There's a lot reporting about this chip killing a healthy kid without waiting for the autopsy. The LD50 of pure capsaicin via oral consumption in mice is 47.2 mg/kg [1], which (assuming it's the...
Exemplary
There's a lot reporting about this chip killing a healthy kid without waiting for the autopsy.
The LD50 of pure capsaicin via oral consumption in mice is 47.2 mg/kg [1], which (assuming it's the same for humans) would translate to about 2.3 grams for 110lb/50kg (bottom 25% 14-year old male weight [2]). A single Carolina Reaper II has 100 mg of capsaicin on average (seeds and all)[3]. So basically, it'd take about 23 Carolina Reaper II peppers in one sitting to kill half of underweight 14-year old boys. I'm guessing this chip doesn't come close to that.
Health complications can occur before that point, of course. There are multiple reports of people being admitted to the ER with reversible cerebrovascular vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS), but the case studies I've seen report the onset over multiple days, eventually being treated with a full recovery.
If this kid did die as a direct result of eating one of these chips, it seems more likely that he either had an undiagnosed underlying health issue or else there was a contaminate in the chip.
Just pointing out that LD50 is not a threshold for mortality, but the dose that has killed 50% of the study population within the given timeframe. By definition, about half of the individuals die...
Just pointing out that LD50 is not a threshold for mortality, but the dose that has killed 50% of the study population within the given timeframe. By definition, about half of the individuals die at doses lower than the LD50.
Yes. I tried to phrase it to make that clear but it's an important distinction, so thank you for clarifying. Edit: The point being that it's not impossible that the capsaicin is directly...
Yes. I tried to phrase it to make that clear but it's an important distinction, so thank you for clarifying.
Edit: The point being that it's not impossible that the capsaicin is directly responsible; it just seems unlikely. Nearly all of the sources I've seen for this story frame it as though the spiciness of the chip is what killed him, but that comes across as yellow journalism to me. Even the AP is reporting it like this, which is a shame. I understand the family is looking for answers in the aftermath of a tragedy, but the responsible thing would be to wait for an autopsy or multiple cases before reporting it as if there were a direct connection. This sort of thing breeds misinformation.
LD_n is the dose that kills n% of the population. By extension, that means that <n% are killed at lower doses, and <(100-n)% can survive a higher dose. To clarify, the LD_100 is a guaranteed kill,...
LD_n is the dose that kills n% of the population. By extension, that means that <n% are killed at lower doses, and <(100-n)% can survive a higher dose.
To clarify, the LD_100 is a guaranteed kill, LD_0 is "safe" aka nonlethal. But yes, what you should be looking at here is not the LD_50, but the LD_lo, the lowerst known lethal dose.
But yes, there's some variation in what dose kills a population, so lots of people will already be dead at lower concentrations, and lots of people will live and could've even stomached a bit more.
Just poking around a bit, the LD10 and LD90 regularly lie apart by a factor of 3 to 10 or so, but all I've seen these values for are other substances in other organisms. Still gives an idea what kind of variation we should probably expect.
The terms of art here for lack of toxicity are "NOEL", and "No Observed Effect Level" or more currently, "NOAEL", "No Observed Adverse Effect Level". There's some controversy about whether we can...
The terms of art here for lack of toxicity are "NOEL", and "No Observed Effect Level" or more currently, "NOAEL", "No Observed Adverse Effect Level". There's some controversy about whether we can meaningfully speak of binary thresholds for toxic/non-toxic levels of substances.
Capsaicin and related alkaloids are especially difficult to discuss for a couple of reasons:
People consume and use them for what would ordinarily be considered neurotoxic effects;
Traditionally used spices and seasonings are generally excepted from regulation on the grounds that large populations consume them without serious harm from ordinary use.
There are many common seasonings that are relatively toxic (e.g. 5 grams of nutmeg or saffron can put an adult human in the hospital). [That's not counting exceedingly high levels of lead, cadmium, arsenic, pesticides, aflatoxins, pathogens, and other contaminants, but I digress...]
How is that the opposite? It sounds exactly the same to me. Maybe it's just too early for me to understand things... ...also, I'll get you for this, underdog! There's only room in this world for...
How is that the opposite? It sounds exactly the same to me. Maybe it's just too early for me to understand things...
...also, I'll get you for this, underdog! There's only room in this world for one directional dog!
The spiciness arms race is pretty stupid, in my opinion. There is not even a façade of doing it for "flavour", it's literally just meant to be painful and as hard to ingest as possible. It would...
The spiciness arms race is pretty stupid, in my opinion. There is not even a façade of doing it for "flavour", it's literally just meant to be painful and as hard to ingest as possible. It would be similar to spirits brands coming out with drinks with increasingly higher alcohol concentrations, to near lethal levels.
Hopefully it stops here, I don't think there is a valid reason or market for growing peppers that will soon enough not be fit for human consumption unless diluted.
It's stupid but far from what I would consider a problem. 1 kid dying because of complications after eating a hot chip isn't a worrying pattern, it's just an unfortunate occurrence. People do a...
It's stupid but far from what I would consider a problem. 1 kid dying because of complications after eating a hot chip isn't a worrying pattern, it's just an unfortunate occurrence.
People do a ton of dumb shit with no restrictions, we're drawing the line at making spicier peppers?
Agreed. Dumb trends are nothing new. Teenagers will also push limits like always, it's pretty much a part of our development(and with many it never stops lol) . It's important to do our best to...
Agreed. Dumb trends are nothing new. Teenagers will also push limits like always, it's pretty much a part of our development(and with many it never stops lol) . It's important to do our best to guide them as safely as possible of course.
Agreed. This is a tragedy. A mother lost her son. But lots of people eat spicy food every day. I hope this never happens again but banning it won't solve anything
Agreed. This is a tragedy. A mother lost her son. But lots of people eat spicy food every day. I hope this never happens again but banning it won't solve anything
The difference here is capitalizing on the suffering of others. Yes pretty much all challenges lead to profits for the material supplier, but the difference is that they aren't generally...
The difference here is capitalizing on the suffering of others. Yes pretty much all challenges lead to profits for the material supplier, but the difference is that they aren't generally encouraging people to hurt themselves. Pacai specifically produces and markets this product for the explicit intent of daring people to hurt themselves. Should we let capitalism run free on marketing pain?
"Capitalizing on the suffering of others" is a very loaded way to refer to a novelty spicy chip. Is eating it painful? Yes, but only because that's the mechanism how the human palate understands...
Exemplary
"Capitalizing on the suffering of others" is a very loaded way to refer to a novelty spicy chip. Is eating it painful? Yes, but only because that's the mechanism how the human palate understands spice. You could level this same charge at the whole hot sauce or chicken wing industry then.
Obviously these things don't all exist just to make money off of making people suffer for the sake of it, so it would be a stretch to say that this One Chip was made just to make people suffer. It's just an extension of the experience people already go to this industry and company for. They aren't running a business where the model relies on exploiting people and extracting wealth directly from harming their lives or wellbeing. This is one particular product made for a ridiculous, specific purpose from a company that makes a line of more reasonably spicy chips.
And if the concern is about letting capitalism run free on marketing pain, pharmaceutical companies effectively have a monopoly on that and have led to much, much, much worse examples of this. Like the opioid crisis, which kills more people every day than this one chip would in 1000 years at this rate.
It's ok to create challenges but customers need to be properly aware of the risks. Eating challenges in restaurants typically have the waiter explain the rules and risks before letting the...
It's ok to create challenges but customers need to be properly aware of the risks. Eating challenges in restaurants typically have the waiter explain the rules and risks before letting the customer engage. They may even require a waiver to be signed. The restaurant also has the right to refuse them the challenge of the customer isn't paying attention. The one chip challenge has none of these controls in place. No a little
As to pharma, yes it's a problem but complacency in one area does not excuse it in all areas. Still, we do try to protect consumers with purchase limits, age limits, or straight up prescription requirements. So while there's problems, there are also attempts to address them.
I would argue gambling is a far more egregious and damaging market capitalizing on the suffering of others, yet nothing is being done to stop it. Start with the real problems, then focus on the...
I would argue gambling is a far more egregious and damaging market capitalizing on the suffering of others, yet nothing is being done to stop it. Start with the real problems, then focus on the tiny ones.
We aren't limited to one thing at a time. Trying to blow off one problem by pointing to another does nothing. Additionally, gambling is problematic but it's a financial issue. You aren't going to...
We aren't limited to one thing at a time. Trying to blow off one problem by pointing to another does nothing. Additionally, gambling is problematic but it's a financial issue. You aren't going to suffer organ failure from a hard night of gambling. Though I do agree that gambling advertising should be snuffed entirely.
We aren't limited to one thing at one time, but we are limited by some things at some times. It's a little disingenuous to rebut someone acknowledging resource limits to actions taken by humans by...
We aren't limited to one thing at one time, but we are limited by some things at some times. It's a little disingenuous to rebut someone acknowledging resource limits to actions taken by humans by making a statement that implies that limits aren't a thing. Every second we're discussing this is a second we're not discussing something else. There is actually a limit to how many things we can address at any given time, and part of that also depends to what extent we expend resources on each thing we're attempting to address. Whether we're up against that limit with these particular discussions I am not trying to claim.
However to acknowledge that resources are limited, one should briefly examine the situation and decide whether it's something that warrants expending significantly more resources on to address, or to acknowledge that it's less serious of an issue than others. I believe the comment you were responding to was approaching it more in this manner. If you find a less serious problem and at a glance seems it has easy solutions that won't introduce other problems, then it makes sense to pursue further. If at a glance many problems arise in your attempt to find solutions to this lesser issue, then it does not seem a prudent use of resources to dive further in when there are other more serious problems that could use more resources to solve them.
Oh come on. Yes individuals are heavily limited in capacity but government does not have the same sort of capacity issues. We pay for thousands and thousands of people every day to work on...
Oh come on. Yes individuals are heavily limited in capacity but government does not have the same sort of capacity issues. We pay for thousands and thousands of people every day to work on problems. We have over 500 people in the US Congress who's sole job is to work on solving problems, or at least facilitate the capacity to do so (see FDA, FTC, SEC, etc). And that's just at the national level. There's also state, county, and city levels of government who also are tasks with the same concept. So to dismiss X as unimportant because Y exists is entirely bs.
And no, us talking about this doesn't impact anything. Unless you're an elected member spending your office hours on socials.
Yes, and then we have hundreds of millions of people in this country, and millions or billions more depending on what you're speaking of, that all have some kind of demands as well. Think of...
Yes individuals are heavily limited in capacity but government does not have the same sort of capacity issues.
Yes, and then we have hundreds of millions of people in this country, and millions or billions more depending on what you're speaking of, that all have some kind of demands as well. Think of Ukraine gets attacked by Russia, or any number of issues in Africa, or any other global events or problems that occur, and mind you those are the more publicly known ones and not the myriad of others that hardly anyone knows about. It's not as though we're operating with excess capacity of "get shit done" just waiting for someone to bring up an issue big or small. We've got various wealthy billionaires who each have their demands, various corporations who each have their demands, various not for profits and other organizations all with their demands, which represent individual people who have their own demands, so you in many cases have the same people who have individual demands who also are part of organizations who have demands on a group level.
Yes, believe it or not, what individuals talk about matters when they're being properly represented at least, because it's what we build our own perspective and demands through, and then we exert our influence through voting onto politicians that are supposed to do something with them, in theory. So every second we think about a one in a trillion chance a kid dies from a spicy chip and think that needs addressed is a second we aren't thinking about another problem that we could then relay to our representatives. If we are talking about A, B, C, D issues, and that's all we can do in a 24 hour day, 7 days a week, 365 days in a year time frame as individuals, while dealing with our own lives, and meanwhile E, F, G all the way through X are happening and we don't have time for them, then that's what we're telling our reps to focus on, A-D. Now if Y issue happens and it's a kid dying from a spicy chip and suddenly we drop issue D, then why would our representatives care about issue D anymore?
Right now there is some problem in the world happening somewhere that we aren't learning about because we're talking about this. That's true no matter what we do, we can't know about everything, so there's always the case of anything we do means we're not doing something else, and thus comes the idea of choosing what's appropriate to care or talk about. It's all the more the case when we don't all operate independently, it's not as though we randomly think of something, we're thinking about it because it's reported in the news, so it's not just the mother and father of the kid thinking about it, it's now thousands or millions of people who read the news who are thinking about it rather than thinking about something else, and those things influence the demands we place on government.
So there are legal age limits to products like alcohol, are there any other products besides the Paqui chips that were "for adults only" but not actually regulated that way? That sort of is what...
So there are legal age limits to products like alcohol, are there any other products besides the Paqui chips that were "for adults only" but not actually regulated that way?
That sort of is what strikes me as wrong, unless the register flags for an ID, Paqui knew kids would buy their "for adults only" product because there wasn't actually anything stopping them, right? (And maybe I'm wrong and there were legal regulations here?)
Not to mention that the presentation and packaging are clearly designed to appeal to teenagers. Individually wrapped in a coffin-shaped container? Yeah, definitely targeted at mature adults, just...
Not to mention that the presentation and packaging are clearly designed to appeal to teenagers. Individually wrapped in a coffin-shaped container? Yeah, definitely targeted at mature adults, just like Joe Camel.
Everclear is about 90% abv. We can get between 95-97% without the use of an additive to break the azeotrope (the level at which distillation will no longer concentrate the ethanol). So while those...
Everclear is about 90% abv. We can get between 95-97% without the use of an additive to break the azeotrope (the level at which distillation will no longer concentrate the ethanol). So while those additives are toxic, there is still a bit of runway for us to make stronger spirits!
Everclear is 190 proof, 95% ethanol. So, not much room for improvement, unless you're suggesting benzene consumption or really advanced home filtration setups?
Everclear is 190 proof, 95% ethanol. So, not much room for improvement, unless you're suggesting benzene consumption or really advanced home filtration setups?
Don’t forget that we can break the azeotrope with pressure swing distillation. So we can make 200 proof alcohol, but we usually just use benzene to do it, as it gets around the alcohol taxes.
Don’t forget that we can break the azeotrope with pressure swing distillation. So we can make 200 proof alcohol, but we usually just use benzene to do it, as it gets around the alcohol taxes.
Spicy for spiciness-sake can seem stupid, but for those of us who enjoy heat it can be a bit more nuanced. For instance I hate ghost peppers because their only flavor is heat. Meanwhile, I really...
Spicy for spiciness-sake can seem stupid, but for those of us who enjoy heat it can be a bit more nuanced.
For instance I hate ghost peppers because their only flavor is heat. Meanwhile, I really like Carolina Reapers because they do have a great flavor if you've built up enough tolerance that you can actually taste them.
That's interesting! For me, I can barely taste the carolina reaper over the heat, but ghost peppers have a distinct, fruity flavour I enjoy. Maybe I've just not been working with fresh enough...
That's interesting! For me, I can barely taste the carolina reaper over the heat, but ghost peppers have a distinct, fruity flavour I enjoy.
Maybe I've just not been working with fresh enough peppers, or, my tolerance for reapers isn't there yet!
Yeah, I feel like only people who don’t like spice would claim that there’s no flavor there. There are so many unique flavors that you don’t really get without the spice.
Yeah, I feel like only people who don’t like spice would claim that there’s no flavor there. There are so many unique flavors that you don’t really get without the spice.
I think this attitude is exacerbated by the unavailability of relatively mild chilis. They're not impossible to find depending on where you are but in most of the US there's nothing available...
I think this attitude is exacerbated by the unavailability of relatively mild chilis. They're not impossible to find depending on where you are but in most of the US there's nothing available between a bell pepper and a jalapeño. I follow a cooking channel called Chinese Cooking Demystified, and while they usually try their best to recommend substitutions for the various Chinese chili varieties in their recipes, they really struggled when it came to mild chilis since the only option that wasn't too spicy was bell peppers, which don't taste the same at all.
This - capsaicin is used in agriculture as an organic pesticide and animal repellent. In Florida, we'd keep crazy ants out of the house by following outdoor ant trails to points of entry, dab the...
This - capsaicin is used in agriculture as an organic pesticide and animal repellent. In Florida, we'd keep crazy ants out of the house by following outdoor ant trails to points of entry, dab the spots with a bit of oleoresin capsicum, and no more house ants for months on end.
There are pharmaceutical uses (though I have to say capsicum arthritis cream was more of a headache than it was worth - you're not going to be able to stop using your hands to rub your eyes, touch genitals, etc.).
Never share a household with singers and writers. Unless you are willing to be the inspiration for widespread humorous cautionary tales about the night some lovers discovered one of them had...
Never share a household with singers and writers. Unless you are willing to be the inspiration for widespread humorous cautionary tales about the night some lovers discovered one of them had de-seeded a pound of Thai peppers without gloves on.
That's not different from a lot of extreme sports. We have issues with spirits because people often either operate heavy machinery, gamble, commit violence, or do other regrettable things as a...
It would be similar to spirits brands coming out with drinks with increasingly higher alcohol concentrations, to near lethal levels.
That's not different from a lot of extreme sports. We have issues with spirits because people often either operate heavy machinery, gamble, commit violence, or do other regrettable things as a consequence of the cognitive impairment. But if someone wants to Evil Knievel with a pepper instead of a motorcycle jump that's on them. At least they won't be running into anyone along the way.
I had this year's one chip challenge. It was brutal, but should not have caused a problem in a healthy individual. There is most likely a contributing factor, either some sort of health issue that...
I had this year's one chip challenge. It was brutal, but should not have caused a problem in a healthy individual. There is most likely a contributing factor, either some sort of health issue that was undiagnosed, or simply shock. I'm not particularly well-conditioned to spicy food this hurt like hell, but should not have been lethal.
People have made fun of the kid for "being stupid," said the company is at fault, but I think somebody dying to a compound that has not been found to carry any serious risks beyond induced stress is simply a tragedy. He had no way of knowing he would die, because thousands have eaten this product with absolutely no issues across age ranges. He may actually be the only death.
There is one thing I am concerned about, and should affect how it's sold. The container warns that this should only be eaten by adults. Paqui should require age verification to buy it if this is a serious concern. While I feel this is basically a "no-fault" situation, if Paqui doesn't take future precautions to prevent it they are, in a sense, responsible because this has happened at least once. Pulling the chip was a smart move on their lart, and the right thing to do given the circumstances.
There's a 2011 German regulatory paper on capsicum toxicity that recommends warning labels and childproof closures on pepper products containing the equivalent of 100 mg capsaicin/kilogram. To...
There's a 2011 German regulatory paper on capsicum toxicity that recommends warning labels and childproof closures on pepper products containing the equivalent of 100 mg capsaicin/kilogram. To some extent, that's based on a pain-inducing sensory threshold in adults of 5 mg per food serving, but the paper makes note of severe poisonings and deaths in children.
There's a reason that pediatric medicine is its own specialty - children are vulnerable to injury at different toxic thresholds and sometimes through different mechanisms than adults. Kids have higher metabolic rates, higher surface-to-volume ratios, lower body fat percentages (on average), less developed immune systems, greater likelihood of as yet undiscovered illnesses... And they require a different regulatory standard of protection.
It's hard to say exactly how much Carolina Reaper powder was used on the Paqui chip. I've seen a figure of 7,300 mg capsaicin/100 g dry weight for this pepper strain, so even a dusting of powder on a chip could easily have exceeded 100 mg capsaicin in a single portion.
We treat pure chemical extracts of plants differently in health and law. Like caffeine from coffee beans, cocaine from coca leaves, and THC from cannabis, the sale of very highly concentrated capsicum products needs some enforcement for reasonably safe sale, packaging, and labeling.
I'm not saying that everything needs to be regulated to avoid the consequences of maximum human stupidity. I'm a serious pepperhead myself, and goodness knows I don't want to be separated from my beloved Reapers and Scorpions and 7-Pots (which I use, at significant dilution, to make sauces, and repel squirrels from bird feeders, though the little buggers seem to have developed a taste). But maybe some public health messaging, labeling, and child-resistant packaging on the concentrated versions, and no "death challenge" marketing?
This is really unfortunate, just a kid being a kid and doing something dumb with their friends. I don't think a label has ever stopped a teenager from half thinking through something fun with...
This is really unfortunate, just a kid being a kid and doing something dumb with their friends. I don't think a label has ever stopped a teenager from half thinking through something fun with their friends. I don't necessarily see any fault on the manufacturer's side, this is just unfortunate and it may be better for the chip to be taken off market.
I have not heard of a kid drinking bleach or hydrochloric acid on a dare, though. It would be pretty cool if it was mandatory to give hotness of any food above a threshold in a standardized unit...
I have not heard of a kid drinking bleach or hydrochloric acid on a dare, though.
It would be pretty cool if it was mandatory to give hotness of any food above a threshold in a standardized unit on the packaging and restaurant menu. That way people would know how hot they can handle.
Uh, I think you may have missed or forgotten certain TikTok challenges from a few years ago. Tide pods come to mind :) But giving restaurant food actual scoville units on the menu would be cool...
I have not heard of a kid drinking bleach or hydrochloric acid on a dare, though.
Uh, I think you may have missed or forgotten certain TikTok challenges from a few years ago. Tide pods come to mind :)
But giving restaurant food actual scoville units on the menu would be cool imo. Better than the 1-2-3 pepper stuff some do
Dunno about Scoville units on menus - even the same strain of pepper can have variability in capsaicin content by as much as 10x. You're better off understanding heat level based on the cuisine,...
Dunno about Scoville units on menus - even the same strain of pepper can have variability in capsaicin content by as much as 10x. You're better off understanding heat level based on the cuisine, and assume Indian hot > Thai hot > Chinese hot >> Mexican hot > Mediterranean hot > American hot > European hot.
I don't think you can really compare drinking bleach and eating a chip. I would guess more kids have died this year from peanut allergies than peppers.
I don't think you can really compare drinking bleach and eating a chip.
I would guess more kids have died this year from peanut allergies than peppers.
There isn't really a standard unit here though. Scovilles aren't really well-founded science -- it's based on a subjective test by some number of participants, and there's no guarantee it actually...
hotness of any food above a threshold in a standardized unit
There isn't really a standard unit here though. Scovilles aren't really well-founded science -- it's based on a subjective test by some number of participants, and there's no guarantee it actually reflects any given individual's subjective experience of heat. This is even more impossible to do when cooking a dish (as opposed to just rating hot peppers) because even if you could get a perfect rating for the heat of the peppers and spices you used in a dish, that wouldn't account for how using them together with whatever other ingredients you used affects people's subjective experience of the heat of the dish -- for instance, stuff like coconut milk or other fatty ingredients can reduce the subjective heat of a dish by quite a lot.
Even if there were an accurate way to standardize such things, I'm not confident it would actually make it easier for people to know how hot they could handle -- it would still need to be based on trial-and-error, especially since one's own heat tolerance can vary a lot depending on a number of factors.
Also weird that you call out Indian restaurants, since they're the only ones I've been to that even try to have some sort of rating for spice. It's not particularly standardized but the 1-5 scale most such places give me is better than the vague semantic "spicy" or "very spicy" I've seen at restaurants from other cuisines with spicy food.
Scoville ratings have gotten more objective - the SHU score is now based on 15,000 x ppm capsaicin in the pepper material, prepared as a standard extract for analysis. They had to do that for...
Scoville ratings have gotten more objective - the SHU score is now based on 15,000 x ppm capsaicin in the pepper material, prepared as a standard extract for analysis. They had to do that for super-hots, since the former rating system didn't scale past a subjective "ohmigod my head is on fire".
Fair enough on that point, but the fact that it's more objective actually makes it less applicable to measuring the spice of an actual dish rather than a specific pepper lol
Fair enough on that point, but the fact that it's more objective actually makes it less applicable to measuring the spice of an actual dish rather than a specific pepper lol
This is pretty standard in cuisines that have traditionally spicy food. Every Thai restaurant I've been to has this as well. Mexican-style restaurants that offer salsa and hot sauce bars often...
since they're the only ones I've been to that even try to have some sort of rating for spice
This is pretty standard in cuisines that have traditionally spicy food. Every Thai restaurant I've been to has this as well. Mexican-style restaurants that offer salsa and hot sauce bars often annotate the labels with spice level. And chicken wing places that offer an array of sauces do the same.
Unfortunately I moved to a country of little babies who can't handle spicy food (Germany) 5 years ago, so finding something more granular than "spicy" or "very spicy" on the menu isn't common at...
Unfortunately I moved to a country of little babies who can't handle spicy food (Germany) 5 years ago, so finding something more granular than "spicy" or "very spicy" on the menu isn't common at non-Indian places. "spicy" varies from "has garlic in it" to "actually little spicy". I can't even FIND hot wings here, much to my chagrin.
Ahhh, makes sense. I wonder if this is the case in other countries whose standard cuisine tends to be pretty mild? Lol at the idea that garlic is spicy.
Ahhh, makes sense. I wonder if this is the case in other countries whose standard cuisine tends to be pretty mild? Lol at the idea that garlic is spicy.
Others have raised good points but I'd like to point out the absolute ridiculousness of the company declaring that this thing is meant for adults and there is a disclaimer. It's clearly a...
Others have raised good points but I'd like to point out the absolute ridiculousness of the company declaring that this thing is meant for adults and there is a disclaimer.
It's clearly a "challenge" thing and who is more easily susceptible to challenges of not kids/teens with their peer pressure?
I wonder if the shock of something very spicy compared to their dietary history plays a role. I kind of assume that people who regularly eat extremely hot food probably build up a resistance of...
I wonder if the shock of something very spicy compared to their dietary history plays a role. I kind of assume that people who regularly eat extremely hot food probably build up a resistance of some kind but I have no evidence to back that up.
I’ve heard from last year’s that the way these are made doesn’t lend them to be comparable to spicy peppers. I’ve heard them described as being closer to having a chemical burn than having a...
I’ve heard from last year’s that the way these are made doesn’t lend them to be comparable to spicy peppers. I’ve heard them described as being closer to having a chemical burn than having a particularly hot pepper.
See this part from the article This much spicy spice is not natural.
See this part from the article
If you haven't kept track, heat-seeking chili growers have been breeding spicier and spicier hybrids. In 2007, the Ghost Pepper was the hottest, but in 2011, it was overthrown by a succession of new hybrids, including the Infinity Chili, the Naga Viper pepper, and the Trinidad Scorpion Butch T pepper. Then, in 2013, the Carolina Reaper came along and has yet to be unseated—which may be for the best
Neither are sweet oranges. Or broccoli. Or any of the bajillion apple varieties at the grocery store. In fact, it'd be nigh-impossible to pick out a piece of produce, at the grocery store or from...
This much spicy spice is not natural.
Neither are sweet oranges. Or broccoli. Or any of the bajillion apple varieties at the grocery store. In fact, it'd be nigh-impossible to pick out a piece of produce, at the grocery store or from someone's garden, that didn't have a long history of artificial selection for various traits we humans found desirable to cultivate. "Natural" doesn't mean good, and neither is the opposite true.
Oh sure, but I mean there are people eating Carolina Reaper sauce every day (I'm personally a fan of the Garlic Reaper sauce ). I'm wondering if the kind of people who do that sort of thing are...
Oh sure, but I mean there are people eating Carolina Reaper sauce every day (I'm personally a fan of the Garlic Reaper sauce ). I'm wondering if the kind of people who do that sort of thing are making themselves less susceptible to adverse effects, and if it's possible that, for example this kid who died, could work themselves up to being able to safely consume these super hot peppers.
They're not really significantly different for a non-connoisseur. "Ghost" (bhut jolokia) is 1M SHU on average, Carolina Reaper is 1.6M on average, up to 2.2M. Regular chilies oscillate around 1K....
They're not really significantly different for a non-connoisseur. "Ghost" (bhut jolokia) is 1M SHU on average, Carolina Reaper is 1.6M on average, up to 2.2M. Regular chilies oscillate around 1K. Most people clock out at that, and they will see absolutely no difference between Ghost and Carolina Reaper. It'll just be 10/10 pain.
Habaneros, cultivated before this arms race, are 200K up to 360K and would most likely have the exact same effect on a vulnerable person.
There's a lot reporting about this chip killing a healthy kid without waiting for the autopsy.
The LD50 of pure capsaicin via oral consumption in mice is 47.2 mg/kg [1], which (assuming it's the same for humans) would translate to about 2.3 grams for 110lb/50kg (bottom 25% 14-year old male weight [2]). A single Carolina Reaper II has 100 mg of capsaicin on average (seeds and all)[3]. So basically, it'd take about 23 Carolina Reaper II peppers in one sitting to kill half of underweight 14-year old boys. I'm guessing this chip doesn't come close to that.
Health complications can occur before that point, of course. There are multiple reports of people being admitted to the ER with reversible cerebrovascular vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS), but the case studies I've seen report the onset over multiple days, eventually being treated with a full recovery.
If this kid did die as a direct result of eating one of these chips, it seems more likely that he either had an undiagnosed underlying health issue or else there was a contaminate in the chip.
Just pointing out that LD50 is not a threshold for mortality, but the dose that has killed 50% of the study population within the given timeframe. By definition, about half of the individuals die at doses lower than the LD50.
Yes. I tried to phrase it to make that clear but it's an important distinction, so thank you for clarifying.
Edit: The point being that it's not impossible that the capsaicin is directly responsible; it just seems unlikely. Nearly all of the sources I've seen for this story frame it as though the spiciness of the chip is what killed him, but that comes across as yellow journalism to me. Even the AP is reporting it like this, which is a shame. I understand the family is looking for answers in the aftermath of a tragedy, but the responsible thing would be to wait for an autopsy or multiple cases before reporting it as if there were a direct connection. This sort of thing breeds misinformation.
I always thought it meant the opposite, meaning the other 50% either die with a lower dose or tolerate a higher dose.
LD_n is the dose that kills n% of the population. By extension, that means that <n% are killed at lower doses, and <(100-n)% can survive a higher dose.
To clarify, the LD_100 is a guaranteed kill, LD_0 is "safe" aka nonlethal. But yes, what you should be looking at here is not the LD_50, but the LD_lo, the lowerst known lethal dose.
But yes, there's some variation in what dose kills a population, so lots of people will already be dead at lower concentrations, and lots of people will live and could've even stomached a bit more.
Just poking around a bit, the LD10 and LD90 regularly lie apart by a factor of 3 to 10 or so, but all I've seen these values for are other substances in other organisms. Still gives an idea what kind of variation we should probably expect.
The terms of art here for lack of toxicity are "NOEL", and "No Observed Effect Level" or more currently, "NOAEL", "No Observed Adverse Effect Level". There's some controversy about whether we can meaningfully speak of binary thresholds for toxic/non-toxic levels of substances.
Capsaicin and related alkaloids are especially difficult to discuss for a couple of reasons:
There are many common seasonings that are relatively toxic (e.g. 5 grams of nutmeg or saffron can put an adult human in the hospital). [That's not counting exceedingly high levels of lead, cadmium, arsenic, pesticides, aflatoxins, pathogens, and other contaminants, but I digress...]
How is that the opposite? It sounds exactly the same to me. Maybe it's just too early for me to understand things...
...also, I'll get you for this, underdog! There's only room in this world for one directional dog!
Very obviously an underlying heart problem that could present itself in a myriad of ways, but one can't sue a heart problem, and it's not a sensation.
The spiciness arms race is pretty stupid, in my opinion. There is not even a façade of doing it for "flavour", it's literally just meant to be painful and as hard to ingest as possible. It would be similar to spirits brands coming out with drinks with increasingly higher alcohol concentrations, to near lethal levels.
Hopefully it stops here, I don't think there is a valid reason or market for growing peppers that will soon enough not be fit for human consumption unless diluted.
It's stupid but far from what I would consider a problem. 1 kid dying because of complications after eating a hot chip isn't a worrying pattern, it's just an unfortunate occurrence.
People do a ton of dumb shit with no restrictions, we're drawing the line at making spicier peppers?
Agreed. Dumb trends are nothing new. Teenagers will also push limits like always, it's pretty much a part of our development(and with many it never stops lol) . It's important to do our best to guide them as safely as possible of course.
Agreed. This is a tragedy. A mother lost her son. But lots of people eat spicy food every day. I hope this never happens again but banning it won't solve anything
The difference here is capitalizing on the suffering of others. Yes pretty much all challenges lead to profits for the material supplier, but the difference is that they aren't generally encouraging people to hurt themselves. Pacai specifically produces and markets this product for the explicit intent of daring people to hurt themselves. Should we let capitalism run free on marketing pain?
"Capitalizing on the suffering of others" is a very loaded way to refer to a novelty spicy chip. Is eating it painful? Yes, but only because that's the mechanism how the human palate understands spice. You could level this same charge at the whole hot sauce or chicken wing industry then.
Obviously these things don't all exist just to make money off of making people suffer for the sake of it, so it would be a stretch to say that this One Chip was made just to make people suffer. It's just an extension of the experience people already go to this industry and company for. They aren't running a business where the model relies on exploiting people and extracting wealth directly from harming their lives or wellbeing. This is one particular product made for a ridiculous, specific purpose from a company that makes a line of more reasonably spicy chips.
And if the concern is about letting capitalism run free on marketing pain, pharmaceutical companies effectively have a monopoly on that and have led to much, much, much worse examples of this. Like the opioid crisis, which kills more people every day than this one chip would in 1000 years at this rate.
It's ok to create challenges but customers need to be properly aware of the risks. Eating challenges in restaurants typically have the waiter explain the rules and risks before letting the customer engage. They may even require a waiver to be signed. The restaurant also has the right to refuse them the challenge of the customer isn't paying attention. The one chip challenge has none of these controls in place. No a little
As to pharma, yes it's a problem but complacency in one area does not excuse it in all areas. Still, we do try to protect consumers with purchase limits, age limits, or straight up prescription requirements. So while there's problems, there are also attempts to address them.
I would argue gambling is a far more egregious and damaging market capitalizing on the suffering of others, yet nothing is being done to stop it. Start with the real problems, then focus on the tiny ones.
We aren't limited to one thing at a time. Trying to blow off one problem by pointing to another does nothing. Additionally, gambling is problematic but it's a financial issue. You aren't going to suffer organ failure from a hard night of gambling. Though I do agree that gambling advertising should be snuffed entirely.
We aren't limited to one thing at one time, but we are limited by some things at some times. It's a little disingenuous to rebut someone acknowledging resource limits to actions taken by humans by making a statement that implies that limits aren't a thing. Every second we're discussing this is a second we're not discussing something else. There is actually a limit to how many things we can address at any given time, and part of that also depends to what extent we expend resources on each thing we're attempting to address. Whether we're up against that limit with these particular discussions I am not trying to claim.
However to acknowledge that resources are limited, one should briefly examine the situation and decide whether it's something that warrants expending significantly more resources on to address, or to acknowledge that it's less serious of an issue than others. I believe the comment you were responding to was approaching it more in this manner. If you find a less serious problem and at a glance seems it has easy solutions that won't introduce other problems, then it makes sense to pursue further. If at a glance many problems arise in your attempt to find solutions to this lesser issue, then it does not seem a prudent use of resources to dive further in when there are other more serious problems that could use more resources to solve them.
Oh come on. Yes individuals are heavily limited in capacity but government does not have the same sort of capacity issues. We pay for thousands and thousands of people every day to work on problems. We have over 500 people in the US Congress who's sole job is to work on solving problems, or at least facilitate the capacity to do so (see FDA, FTC, SEC, etc). And that's just at the national level. There's also state, county, and city levels of government who also are tasks with the same concept. So to dismiss X as unimportant because Y exists is entirely bs.
And no, us talking about this doesn't impact anything. Unless you're an elected member spending your office hours on socials.
Yes, and then we have hundreds of millions of people in this country, and millions or billions more depending on what you're speaking of, that all have some kind of demands as well. Think of Ukraine gets attacked by Russia, or any number of issues in Africa, or any other global events or problems that occur, and mind you those are the more publicly known ones and not the myriad of others that hardly anyone knows about. It's not as though we're operating with excess capacity of "get shit done" just waiting for someone to bring up an issue big or small. We've got various wealthy billionaires who each have their demands, various corporations who each have their demands, various not for profits and other organizations all with their demands, which represent individual people who have their own demands, so you in many cases have the same people who have individual demands who also are part of organizations who have demands on a group level.
Yes, believe it or not, what individuals talk about matters when they're being properly represented at least, because it's what we build our own perspective and demands through, and then we exert our influence through voting onto politicians that are supposed to do something with them, in theory. So every second we think about a one in a trillion chance a kid dies from a spicy chip and think that needs addressed is a second we aren't thinking about another problem that we could then relay to our representatives. If we are talking about A, B, C, D issues, and that's all we can do in a 24 hour day, 7 days a week, 365 days in a year time frame as individuals, while dealing with our own lives, and meanwhile E, F, G all the way through X are happening and we don't have time for them, then that's what we're telling our reps to focus on, A-D. Now if Y issue happens and it's a kid dying from a spicy chip and suddenly we drop issue D, then why would our representatives care about issue D anymore?
Right now there is some problem in the world happening somewhere that we aren't learning about because we're talking about this. That's true no matter what we do, we can't know about everything, so there's always the case of anything we do means we're not doing something else, and thus comes the idea of choosing what's appropriate to care or talk about. It's all the more the case when we don't all operate independently, it's not as though we randomly think of something, we're thinking about it because it's reported in the news, so it's not just the mother and father of the kid thinking about it, it's now thousands or millions of people who read the news who are thinking about it rather than thinking about something else, and those things influence the demands we place on government.
Next up is spicy Tide Pods!
This metaphor doesn't really apply. Everclear is readily available at any given liquor store.
So there are legal age limits to products like alcohol, are there any other products besides the Paqui chips that were "for adults only" but not actually regulated that way?
That sort of is what strikes me as wrong, unless the register flags for an ID, Paqui knew kids would buy their "for adults only" product because there wasn't actually anything stopping them, right? (And maybe I'm wrong and there were legal regulations here?)
Not to mention that the presentation and packaging are clearly designed to appeal to teenagers. Individually wrapped in a coffin-shaped container? Yeah, definitely targeted at mature adults, just like Joe Camel.
Everclear is about 90% abv. We can get between 95-97% without the use of an additive to break the azeotrope (the level at which distillation will no longer concentrate the ethanol). So while those additives are toxic, there is still a bit of runway for us to make stronger spirits!
Everclear is 190 proof, 95% ethanol. So, not much room for improvement, unless you're suggesting benzene consumption or really advanced home filtration setups?
oh you're right, that was a silly slip of the memory. so only 1-2% more we can push it.
Don’t forget that we can break the azeotrope with pressure swing distillation. So we can make 200 proof alcohol, but we usually just use benzene to do it, as it gets around the alcohol taxes.
Spicy for spiciness-sake can seem stupid, but for those of us who enjoy heat it can be a bit more nuanced.
For instance I hate ghost peppers because their only flavor is heat. Meanwhile, I really like Carolina Reapers because they do have a great flavor if you've built up enough tolerance that you can actually taste them.
That's interesting! For me, I can barely taste the carolina reaper over the heat, but ghost peppers have a distinct, fruity flavour I enjoy.
Maybe I've just not been working with fresh enough peppers, or, my tolerance for reapers isn't there yet!
Yeah, I feel like only people who don’t like spice would claim that there’s no flavor there. There are so many unique flavors that you don’t really get without the spice.
I think this attitude is exacerbated by the unavailability of relatively mild chilis. They're not impossible to find depending on where you are but in most of the US there's nothing available between a bell pepper and a jalapeño. I follow a cooking channel called Chinese Cooking Demystified, and while they usually try their best to recommend substitutions for the various Chinese chili varieties in their recipes, they really struggled when it came to mild chilis since the only option that wasn't too spicy was bell peppers, which don't taste the same at all.
This - capsaicin is used in agriculture as an organic pesticide and animal repellent. In Florida, we'd keep crazy ants out of the house by following outdoor ant trails to points of entry, dab the spots with a bit of oleoresin capsicum, and no more house ants for months on end.
There are pharmaceutical uses (though I have to say capsicum arthritis cream was more of a headache than it was worth - you're not going to be able to stop using your hands to rub your eyes, touch genitals, etc.).
I just want you to know that I appreciate your vote of confidence in not adding "your" to the genitals bit.
Never share a household with singers and writers. Unless you are willing to be the inspiration for widespread humorous cautionary tales about the night some lovers discovered one of them had de-seeded a pound of Thai peppers without gloves on.
That's not different from a lot of extreme sports. We have issues with spirits because people often either operate heavy machinery, gamble, commit violence, or do other regrettable things as a consequence of the cognitive impairment. But if someone wants to Evil Knievel with a pepper instead of a motorcycle jump that's on them. At least they won't be running into anyone along the way.
I had this year's one chip challenge. It was brutal, but should not have caused a problem in a healthy individual. There is most likely a contributing factor, either some sort of health issue that was undiagnosed, or simply shock. I'm not particularly well-conditioned to spicy food this hurt like hell, but should not have been lethal.
People have made fun of the kid for "being stupid," said the company is at fault, but I think somebody dying to a compound that has not been found to carry any serious risks beyond induced stress is simply a tragedy. He had no way of knowing he would die, because thousands have eaten this product with absolutely no issues across age ranges. He may actually be the only death.
There is one thing I am concerned about, and should affect how it's sold. The container warns that this should only be eaten by adults. Paqui should require age verification to buy it if this is a serious concern. While I feel this is basically a "no-fault" situation, if Paqui doesn't take future precautions to prevent it they are, in a sense, responsible because this has happened at least once. Pulling the chip was a smart move on their lart, and the right thing to do given the circumstances.
There's a 2011 German regulatory paper on capsicum toxicity that recommends warning labels and childproof closures on pepper products containing the equivalent of 100 mg capsaicin/kilogram. To some extent, that's based on a pain-inducing sensory threshold in adults of 5 mg per food serving, but the paper makes note of severe poisonings and deaths in children.
There's a reason that pediatric medicine is its own specialty - children are vulnerable to injury at different toxic thresholds and sometimes through different mechanisms than adults. Kids have higher metabolic rates, higher surface-to-volume ratios, lower body fat percentages (on average), less developed immune systems, greater likelihood of as yet undiscovered illnesses... And they require a different regulatory standard of protection.
It's hard to say exactly how much Carolina Reaper powder was used on the Paqui chip. I've seen a figure of 7,300 mg capsaicin/100 g dry weight for this pepper strain, so even a dusting of powder on a chip could easily have exceeded 100 mg capsaicin in a single portion.
We treat pure chemical extracts of plants differently in health and law. Like caffeine from coffee beans, cocaine from coca leaves, and THC from cannabis, the sale of very highly concentrated capsicum products needs some enforcement for reasonably safe sale, packaging, and labeling.
I'm not saying that everything needs to be regulated to avoid the consequences of maximum human stupidity. I'm a serious pepperhead myself, and goodness knows I don't want to be separated from my beloved Reapers and Scorpions and 7-Pots (which I use, at significant dilution, to make sauces, and repel squirrels from bird feeders, though the little buggers seem to have developed a taste). But maybe some public health messaging, labeling, and child-resistant packaging on the concentrated versions, and no "death challenge" marketing?
This is really unfortunate, just a kid being a kid and doing something dumb with their friends. I don't think a label has ever stopped a teenager from half thinking through something fun with their friends. I don't necessarily see any fault on the manufacturer's side, this is just unfortunate and it may be better for the chip to be taken off market.
I have not heard of a kid drinking bleach or hydrochloric acid on a dare, though.
It would be pretty cool if it was mandatory to give hotness of any food above a threshold in a standardized unit on the packaging and restaurant menu. That way people would know how hot they can handle.
Looking at you, Indian restaurants.
I think you missed the pod tide challenge. And, actually, there was a drink bleach challenge. TikTok is crazy
Oh my.
As the ever iconic comic meme says, “cliffcels be seething at the jumpchads”
Darwinism is alive and thriving in 2023.
Uh, I think you may have missed or forgotten certain TikTok challenges from a few years ago. Tide pods come to mind :)
But giving restaurant food actual scoville units on the menu would be cool imo. Better than the 1-2-3 pepper stuff some do
Dunno about Scoville units on menus - even the same strain of pepper can have variability in capsaicin content by as much as 10x. You're better off understanding heat level based on the cuisine, and assume Indian hot > Thai hot > Chinese hot >> Mexican hot > Mediterranean hot > American hot > European hot.
I don't think you can really compare drinking bleach and eating a chip.
I would guess more kids have died this year from peanut allergies than peppers.
There isn't really a standard unit here though. Scovilles aren't really well-founded science -- it's based on a subjective test by some number of participants, and there's no guarantee it actually reflects any given individual's subjective experience of heat. This is even more impossible to do when cooking a dish (as opposed to just rating hot peppers) because even if you could get a perfect rating for the heat of the peppers and spices you used in a dish, that wouldn't account for how using them together with whatever other ingredients you used affects people's subjective experience of the heat of the dish -- for instance, stuff like coconut milk or other fatty ingredients can reduce the subjective heat of a dish by quite a lot.
Even if there were an accurate way to standardize such things, I'm not confident it would actually make it easier for people to know how hot they could handle -- it would still need to be based on trial-and-error, especially since one's own heat tolerance can vary a lot depending on a number of factors.
Also weird that you call out Indian restaurants, since they're the only ones I've been to that even try to have some sort of rating for spice. It's not particularly standardized but the 1-5 scale most such places give me is better than the vague semantic "spicy" or "very spicy" I've seen at restaurants from other cuisines with spicy food.
Scoville ratings have gotten more objective - the SHU score is now based on 15,000 x ppm capsaicin in the pepper material, prepared as a standard extract for analysis. They had to do that for super-hots, since the former rating system didn't scale past a subjective "ohmigod my head is on fire".
Fair enough on that point, but the fact that it's more objective actually makes it less applicable to measuring the spice of an actual dish rather than a specific pepper lol
This is pretty standard in cuisines that have traditionally spicy food. Every Thai restaurant I've been to has this as well. Mexican-style restaurants that offer salsa and hot sauce bars often annotate the labels with spice level. And chicken wing places that offer an array of sauces do the same.
Unfortunately I moved to a country of little babies who can't handle spicy food (Germany) 5 years ago, so finding something more granular than "spicy" or "very spicy" on the menu isn't common at non-Indian places. "spicy" varies from "has garlic in it" to "actually little spicy". I can't even FIND hot wings here, much to my chagrin.
Ahhh, makes sense. I wonder if this is the case in other countries whose standard cuisine tends to be pretty mild? Lol at the idea that garlic is spicy.
Others have raised good points but I'd like to point out the absolute ridiculousness of the company declaring that this thing is meant for adults and there is a disclaimer.
It's clearly a "challenge" thing and who is more easily susceptible to challenges of not kids/teens with their peer pressure?
I wonder if the shock of something very spicy compared to their dietary history plays a role. I kind of assume that people who regularly eat extremely hot food probably build up a resistance of some kind but I have no evidence to back that up.
I’ve heard from last year’s that the way these are made doesn’t lend them to be comparable to spicy peppers. I’ve heard them described as being closer to having a chemical burn than having a particularly hot pepper.
I’ve actually eaten a few of them, and it’s not dissimilar from eating other ultra hot sauce, eg. The Rapture.
See this part from the article
This much spicy spice is not natural.
Neither are sweet oranges. Or broccoli. Or any of the bajillion apple varieties at the grocery store. In fact, it'd be nigh-impossible to pick out a piece of produce, at the grocery store or from someone's garden, that didn't have a long history of artificial selection for various traits we humans found desirable to cultivate. "Natural" doesn't mean good, and neither is the opposite true.
Oh sure, but I mean there are people eating Carolina Reaper sauce every day (I'm personally a fan of the Garlic Reaper sauce ). I'm wondering if the kind of people who do that sort of thing are making themselves less susceptible to adverse effects, and if it's possible that, for example this kid who died, could work themselves up to being able to safely consume these super hot peppers.
Seconded on the garlic reaper sauce, that stuff is delicious and goes well with a lot of foods!
They're not really significantly different for a non-connoisseur. "Ghost" (bhut jolokia) is 1M SHU on average, Carolina Reaper is 1.6M on average, up to 2.2M. Regular chilies oscillate around 1K. Most people clock out at that, and they will see absolutely no difference between Ghost and Carolina Reaper. It'll just be 10/10 pain.
Habaneros, cultivated before this arms race, are 200K up to 360K and would most likely have the exact same effect on a vulnerable person.
Being natural or not seems irrelevant.