You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

sixes_and_sevens comments on You'll die if you do that - Less Wrong Discussion

15 Post author: sixes_and_sevens 12 May 2011 10:27AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (67)

Comments (67)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 12 May 2011 03:38:57PM 4 points [-]

It doesn't look edible, or smell appetising, and isn't even especially harmful to ingest in most circumstances. Chances are that if I ever did want to eat silica gel, I'd probably have a damn good reason, and a lifetime of being told to not eat it is an obstacle to that.

People can be stupid. Shockingly stupid. Much like the infamous McDonald's coffee case (which turns out to be much more sensible and fair a verdict when you read the details), I would not be surprised if there were a reason for the warning.

Or do you read the Darwin Awards and think they must 'have a damn good reason' for what they did?

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 12 May 2011 04:04:17PM 4 points [-]

The Darwin Awards are (when not apocryphal) extreme outliers, not case studies of common events.

I don't doubt the warning is there for a reason, as desiccant packaging is presumably not acausal in nature. My point was that, actually, you can ingest silica gel, especially in small quantities, without suffering any ill effects, but the warning is so consistent and prevalent that it would lead you to believe otherwise, and if I ever did have good reason to eat silica gel, the warning is a needless obstacle.

Not that I foresee ever wanting to eat silica gel, but it does raise the question of how many similar events have assumed catastrophic outcomes that aren't warranted.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit