from something found in nature, but were improved upon using our knowledge and scientific technologies.

Aspirin, (acetylsalicylic acid), is related to a chemical in willow bark, salicin.

Salicin is converted into salicylic acid, both of which have therapeutic properties, but high doses are required. At those doses, undesirable side effects appear: stomach cramping, stomach bleeding, diarrhea, vomiting, heartburn. Fun! Scientists made a more potent and better tolerated version: aspirin. Aspirin exerts pain-relieving and anti-inflammatory effects at far lower dosages than natural relatives with far fewer potential side effects.

Contrast with another related chemical, methyl salicylate, naturally produced by wintergreen plants. It’s promoted as a natural alternative to aspirin (primarily for topical use), but it is 4 times more toxic than the synthetic salicylate in aspirin. If you ingest even a tablespoon of the concentrated oil, it can be fatal.

Vaccinations are synthetic “versions” of pathogens that protect against potentially fatal illnesses without the risk of disease.

Natural immunity is NOT superior to vaccine-induced immunity: infection comes with risk of illness, long-term complications, and death.

Synthetic pesticides used in conventional farming are often adapted from natural pesticides that are used in organic farming.

These alterations improve the stability, specificity, and efficacy of the chemical in question, so farmers can apply less with reduced ecological impact. Pyrethroids are synthetic derivatives of pyrethrins, produced by the Chrysanthemum cinerariaefolium plant that work as insecticides. Pyrethrins degrade rapidly when extracted and exposed to sunlight, so they need to be applied frequently to combat insect pests. Pyrethroids have been synthetically altered to be more stable and consistent, allowing farmers to use less pesticides for the same result.

Think like a scientist when you hear claims about chemicals

The next time you see headlines like: “Toxic chemicals in your shampoo!” or “The dangerous food additives Big Food doesn’t want you to know about!” remember: these headlines are exploiting the appeal to nature fallacy to scare people.

Before you fall into the fearfluencer trap, ask yourself:

• What does the science say about this chemical?

• Is there actual evidence of harm at realistic exposures?

• What’s the dose? Everything is toxic at high enough levels, even water.

• Is the alternative actually safer, or is it a marketing ploy?

There is no reason to automatically fear synthetic substances OR automatically trust natural substances.

Synthetic chemicals are not inherently harmful. Often, they’re safer and more effective than their natural counterparts. Nature doesn’t care about your feelings—many natural chemicals can cause far more harm than anything made in a lab.

Arsenic is natural, and so is lead. Life-saving medications like insulin are synthetic. Which would you rather have?

Science isn’t scary, but misinformation makes it seem that way. We are going to fix that.

Now, more than ever, we all must join in the fight for science.

Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.

More science education, less disinformation.

- Andrea

ImmunoLogic is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below:

Subscribe now

Welcome to the very first edition of Fundamental Elements, a new section of ImmunoLogic. My goal is to break down the basics of science fundamentals, so that you are better equipped to navigate the misinformation minefield that our society is living in. My hope is it will allow you to sniff out the clickbait, fearmongering, and pseudoscience, and ultimately make better informed decisions for you and your families.

To do that, we have to start at the beginning. That means we have to start with one of the most fundamentally (pun intended) misunderstood concepts: chemicals. And that’s because a lot of wellness misinformation exploits this misunderstanding. So if we master this concept, we are already making progress.

If you’ve ever heard someone say they “avoid chemicals,” you’ve met someone who doesn’t understand how reality works.

Because—spoiler alert—everything is chemicals.

Yes! Everything is chemicals. You’re a sack of chemicals. Your house is chemicals. Your pets are chemicals. Your food (all of it, not just the “toxic, artificial, ultraprocessed” stuff) is chemicals. Chemicals are the reason you, and everything else on the planet, exist.

Let’s get into it.

Share

What even is a chemical?

I bet most of you have heard someone use the term “chemical” when they’re describing something as bad or harmful, right? Not going to inject those “chemicals” into my body—when referencing a vaccine. How can you drink that “chemical bomb” — when referring to a diet soda.

This is obviously not correct—but it is so entrenched because most people don’t realize that everything is chemicals. I know I use this phrase a lot, but it’s true. And repetition cements belief, right?

A chemical is anything that is made up of matter. That means if the substance has mass and takes up space—it’s a chemical.

The only things in our universe that aren’t chemicals are light and energy. So you literally cannot exist in a “chemical-free” world.

This includes:

• Well, you. Your entire body, every organ, every tissue, every cell, every message sent between cells. All chemicals and networks of chemicals.

• The air you breathe is a chemical mixture of various gases including nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide. These are all chemicals.

• Water you drink—H₂O. Yep, that’s also a chemical.

• Caffeine in your coffee has the chemical formula C₈H₁₀N₄O₂. The coffee itself. All chemicals.

• DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) — those are the molecules that make up your genes. Those are chemicals too.

• Proteins, fats, carbohydrates. Vitamins, minerals. All of them—chemicals.

Chemicals are substances. If a substance exists in a physical form—it’s chemicals.

Chemicals exist as elements and compounds

Elements are the building blocks of all substances—all chemicals.

Elements are pure substances—this means, they consist of only one type of unit of matter. That unit is the atom. That means elements are pure substances made up only of one type of atom.

Elements are what are listed on the periodic table—the foundation of chemistry.

Elements include hydrogen (H), oxygen (O), carbon (C), gold (Au), silver (Ag), Copper (Cu)…anything that’s listed on the periodic table.

Each element has specific and unique properties that defines their identity. Think of each element like a LEGO: they can be used to build more complex substances, both of repeated units of a single element, or in combinations of elements.

Compounds are made when elements get together

A compound is a chemical (or substance) that is made up of two or more different elements attached to each other. In chemistry, those attachments are called bonds.

The formation of that bond completely changes the properties of the new chemical when compared to the separate pieces (the elements).

This is so important to understand, because this misunderstanding is why people spread fear about “heavy metals” in vaccines, or tampons, or whatever the newest fear fad has become.

An example I’ve spoken about before: table salt.

Table salt is a chemical compound composed of sodium and chlorine.

• Elemental sodium is a silver solid metal at room temperature. Sodium metal explodes when you put it into water. (This is real, I promise)

• Elemental chlorine exists as a yellowish gas at room temperature, and can be extremely toxic with low exposures.

A chemical reaction causes the formation of sodium chloride, NaCl. The combining of these two elements makes a completely different chemical with completely different properties.

Sodium chloride is a white crystalline solid that dissolves in water that we use to impart flavor to foods (we call it table salt). The beauty of chemistry!

A chemical is NOT just the sum of its parts

Once these bonds form, the new chemical is completely distinct from the elemental “ingredients,” as I’m sure you gathered with the table salt example.

This is so important to understand. People often believe if an element is “toxic” on its own, then any compound containing it must also be dangerous. But that’s not how chemistry works.

Water (H₂O) is made from chemical reactions between:

• Hydrogen (H₂) is an extremely flammable gas. (remember the Hindenburg?)

• Oxygen (O₂) is also a gas that fuels combustion (fires need oxygen to burn)

Put them together and you get water, a liquid at room temperature which is essential for life, and can extinguish fires.

You don’t hear people saying water is filled with “toxic oxygen,” right? (pure oxygen is toxic at low doses, fyi) — or people saying water is filled with flammable hydrogen, either. That’s because people understand that water is a substance distinct from its parts, even if they don’t think about the parts.

Add another hydrogen to that water? You get hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂)—which can be harmful if ingested, inhaled, injected, even topically or contact with the eyes.

Water and hydrogen peroxide are made up of the same elements, but they have different chemical formulas (and structures), which means: completely different effects.

So if someone says a chemical is “bad” because it contains a certain element, now you can teach them these chemical properties!

ImmunoLogic

Vaccines don't contain 'harmful mercury'

Have you ever heard the claim that vaccines contain mercury and that was a reason to have concern…

Read more

2 years ago · 89 likes · Dr. Andrea Love

Chemistry is more than just mixing stuff together: it’s about how atoms interact

So we know that chemicals aren’t the sum of its parts, but how do those parts stick together? That’s the story of chemical bonding—you can think of it like molecular glue.

There are 3 main types of chemical bonds: covalent bonds, ionic bonds, and hydrogen bonds.

The type of chemical bonds in a chemical are determined by the elemental components and how those elements relate to each other. The type of bonds in a chemical gives us information about how reactive, soluble, stable, or useful a chemical might be.

Covalent bonds are bond where atoms share electrons to form molecules. Water is a covalent compound. Glucose is a covalent compound. DNA is a covalent compound.

Ionic bonds form when one atom gives away electrons and the other takes electrons. In this instance, each becomes an ion: one is positively charged when it is missing electrons and one is negatively charged with extra electrons. Those charged ions attract each other, allowing them to bond.

Table salt, sodium chloride, is an ionic compound formed with sodium ion (Na+) and chloride ion (Cl-). A fun fact? While we call table salt, salt, all ionic compounds are scientifically salts. Salts are ionic compounds: chemicals that are formed by positively charged and negatively charged ions. All those electrolytes in your energy drinks? Those are salts, aka ionic compounds.

A broad rule of thumb: if there is a metal element as part of the structure, the chemical often forms an ionic bond (this is not always true, though).

Hydrogen bonds are unique bonds that play important roles in biology that occur between hydrogen atoms (H) and certain other atoms like oxygen (O), nitrogen (N), and fluorine (F).

Chemical names aren’t “scary” — they tell scientists important information.

You’ve seen the claims, right? Don’t eat anything you can’t pronounce. If you don’t recognize a chemical name, then it’s gotta be harmful.

None of that is true, but it is a popular talking point among the wellness influencers like Vani Hari. In fact, the chemical name has literally nothing to do with whether a chemical poses any risk to us.

Chemical names tells us scientists important details about the chemical.

Many chemicals have common names and systematic names—often, the common names are what you might be familiar with, because it’s a lot easier to say table salt (or salt) than sodium chloride every time you grab for the shake, right?

There are even chemical identifiers which are used by scientists to classify chemicals and register them—this is especially important when we deal with chemicals with growing complexity and similar sounding names.

For accuracy and precision, we use a universal naming system from the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC). This ensures every chemical has a unique, standardized name, no matter where you are in the world. This gives us a language to speak to other scientists.

These names might sound complicated, even scary, but what they do is they tell us what atoms (or ions) are in the chemical, how many of them, how they are arranged, and how they behave.

Let’s illustrate with a couple examples:

Water is the common name for, well, water. Formula H₂O.

• The IUPAC name for H₂O is… oxidane (while some people say dihydrogen monoxide, it’s not the systematic name). But scientists don’t even refer to water as oxidane, because water is so universal.

Vitamin C? Ascorbic acid? These are common names for the chemical with formula C₆H₈O₆,

• But the systematic name for the exact same thing is (5R)-[(1S)-1,2-Dihydroxyethyl]-3,4-dihydroxyfuran-2(5H)-one. Try to say that five times fast!

• Baking soda, which you are familiar with when you make cakes or cookies (or maybe to deodorize your shoes), has chemical formula NaHCO₃. The systematic name for that is sodium bicarbonate.

• Caffeine? That delightful active ingredient in your morning coffee that helps with alertness? That’s also a common name for the chemical formula C₈H₁₀N₄O₂. The systematic name is 1,3,7-Trimethylpurine-2,6-dione.

Chemical names sound complicated because they follow those strict naming rules, but that doesn’t mean the substances themselves are dangerous. Think of it as a new language that scientists use to communicate important information.

Every chemical just is. No chemical is inherently “bad” or inherently “good” — they just exist (more on that soon).

Some of the many many many chemicals you yourself is made up of:

Chemicals aren’t scary—they make up everything.

Chemistry is why life exists. Chemicals make up everything on this planet. Some might have simple names, some might have complex ones, some you might not be able to pronounce. Some just have complicated names because science requires precision.

Next time you see a fear-mongering post about “chemicals in food” or “chemical-free” products, remind yourself:

1. Everything is chemicals.

2. Long names don’t mean something is bad or harmful.

3. A compound isn’t the sum of its parts—it’s a completely different chemical than the starting elements.

4. It’s the full chemical formula and how those atoms are bonded that matter.

if someone is spreading messages like those, they’re doing it to scare you. Knowing these basics will help you see through the scaremongering. Don’t let those big words scare you: they’re just the language of the chemistry of the world.

Science isn’t scary, but misinformation makes it seem that way. We are going to fix that.

Now, more than ever, we all must join in the fight for science.

Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.

More science education, less disinformation.

- Andrea

ImmunoLogic is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below:

Subscribe now

Introducing Fundamental Elements: Science Concepts Without the Fearmongering

I know that everyone has been feeling overwhelmed and powerless. How do I know? Because I feel that way too.

Right now, we are all watching our health and safety slip away because anti-science activists and medical conspiracists have taken over our governmental health agencies and podcasters with wellness company funding are viewed as sources of ground truth.

There is a growing measles outbreak in Texas. H5N1 influenza is spreading through domestic and wild birds, other animals, even domestic pets. Scientific research infrastructure is being eroded or outright destroyed. Our food and medicine safety is being compromised. Global health is at risk, and the people in leadership who should be addressing these crises are actually fueling the problem with misinformation and pseudoscience.

It’s too much to keep track of — much less process the short- and long-term consequences of it all. As always, I will continue to discuss how anti-science rhetoric shapes policy and how media disinformation and influencers contribute to the erosion of trust in public health, science, and propagation of wellness profiteering.

But I am going to do something more.

Many of you have expressed a desire to learn more “underneath the hood” science—so this is my solution to that.

Share

A primary reason that pseudoscience and disinformation sticks is because of low science literacy.

• Low science literacy is why journalists misrepresent in vitro studies and spread unfounded fears about things that have no relevance to our daily lives.

• It’s why politicians push performative bans on “chemicals” that won’t actually improve public health and ignore things that will.

• It’s why people fear mRNA vaccines, vaccine ingredients, pesticide residues, genetic engineering, and other life-saving scientific innovations.

• And low science literacy is exploited by bad actors like RFK Jr., Moms Across America, Mark Hyman, the Environmental Working Group—groups that thrive and profit off misinformation, fear, and manipulation of science.

So today, I’m launching a section of ImmunoLogic called Fundamental Elements

This section will focus on science basics—key concepts in chemistry, toxicology, biology, immunology and genetics that get misrepresented or twisted by pseudoscience and disinformation campaigns.

Science isn’t scary—but misinformation makes it seem that way.

Fundamental Elements will explain science in a way that makes sense. The goal? Equip you with the foundational knowledge to better navigate health and science claims you read online—or hear from your friends and family.

You might not know but I’m also a runner—marathon is my favorite distance.

So let’s use a marathon training analogy here (yes, I know the “life is a marathon, not a sprint” cliché is tired, but I promise I’ll make it less annoying):

When you’re training for a marathon, you can’t just go out and run your long runs and think race day will be fine. You need all the easy pace runs, all the base mileage, the strength training. In short—you need all the fundamental components to fitness in order to actually execute your plan.

That’s the purpose of this section.

If we don’t understand the science concepts that relate to topics in the public discourse, we can’t participate in decision-making in an active and informed manner.

By adding in the base miles, we will be better trained when these science topics come up in our day-to-day lives…like choosing what type of fruits and vegetables to buy—should you believe the people screaming about pesticides, or should you trust in your newfound understanding of toxicology?

With improved science literacy, you’ll be able to better tell fact from fear, help others do the same, and make truly informed decisions about your health and other science topics that impact you.

We’ll tackle topics like:

• Why “everything is a chemical” (and why that’s not scary)

• Why the dose makes the poison (and how toxicity is misrepresented)

• How vaccines actually work (and why they don’t “permanently reprogram your immune system”)

• Why mRNA vaccines aren’t gene therapy—and how molecular biology works

• Why chemical compounds are not the same as their individual elements (reminder: your table salt isn’t going to explode in water like sodium will)

• Why genetic engineering and biotechnology tools are safe (and why the anti-GMO movement is based on pseudoscience)

• Why your immune system isn’t a muscle you can flex

This section will be all science: fun, factual, and fearmongering-free.

How this changes things for you as a reader

Well, you have more control over what you get delivered to your inbox. You get to choose what of my content you see, based on your interests. You can:

• Subscribe ONLY to Fundamental Elements if you just want to get some science education and learn more about science concepts.

• Subscribe to ALL of ImmunoLogic if you are here for the health disinformation fact-checking, the snarky discussions about wellness charlatans and the harmful consequences of anti-science rhetoric, AND the science basics.

• Or unsubscribe from Fundamental Elements if you don’t want to listen to me ramble about molecular biology, chemical reactions, and toxicology principles and you’d rather just see the main section articles I write.

The goal here is to knock down those barriers and gaps in science knowledge so you feel like science and health topics are no longer intimidating or scary—because a scientifically-literate society is one that makes good decisions for everyone.

My plan moving forward is to have one traditional ImmunoLogic-style newsletter and one Fundamental Elements newsletter published each week (time permitting—currently my schedule is pretty chaotic!)

I hope to make it engaging, interesting, and allow you to feel confident to go up to someone sharing misinformation falsehoods and say: “you know what? this is wrong, and I’m going to explain to you why”

Welcome to Fundamental Elements—where science makes sense, and fearmongering goes to die.

And let me know your thoughts in the below poll—will this be beneficial for you, personally?

Subscribe now

Now, more than ever, we all must join in the fight for science.

Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.

More science education, less disinformation.

- Andrea

ImmunoLogic is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below: