Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Does Cl2O cause lung cancer?

Does Cl2O cause lung cancer?

Cou - 24-2-2015 at 09:51

Been doing some searching and it seems there are no studies done on Cl2O. Can inhaling even small amounts of it, such as the under the 5 PPM needed to burn the nose, cause lung cancer? Is it a stronger oxidizer than pure Cl2? If it does cause lung cancer, could I have a significantly higher chance from just 1 exposure, or is it over time?

Asking this because I accidentally make some Cl2O from mixing sulfuric acid and bleach. Had a respirator on so I didn't inhale anything past the 2-3 PPM smell limit, no burning nose or burning lungs or anything. Nothing more than what you would smell at an indoor pool, probably. Hope I don't have to start getting low-level CT scans when I'm older...

[Edited on 24-2-2015 by Cou]

Molecular Manipulations - 24-2-2015 at 09:59

I'd be more worried about the possibility of getting killed in my house by a meteorite that was launched from a collision between Jupiter and Pluto.

blogfast25 - 24-2-2015 at 10:25

Quote: Originally posted by Molecular Manipulations

I'd be more worried about the possibility of getting killed in my house by a meteorite that was launched from a collision between Jupiter and Pluto.

You're being a bit flippant here. Bizarrely Wiki doesn't even mention ANY possible health hazard and it does decompose to chlorine...

Zyklon-A - 24-2-2015 at 10:29

Yes it causes cancer, run for your life!
If you couldn't find a single study on it why on gods green earth would expect anyone here to know?
The answer is probably yes and no. Yes, practically everything can be linked in some way to cancer. No, nothing in the world "causes" cancer. They can only increase your chances of getting cancer, even the most carcinogenic substances can only increase your chances.

Cou - 24-2-2015 at 10:30

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichlorine_monoxide

Doesn't even mention any hazards at all, besides a 3 on the NPAA triangle. I'm wondering if it's a stronger oxidizer than pure Cl2.

[Edited on 24-2-2015 by Cou]

Molecular Manipulations - 24-2-2015 at 10:43

Like all other chlorine oxides (except dichloride septoxide) it's an endothermic compound, so yes it's a more powerful oxidizer than either chlorine or oxygen, but that indicates nothing about it's carcinogenic properties. Last time I checked benzene isn't a very strong oxidizer.
Actually, even dichlorine septoxide is endothermic, although it's the most stable chlorine oxide known, from Wikipedia:

Quote:

Although it is the most stable chlorine oxide, Cl2O7 is a strong oxidizer as well as an explosive that can be set off with flame or mechanical shock, or by contact with iodine.[5] Nevertheless, it is less strongly oxidising than the other chlorine oxides, and does not attack sulfur, phosphorus, or paper when cold.[1] It has the same effects on the human body as elemental chlorine, and requires the same precautions.[6]

[Edited on 24-2-2015 by Molecular Manipulations]

woelen - 24-2-2015 at 11:11

No need to worry about Cl2O killing you. I have added acid to bleach MANY MANY times and have made Cl2, ClO2 and maybe also some Cl2O in all these occasiions, I had a whiff of gas many times as well and I still am around, almost half a century by now

If you experiment with bleach just avoid breathing too much of the produced gases, because they can cause edemia, but now if you just had a whiff and could just smell it. Use common sense, do not let yourself run away with frightful thoughts.

Cou - 24-2-2015 at 11:43

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

No need to worry about Cl2O killing you. I have added acid to bleach MANY MANY times and have made Cl2, ClO2 and maybe also some Cl2O in all these occasiions, I had a whiff of gas many times as well and I still am around, almost half a century by now

Well that's a relief. I read your chemistry website sometimes and there are some dangerous experiments on there that I would do myself...

MrHomeScientist - 24-2-2015 at 12:11

I think you are suffering from a debilitating condition known as "chemophobia."

Everything is not out to get you. Maybe inhaling a tiny amount of a gas you may or many not have produced, <I>below the smell limit so you can't even tell you were exposed to anything at all</I>, is not something to panic about. Nothing causes cancer instantly upon first exposure. As was said earlier, carcinogens can only increase your chances. Limiting exposure is obviously still a good idea.

It's great that you're concerned for your safety, of course. Wearing a respirator shows you are experimenting carefully and responsibly; just make sure the cartridges in it are rated for the gases you are producing. Stay careful, plan your reactions beforehand, make sure safety measures are in place, treat your chemicals with the respect they deserve, and you can experiment with chemistry safely.

Cou - 24-2-2015 at 16:52

I'm also worried about getting lung cancer from one time exposure to *Possibly but i don't know for sure* SO3 gas before I became smart about safety. It was enough to burn my nose and throat. So when I turn 18 I might have to start getting low-dose CT scans.

Luckily SO3 has a lot of studies on it from occupational exposures, and this is the best one i've found: Link

It doesn't say exactly what concentration, but they were exposed to sulfuric acid fumes over 9.5 years. All of them were smokers.

[Edited on 25-2-2015 by Cou]

j_sum1 - 24-2-2015 at 21:41

Check list for Cou

Wear your PPE. You do.
Plan your experiments carefully with particular regard to safety. You do.
Ask intelligent questions to increase your knowledge base. You do.
Do research on compounds that you may have had minor exposure to. You do.
Worry less...

Pyrovus - 25-2-2015 at 11:15

Given how reactive it is, I imagine it'll probably be unlikely to be able to get to DNA, as it will have reacted with something long before it gets a chance to.

So as far as carcinogenicity goes, it's probably not going to be all that bad - the most likely mechanism would be indirectly, by creating things like alkyl chlorides and the like. This will likely be quite insignificant compared to the reactivity/corrosivity dangers.

[Edited on 25-2-2015 by Pyrovus]

Cou - 25-2-2015 at 14:28

Quote: Originally posted by Pyrovus

Given how reactive it is, I imagine it'll probably be unlikely to be able to get to DNA, as it will have reacted with something long before it gets a chance to.

So as far as carcinogenicity goes, it's probably not going to be all that bad - the most likely mechanism would be indirectly, by creating things like alkyl chlorides and the like. This will likely be quite insignificant compared to the reactivity/corrosivity dangers.

[Edited on 25-2-2015 by Pyrovus]

What I'm trying to figure out is if maybe 4 exposures over the span of many years is enough to cause a significant increase in lung cancer chance. These exposures were all very quick, as in a 2 second nose burn and it's over. Maybe 3 times when I was 13, and one time just a few months ago. I regret all of the reckless things I did when I was younger... but then again, a lot of people made mistakes when they were younger. Getting melanoma late in life from suntanning as a kid, having a criminal record from marijuana that stops you from getting a job, or even ruining your entire life by fooling around in HS and making a 1.7 GPA, losing teeth from skateboarding or doing jackass tricks, eating junk and getting diabetes as an adult.

[Edited on 25-2-2015 by Cou]

aga - 25-2-2015 at 14:47

Fact is, that once Done, it's Done, and you simply have to live with the consequences.

I cannot find any data linking Dichlorine Monoxide to any form of cancer.

The NFPS 704 health rating is 3 = "Short exposure could cause serious temporary or moderate residual injury"

Those incidents will not affect your long term health at all.

Other stuff that is omnipresent in your environment will have more of an effect, and if you smoke or drink ...

Edit:

Worrying does absolutely no good at all.

As a smoker, my wife insisted that i have a chest x-ray last year.

It was fine, yet there is a risk that the x-rays could possibly cause cancer.

When it comes to your Life, it's a all a matter of Temporary Risk, as you're going to die one day in any case, so balance the risks according to what makes you happiest in the meantime.

[Edited on 25-2-2015 by aga]

Cou - 25-2-2015 at 14:57

I was talking about SO3

Bot0nist - 25-2-2015 at 15:18

Cou, relax. I'm afraid looking at the health effects of substances you may have been exposed to is only worsening your "condition." When I tried the lead chamber process to make sulfuric acid from potassium nitrate and sulfur, I was driven from the room by the sulfur dioxide/trioxide when reaction produced the gas faster than my makeshift gear could handle. (Along with what has surely been liters of the gasses in my decade of pryotechnic adventures, not to mention nitrogen oxides...) This was going on 6 years ago. I've had many checkups since then, and am in good health. Perhaps I slightly increased my chances of misfortune, but if that slight risk worried me, I would have never gotten into this hobby in the first place.

Life is unhealthy, and many many everyday things increase risk, like pumping gas, sunbathing, and a host of common consumer products. I know your concern seems warranted, but I assure you, it's coming off a bit silly. No offense intended.

Stay safe, but remember that while mitigating and weighing risks is a good thing, a risk free life is not much of a life at all, and even then, it won't save you in the end.

[Edited on 26-2-2015 by Bot0nist]

aga - 25-2-2015 at 15:27

If you've sniffed SO3 on a few occasions, and that was more than a week ago, yet you feel fine, and can still actually See, Breathe, have Hair and have working Skin, then you're as OK as you can expect.

A quick whiff of SO3 must have been nasty, yet will not wipe you out just yet.

Prevention is the best you can do for the future, by not being stupid (which i'm sure you're not).

Get stupid with some compounds, and you'll die a lot earlier than you'd like.

Zombie - 26-2-2015 at 15:07

Cou...

With all due respect young fella.
Perhaps chemistry is not for you.

The last posts I read, and responded to for you were in the metal fume fever thread. In that thread we all gave you the exact same advice.

Life long CT scans... insanity... be careful...

If you were a lion tamer, you would have been lunch by now. Maybe take up a hobby that does not worry you so much because it is the worry that will shorten your life. Trust me on this. Stress is the killer.

Make models but use egg whites for glue.

I'm really trying to help you in an Ex New York'r kinda way. You're scaring yourself to death.

Chemosynthesis - 26-2-2015 at 15:25

As others have said, the high reactivity of Cl2O probably mean it's not mutagenic. However... continual damage to the lungs most likely increases the incidence of cancer, just as with Barrett's esophagus and the upper GI tract. Doubt it would be clinically significant, and acute pulmonary edema would be my primary concern.

Cou - 26-2-2015 at 16:12

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Cou...

With all due respect young fella.
Perhaps chemistry is not for you.

The last posts I read, and responded to for you were in the metal fume fever thread. In that thread we all gave you the exact same advice.

Life long CT scans... insanity... be careful...

If you were a lion tamer, you would have been lunch by now. Maybe take up a hobby that does not worry you so much because it is the worry that will shorten your life. Trust me on this. Stress is the killer.

Make models but use egg whites for glue.

I'm really trying to help you in an Ex New York'r kinda way. You're scaring yourself to death.

Yes, it is time for me to quit chemistry. I'm just too worried that I have a higher chance of lung or laryngeal cancer from the maybe 3 or 4 major SO3 exposures I've had over 2 years. SO3 definitely isn't as harmful as smoking, though, based on studies done in workers who work with sulfuric acid.

[Edited on 27-2-2015 by Cou]

j_sum1 - 26-2-2015 at 16:17

Quote: Originally posted by Cou

Yes, it is time for me to quit chemistry. I'm just too worried that I have a higher chance of lung or laryngeal cancer from the maybe 3 or 4 major SO3 exposures I've had over 2 years.

Fight a little bit will ya!
Just because you have had a couple of (minor) frights doesn't mean you should give up. Besides you could get equivalent frights if your hobby was go-karting or football or investing in shares.
I think everyone is saying, be informed, take care but don't lose perspective.

Cou - 26-2-2015 at 16:49

Well I guess you're right... Bicyclists have the chance of permanent brain damage from an accident, football players could break their backs and become permanently paralyzed. The people who make those youtube prank videos and make thousands of dollars from ad revenue, could get shot by someone from their pranks.

Zombie - 26-2-2015 at 17:47

Forgot this guy...

Zyklon-A - 26-2-2015 at 19:37

Quote: Originally posted by Cou

Well I guess you're right... Bicyclists have the chance of permanent brain damage from an accident, football players could break their backs and become permanently paralyzed. The people who make those youtube prank videos and make thousands of dollars from ad revenue, could get shot by someone from their pranks.

What pessimistic way to look at life, everything is a risk sure, but you won't learn anything if you don't take risks.
Bicyclists, getting brain damage? It that what you think of when you picture a bicyclist?

kecskesajt - 14-3-2015 at 07:06

You should worry about chloramines.

IrC - 14-3-2015 at 08:42

Cou, one should worry about what all the stress from all these fears is doing to ones health and what the long term effects of that will be. Maybe you should consider getting out of chemistry. In just this thread you went from Cl2O to SO3 then mentioned getting scans done with no thought to the fact radiation could cause that which you fear so greatly.

Reminds me of an article I read many years ago about injuries in car crashes. They stated statistics indicating drunks fared better than sober people. It seems a sober person being aware of the impending crash tensed up tightening all body muscles to an extreme level whereas the drunk person remained very relaxed. This had a direct effect upon the sudden deceleration injuries the body received. IIRC the study involved measuring blood alcohol levels correlating this to injuries. No I have no link the internet was years in the future at the time. Of course a different thing than stress induced health issues but a fair analogy if you ask me.

AJKOER - 9-5-2015 at 20:34

Quote: Originally posted by kecskesajt

You should worry about chloramines.

I agree, one exposure can induce a respiratory condition (for example, asthma) in some.
----------------------------------------------------------

The reaction of Cl2O and water (or water vapor in your lungs) forms HOCl. Now, here is an interesting quote from Wikipedia on Hypochlorous acid (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypochlorous_acid ):

"Reactivity of HClO with biomolecules
Hypochlorous acid reacts with a wide variety of biomolecules, including DNA, RNA,[5][10][11][12] fatty acid groups, cholesterol[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] and proteins.[8][16][21][22][23][24][25]"

So, I am not convinced that Cl2O is seemingly benign given that its ability to destroy/rewrite ones DNA with a dab of water producing Hypochlorous acid.

As many user's of chlorine bleach may have some exposure after opening (actually, contact with air containing CO2, which can slowly form HOCl and with time and especially sunlight exposure, a lowering of pH favoring free Cl2O), the commercial aspects, in my opinion, can at times, trump an independent risk assessment. Also, moist Calcium hypochlorite appears to readily form Cl2O/Hypochlorous in contact with CO2, or moist air containing Carbon dioxide, making it an even more problematic product.

lf you don't believe me, read what Wikipedia currently has to say about NH2Cl following its expanded commercial use in water purification.

[Edited on 10-5-2015 by AJKOER]