Talk:Borax/Archive 1

Borax Bead

I would love to see some information on the borax bead test.

• So would I. I will try to find some info to put on here. Physchim62 23:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

See Borax bead test (added a seealso to the article). Femto 11:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Cleaning properties?

Granted that borax has been an ingredient in powdered hand soaps and laundry additives; might be useful to see some discussion useful to a layperson on how it made such things "better". knoodelhed 00:05, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. And regarding this, the Basicity entry in the properties table says "see text", but I don't see the information in the text. --CKL

Indeed. In the US, borax in the decahydrate form has been sold for a century or longer as an adjunct to soap or laundry detergents and is often claimed to increase the effectiveness of such substances for removing stains. The ad copy from the companies that sell it says things like "it boosts the cleaning power," etc., but is rather short on details of what they claim is happening. Most detailed information I've been able to find is at http://www.borax.com/detergents/intro.html in which the claims are made that when dissolved in hot water, sodium perborate generates hydrogen peroxide and lowers the pH of the water, helping to oxidize and break down certain types of stains. Details are, as I say, lacking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.41.40.24 (talk) 12:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Borax as a skin softener

I recently found a recipe for moisturising face cream, with one of the ingredients being Borax. The author claimed it worked as a skin softener, but from what I've read on this site I wouldn't want to put it on my face!!! Can someone clarify this for me?

A problem that the cosmetics industry has is that while they spend billions convincing the public about the efficacy of their products, they have to spend similar amounts of money convincing the authorities that their product doesn't have an effect. I would presume that if this face cream is approved (FDA or whatever) then it is perfectly safe to apply to the skin. I've had borax on my skin in the past without any noticeable effect. -- njh 23:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Borax as a skin softener. I have been dabbling in making my own creams and lotions and I use a solution of water 4 oz and borax 1/4 t or less to bind the water and oils together to form a cream. A cream will hold a peak when expressed, a lotion should not. I use the borax in the creams only to give it a "butter" consistency. I hope this helps you.

By the way... borax is an acid aren`t all cleaning supplies acid?~Brad age 23 ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.54.206.49 (talk) 21:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

No, borax is alkaline; boric acid is acid. Borax has long use in cold creams containing beeswax. It has also been frequently used in bath salts. So Boraxo is far from the only toiletry product to include borax.Robert Goodman (talk) 02:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Reference to Margaret Truman mystery novel.

I've excised a reference to borax-laden caviar being important in the (putative) novel "Murder at the British Embassy." It struck me as a fact that wouldn't be relevant or interesting to anyone who wasn't already interested in Margaret Truman's "Capital Crimes" series. Also, a novel by that title doesn't show up in her Wikipedia bibliography, nor a search of Amazon including an exhaustive look at all books for sale written by Truman, nor, indeed, a Google search. So, in addition to sounding a little fannish, it seems like the reference is incorrect.

Furthermore, it is an undelimited spoiler, which is unfair to people who haven't read it yet. -- njh 23:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Borax to control fleas

Borax sprinkled on carpets and on animal bedding controls fleas without poison. We have never gotten a reaction from human or animal to the borax in our carpets, and we are flea-free.

Some argue that's original research. D e l t i c 22:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

It's also questionable whether something with a LD50 of 100-500mg/kg can be said to be not a poison Nil Einne 12:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

The toxicity of borax is on par with caffeine or aspirin —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.13.217.231 (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

So you agree it's a poison? Nil Einne (talk) 08:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

It seems very likely that its safe and effective in flea treatment as Borax is found in some "green" woodworm treatments as well.

Probably but without a RS it's a moot point. Either way, it would likely be quite misleading for us to suggest you aren't using a poison when using borax (which was my point above) although our article seems to now suggest it's safer than it did before. P.S. I should clarify I'm not saying that borax is generally safe or effective because it's used in "green" woodworm treatments but rather that the evidence from our article particularly now suggests it's probably generally relatively safe (despite potentially being accurately described as a poison in humans and many other mammals although as said the evidence in our article is less clear now than IIRC it was before). There's less evidence on effectiveness but stuff I've read elsewhere suggest it's probably somewhat effective for flea control. The fact that it's used in "green" treatments is mostly neither here nor there. Plenty of "green" stuff is not particularly effective and plenty of it is not particularly safe (because most "green" stuff is based on the flawed idea that if it fits some definition of "natural" it must be safe or at least safer than something which would fall in to their definition of "artificial"). Nil Einne (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Borax to control woodworm

http://www.sustainablebuildingresource.co.uk/building_information/common_problems_with_older_homes/woodworm_and_rot/1264//80.80.177.122 (talk) 14:03, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Production and availability

What is the yearly production of borax? I tryed that it made more fleas come ~ claire age 19 skipped 5 grades and got 800 on all S.A.Ts —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.54.206.49 (talk) 21:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Just a sec...

No one's said anything about borax's use in informal "flubber" or "putty" recipes.~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 01:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

'References'

There is an error in the references section, (misspelling of eighth as eightth) and when I went to correct it, all I found was an HTML tag </references> that by rights shouldn't be there. No text for the references appears at all. Still, the article page contains several reference entries. What's going on?

Snezzy 00:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Footnotes. The list of references is automatically generated (at the place determined by the <references/> tag) from the individual <ref></ref> tags in the article body. To change the text of a particular citation, edit its corresponding ref tag. Femto 13:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

function?

The food additive section didn't describe the function or purpose of borax as a food additive. Rtdrury (talk) 00:10, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Melting point

The reasoning accompanying this edit seemed persuasive, but it wasn't supported by a reliable source—reverting in favor of the sourced version. Please do bring it back, integrated with the existing information, if there is a source to back it up. --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Melting Point Reply

I have changed the Melting Point back to 743 °C This is the correct MP. Reference source is the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 86th edition (2005-2006) section 4 page 88. I work with borax in its molten form daily.Jbin (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

You need to put the reference in the article otherwise I will have to revert it.- Wolfkeeper 19:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

The other thing is, unless you have a second source for this that says the same, you really should put them both in. The wikipedia is verifiability over truth... ;-) Unfortunately your personal experience doesn't count, because we can't verify it.- Wolfkeeper 19:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I have added the CRC reference. There are quite a few MSDS's on line with the 741-743 °C Melting Point. There are also many that list 65-70°C as the Melting Point this is actually when it begins to decompose and loose its crystal water, by the time it reaches 350-400°C it becomes anhydrous borax or aka Sodium Borate and finnaly at 743°C it fuses into a liquid.Jbin (talk) 21:34, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Jbin. I tried to change the MP in January 2007, with several references, and got rebuffed by the editators. Yeah, sure, your own research doesn't count, even if anyone with a match can prove the article is wrong. Maybe the correct data will stick this time.

Other Uses

Under its use as a micro-nutrient, there should be a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron_deficiency_%28plant_disorder%29
I haven't added it myself as I'm not quite sure what the Wikipedia conventions are for such crosslinks. 86.5.163.70 (talk) 17:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC) dww (not registered)

Borax is only given a passing mention in that article, which deals with deficiency in the element, boron. The way to add links is here. Best. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Use as wood preservative

I regularly use borax to treat timber to prevent wood borer damage, specifically the lyctus borer beetle (Australian powder post beetle) in the sapwood of Acacia and vulnerable Eucalyptus species. It's extremely effective in my experience; it's low toxicity is a real plus and makes otherwise vulnerable (and otherwise so short lived as to be unusable) small poles quite durable. It does leach out with exposure to rain but by the time it has the timber seems to be much less susceptible - I suspect the starches the lyctus borer requires gets leached out too.Ken Fabos (talk) 23:31, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Toxicity

1. Can we have an explanation of the mode of its toxicity, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.72.120.131 (talk) 10:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

2. Are borates toxic to the environment?

There is this company producing the Quantino, based on nanoFlowcell which is a redox flow cell. I understood from Prof. PECQUEUR of the Thomas More University Antwerp dpt Car technology Campus de Nayer - the liquids are borates and there would be environmental toxicity concerns with these? Anybody more info on this? Thy.--SvenAERTS (talk) 11:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 April 2013

In discussing toxicity, this page uses "borax" and "boric acid" interchangeably. They are not the same substance. It says that borax is on the "substance of very high concern" list, which is it not. Boric acid is on the list. Boric acid's Wikipedia page says "Boric acid may be prepared by reacting borax (sodium tetraborate decahydrate) with a mineral acid, such as hydrochloric acid: is made by combining borax and another substance..."

Would someone please correct?

Patehler (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Pats

Partly done: I have removed the paragraph on eye wash as that appears to be entirely about boric acid. However, the paragraph about SVHC list says it is on the SVHC candidate list, not that it is on the actual SVHC list. The source provided on the article establishes this. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 20:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this is a frequent issue on Wikipedia. Same issue was with the page for Folic Acid and Folate. The former is a specific synthetic compound, the latter is used either for the natural form or as an "umbrella" term for a group of compounds (perhaps some confusion between common use and scientific usage?) 129.78.233.211 (talk) 05:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Persian root

Source 2 makes NO MENTION of the Arabic word coming from any Persian word. Buraq is an Arabic word meaning "white". I read the enitire article and it makes no mention of where this Arabic word derives. There was an unrelated name in Sanskrit, where it was first discovered on the Indian Subcontinent, but this seems to have no influence on the Arabic term. The Refrence was therefore misused blatantly - most likely by small-minded ignorant and shameless liars with an anti-Arab Persian Nationalist agenda. SaSH (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, there. I think you are a bit misguided. The Arabic word būraq IS from the Persian source bwrk, now būrah. I have verified this from Merriam-Webster, Dictionary.com, The Free Dictionary as well as Wiktionary. This is not a Persian nationalist agenda (Atleast the user who first stated the word coming from a Persian source doesn’t seem to be). I am changing it back.

—Syɛd Шαмiq Aнмɛd Hαsнмi (тαlк)

11:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Borax Kills Cockroaches?

I've heard that Borax kills cockroaches--just sprinkle it around baseboards, under the stove and refrigerator, and after about 3 weeks the cockroaches die because the borax abrades/dissolves their exoskeleton and they dehydrate. Anybody got any info on this or is it just another urban legend? 50.202.81.2 (talk) 19:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, borax is indeed an insecticide. With an LD50 at 2.66 g/kg in rats probably the lessest toxic insecticide on earth. I'm wondering how much the insecticide industry paid the FDA to forbid it...more infos about the toxity of "normal" insecticides here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/insecticide --178.197.226.24 (talk) 16:31, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I have used boric acid to kill roaches. It seems to work by giving them diarrhea because their are brown squirts on the wall. I have read that borax kills ants so I bought 20 mule team borax The box says it has Sodium tetraborate. I would like a comparison of boric acid versus borax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.237.119 (talk) 22:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Does anybody inhale borax?

"Sufficient exposure to borax dust can cause respiratory and skin irritation." - I'd like to see you guys inhaling limestone or silicium powder. Nevertheless our body need calcium and silicium, and it does no harm when eaten! So said, almost any compound causes problems through inhalation. Anyway, if you use borax as an insecticide, you won't use powder but dissolve it in water and spray it. So why on earth would somebody inhale borax, or is this just another stupid example financed by the insecticide industry? I even live in a country where the selling of borax over the counter is forbidden...in the other hand we spray DDT aso. for most effective poisoning ourselfs. --178.197.226.24 (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC) I plan to just put the dry powder down behind cabinet to get rid of ants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.237.119 (talk) 23:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Toxicity - dangers the product posed to the general public?

Under Toxicity it says, "Registration was allowed to lapse after the initial one year registration due to the fact the product could not be legally sold over the counter as an insecticide due to the dangers the product posed to the general public."

Now it doesn't say what country is involved, but "EPA" is there, so assuming this is the United States Environmental Protection Agency, this is flat out wrong. Terro will sell you liquid ant baits with sodium tetraborate decahydrate (Borax) (5.40%). So unless Terro is illegally selling sodium tetraborate decahydrate, then it is legal.

In addition, the link given under the effects of exposure is http://web.archive.org/web/20110725113454/http://echa.europa.eu/doc/candidate_list/svhc_supdoc_disodium_tetraborate_anhydrous_publication.pdf Now, I'm not a chemist, so I can be wrong but the substances of that document are listed as Disodium tetraborate, anhydrous, EC number: 215-540-4, CAS number: 1330-43-4. In addition, it covers disodium tetraborate hydrates with the following CAS numbers which are covered by the EINECS entry of anhydrous form: CAS number 12179-04-3: Disodium tetraborate pentahydrate, [CAS name: boron sodium oxide (B4Na2O7•5H2O), pentahydrate] CAS number 1303-96-4: Disodium tetraborate decahydrate, [CAS name: Borax (B4Na2O7.10H2O)] and the following substance with EC number 235-541-3 and CAS number 12267-73-1: Tetraboron disodium heptaoxide, hydrate [CAS name: Boron sodium oxide (B4Na2O7), hydrate].

It does not say "sodium tetraborate decahydrate". Now I'm aware that chemical names can vary, you can call water hydrogen oxide, as well as an alkali name of hydrogen hydroxide, and several acid names such as hydric acid, hydroxic acid, hydroxyl acid, and hydroxilic acid. So I don't know if sodium tetraborate decahydrate is any of the ones in the document.

There seem to be so many variations of Borax, that I don't think you can generalize so easily. If I'm wrong, then at least the article should make it more clear. And the "illegal" to sell sodium tetraborate decahydrate, at least in the USA, unless Terro is a lawbreaker, needs to be removed. And if it is illegal, it needs where it is illegal, unless it is a worldwide law.

Fanra (talk) 22:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I also think this paragraph is questionable. I separated out the non-tendentious parts of the original paragraph and placed them in a separate paragraph, and labelled parts of the questionable one as needing citations. Here is the questionable paragraph:

Sodium tetraborate decahydrate was once registered as an insecticide for a brief period, and the product was issued a "Danger" signal word by the EPA. Registration was allowed to lapse after the initial one year registration due to the fact the product could not be legally sold over the counter as an insecticide due to the dangers the product posed to the general public. Danger is the highest level signal word issued by the EPA.

From the Dial Corporation at http://www.20muleteamlaundry.com/about/faq :

How much of the mineral is in 20 Mule Team Borax?

20 Mule Team Borax is comprised of 99.5% pure borax, a naturally occurring mineral composed of sodium, boron, oxygen, and water. (The scientific name for borax is sodium tetraborate decahydrate.) The remaining 0.5% is composed of trace minerals.

So it is sold for general household purposes, but it is not sold as a pesticide because it is too dangerous. It received a rating of "danger" only while it was being sold as a pesticide. Then it stopped being sold as a pesticide because it was too dangerous as a pesticide. So then they stopped the "danger" rating. But it is still sold for general household purposes.

Note also the LD50 of 2.6g/kg and the fact that it has been banned as a food additive in many countries.

Upshot: don't eat it. 84.227.243.227 (talk) 08:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

To second this: "too dangerous" for use as a pesticide but it's sold for general household purposes? I really want to see some sources here. Remember, the LD50 (admittedly in rats) is 2.6 grams per kilogram of body weight. That would be 260 grams or roughly half a pound for a 100 kg (220 pound) man.

As noted above, eating it is a bad. The dust is potentially a problem, but I want to see some sources. 24.212.189.162 (talk) 01:21, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Borax as an ant-bait / insecticide

I just bought some Amdro-brand ant-baits at the big-orange home center today. Contains 5.4% sodium tetraborate decahydrate as the active ingredient. Curious to see if it works any better than the standard ivermectin baits that I've been using. In any case, someone should add "Ant Killer" to the list of possible uses as it looks like it's legal again in the USA. Nasukaren (talk) 00:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. It is apparently widely-used in ant baits. This article needs to describe the mechanism by which borax kills an ant colony.Starhistory22 (talk) 07:20, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Etymology?

Is the whole etymology section relevant if we take this article to be more of a chemistrical/scientific nature? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.134.206.249 (talk) 16:11, 30 July 2014‎ (UTC)

• The article is not strictly a chemical/scientific topic. Borax is a very long-known chemical with many applications outside of the lab...no reason not to expect lay readers with interests/curiosity beyond the science of it. It's also not the origin one might expect (naively, some sort of modern contraction of "boron + oxygen" as often for common-names of scientific things). I'm ambivalent about it being its own section, however. DMacks (talk) 16:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

• I could see it being combined with the earlier paragraph beginning "The word borax is from Arabic ..." and the following paragraph regarding discovery in Tibet, with some expansion concerning early references to the substance, under a heading "History and early use" or somesuch. As it stands, the Etymology section would be primarily of interest to linguists, not the lay reader. Dwpaul ^Talk 16:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

• The exceptional origin should not be entirely ignored indeed. The idea of combining it with history and early use or putting it in the opening section actually pleases me. A similar structure (opening section) can be seen on the Phosgene page;

The chemical was named by combining the Greek words 'phos' (meaning light) and genesis (birth); it does not mean it contains any phosphorus (cf. phosphine).

That way we inform the lay reader about it's origin, but we don't bore them. (MrChem (talk) 14:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC))

2 pictures of steam engines hauling borax

the first pic is of the borax wagons pulled by the far more common "20 mule team". Should be one photo of the 20 mule team hauling borax although the pic of the steam traction engine hauling, ladies on front is very good 86.139.151.221 (talk) 04:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)