Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22a36d8d959a151

Jump to content

Talk:Agent Pink

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 15 years ago by PlattEngr in topic Untitled

Untitled

[edit]

This article appears to be just plain wrong. Dioxin is not a herbicide, so I really doubt that Agent Pink was "100% dioxin".

Maury

It is wrong, re-written. Maury 21:38, 17 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Yes there are numerous things wrong with this page. Just to dispute one of them: Most people believe instantly that just because they have heard of something less (than others of similar relation), they think it is more potent or more substantial than the more common types. But this doesnt seem to be the case here. Just using other information on Wikipedia, one can find that 2,4-D was mixed with 2,4,5-T in a 50 to 50 ratio in the making of agent orange. While TCDD is found more in 2,4,5-T (the only part of Agent Pink) and is thought, but not actually known to be more poisonous to humans, the DCDD found in 2,4-D (Used in 50 to 50 ratio in Agent Orange) is EQIPOTENT (though that statement is often overlooked)... it has the same potency of TCDD making it just as dangerous.

Therefore, just because 2,4,5-T is the sole component in Agent Pink does not mean that Agent Pink is many times greater than Agent Orange. One could even conclude (though this may be a generalization) that Agent Pink was just as dangerous (in terms of dioxin toxicity levels) as Agent Orange and not of any greater danger to humans.

PlattEngr (talk) 06:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply