Category Archives: Branches of Chemistry

The Great Debate: Chemical Additives in Food – Are They Helping or Harming You?

Chemical additives in food safety and effectiveness is currently one of the most disputed issues in the field of science. Some argue that these additives are necessary to preserve food and enhance taste. Others are concerned about their potential health risks. This blog aims to explore both sides of the scientific discourse and offer insight into the reasoning behind each perspective.

One perspective of the debate supports the use of chemical additives in food. They argue that these additives are essential for preserving the freshness of food, preventing spoilage, and enhancing its taste and appearance. Additionally, they emphasize that numerous food additives have undergone rigorous safety evaluations and have been authorized by regulatory organizations such as the FDA.

Moreover, some argue that the amount of additives in food is relatively small and does not pose a significant health risk to the general population. They also argue that without these additives, food production would be less efficient and more costly, resulting in higher prices and less availability of food.

Figure 2: Two Cans Of Boiled Green Peas and Fresh Vegetables

On the contrary, there are others who express worry about the safety and possible health hazards of chemical additives in food. They contend that certain additives may lead to adverse effects on human health, including but not limited to allergic reactions, hormone disruption, and an elevated risk of cancer.

Furthermore, some argue that the long-term effects of consuming these additives are not well understood, and that more research is needed to assess their safety. They also argue that the use of chemical additives in food is not necessary, and that natural preservatives and flavourings can be used instead.

In conclusion, the use of chemical additives in food is a controversial issue with valid arguments on both sides. While some argue that these additives are necessary for preserving food and enhancing its taste, others are concerned about their potential health risks. It is important for regulators, food producers, and consumers to carefully consider the evidence and arguments from both sides in order to make informed decisions about the safety and effectiveness of chemical additives in food.

The Killer That Could Save Your Life: Snake Venom

Snakes are a root of fear for many people due to the dangerous venom they produce. Around 5.4 million people are bitten by snakes each year, 2.7 million of which are envenomings. Of these, up to 180 thousand cause death, and three times as many result in amputations or permanent disabilities. However, snake venom may also save your life. Snake venom has been used to treat a variety of conditions since the 1930s, including cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and strokes.

Snake venom contains a variety of compounds, including a variety of powerful enzymatic and non-enzymatic peptides. Enzymes are biological catalysts used to promote the reaction of chemical compounds. Enzymes found in snake venom have a variety of applications, from antiviral and antibacterial properties. Further, several non-enzymatic peptides, such as 3FTxs and disintegrin, found in snake venom have been used as therapeutic agents for HIV, muscular dystrophy, cancer, and a variety of other ailments.

Tertiary structure of 3FTx non-enzymatic protein. Source

3FTxs, or Three-Finger Toxins, are a large group of non-enzymatic peptides found in venom that have been widely studied. Their identifiable structure appears due to the presence of several disulfide bonds in the molecule. The wide variety of these neurotoxins and the breadth of their family allow them to have a wide variety of uses, and their prevalence in venom among several snake species made them very researchable. 3FTxs have been used to treat drug-resistant HIV strains, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy and other debilitating conditions.

However, snake venom comes at a cost, and an expensive one. Snake venom samples can cost anywhere from 250-4000$ per gram. These prices are in great part due to the immense difficulty in extracting snake venom. Snake venom extraction is done through a process called milking, a dangerous and tedious job, during which milkers run the risk of being bitten. Further to maintain the snake’s health, only small quantities of venom can be extracted at a time, with milkings occurring about every 30-60 days. This maintains the high price, making many therapeutics inaccessible to the general public.

Snake milking venom extraction. Source

Not only is venom extraction dangerous, but it also comes at a cost to the animal. Often snakes are kept in plastic bins stacked in rows in facilities, kept for extraction of venom. Groups have argued against the ethics of this, as the snake’s lifetime is significantly decreased by this treatment. Synthetic production of snake venom is an evolving field in recent years but has yet to be a more affordable and energy-efficient alternative to snake venom usage.

The importance of snake venom in the production of therapeutic agents cannot be underestimated, however, the mal-treatment of the animals, even if they frighten us, is an important consideration in the development of these life-saving products, particularly if those products are only accessible to people with enough money to cover the cost.

~Tristan Ruigrok

Coloured Contact Lenses: Do They Bring More Harm than Good?

Are you thinking about wearing coloured contact lenses to change the colour of your eyes? While it may appear to be a simple and risk-free way to enhance your natural eye colour or make a fashion statement, it is critical to consider the chemical composition as well as the potential risks associated with these lenses. Let’s look at the chemistry of coloured contact lenses and weigh the upsides and downsides.

Better Vision different colour contact lenses. Source.

Reasons Against Coloured Contact Lenses:

They Increase the Risk of Eye Infections: Contact lenses are made of hydrophilic polymers, which attract and retain water. This makes them an ideal surface for microorganisms to grow on, increasing the risk of eye infections. If you do not clean and disinfect your coloured contact lenses properly, you may increase your risk.
Common monomers and polymers used in contact lens production. PMMA—poly methyl methacrylate, PVA—poly vinyl alcohol, PEG—poly ethylene glycol, DMA—dimethyl methacrylate, HEMA—hydroxy ethyl methacrylate, NVP—N-vinyl pyrrolidone, EGDMA—ethylene glycol dimethacrylate, PDMS—poly dimethyl siloxane, TRIS—3-[tris(trimethylsiloxy)silyl]propyl methacrylate. Source
Manufacturers Might Not Follow Strict Safety Standards: Coloured contact lenses are frequently regarded as cosmetic devices and are therefore not subject to the same regulations as medical devices. Some manufacturers may fail to adhere to strict safety standards, resulting in poorly made lenses that harm your eyes. It is critical to select a reputable brand and avoid purchasing lenses from untrustworthy sources.
Sharing Coloured Contact Lenses is a Big No-No: Sharing coloured contact lenses or wearing them for an extended period of time can increase the risk of eye infection. This is because the lenses can harbour bacteria, which can cause long-term damage to your eyes. It is critical to carefully follow the instructions and avoid sharing your lenses with anyone.

Reasons in Favour of Coloured Contact Lenses:

Different coloured contact lenses in the same individual. Source.

They Allow Personal Expression: Coloured contact lenses are a fun and versatile way to express yourself and your sense of style. You can switch up your look as often as you like because there are so many different colours and designs to choose from. This is especially appealing to those who do not want to commit to long-term solutions such as cosmetic surgery or tattoos.
They Are Made of Safe Materials: Coloured contact lenses are made of eye-safe materials such as silicone hydrogels or methacrylate-based polymers. These materials are designed to be biocompatible, which means they will not harm or irritate your eyes.
They Can Be Customized to Your Needs: Coloured contact lenses are available in prescription and non-prescription forms, allowing you to tailor them to your specific requirements. This is especially beneficial for people who need vision correction but want to experiment with different eye colours.

Finally, while coloured contact lenses can be a fun and exciting way to experiment with your personal style, it is critical to prioritize your eye health and safety. You can reduce your risk of eye infections and enjoy the benefits of coloured contacts by selecting a reputable brand, following proper cleaning procedures, and avoiding sharing your lenses. Whether you’re looking to enhance your natural eye colour or completely change your look, remember to prioritize your eye health and enjoy your new look with confidence!

~ Vivian Hou

Melatonin: A Sleep Aid That Keeps Doctor’s Up At Night

Melatonin is a common over-the-counter drug in many Canadian homes. Available as a pill, gummy, or vape. Currently, this hormone is a staple of many nighttime routines. However, many medical professionals do not support melatonin’s gain of popularity.

Our brain releases melatonin when it is dark. This hormone naturally signals our circadian rhythm. Melatonin supplements function as a sleep aid.

Chemical structure of melatonin.

Melatonin is an over-the-counter natural health product in Canada. While in many other countries, it is a prescription drug.

With many forms of melatonin commercially available in Canada, use has increased dramatically from 2000-2018. The marketing of this hormone has led to uses against medical advice gaining popularity. Many use melatonin to control sleep schedule abnormalities caused by sleep disorders, anxiety, and restlessness.

Users have even incorporated melatonin into their daily routines. Claiming it is the key component allowing them to maintain a healthy sleep schedule.

However, many doctors do not recommend long-term dosing of melatonin. Doctors strictly recommend melatonin for short-term usage.

Doctors generally only support using melatonin to recover from jet lag and other short-term sleep schedule interruptions.

The use of melatonin to treat the common sleep disorder delayed sleep-wake phase disorder has been controversial. Sleep specialists prefer to treat it with bright light therapy or chronotherapy.

There is also a lack of scientific evidence supporting that melatonin use can improve the sleep quality of people with insomnia.

Insomnia is a common sleep disorder. People with insomnia may turn to melatonin for relief.

There is also evidence that long-term use may lead to your body stopping the natural production of melatonin, leaving you dependent on the hormone.

So, consult your doctor before taking melatonin. For every positive testimonial from someone who freely doses themselves, a medical professional is frowning on that decision.

The end is in sight…or maybe not.

Go into the UBC chemical storeroom, and you will find a range of chemicals. But what you won’t find at UBC, or anywhere else, is the element unquadseptium. And that’s because unquadseptium, with an atomic number of 147, has yet to be proven to exist and, according to some chemists, will never exist.

Since Dimitri Mendeleev developed the periodic table in 1875, chemists have added 55 elements to its rows and periods. While most of the 118 elements we are familiar with today exist naturally, some exist briefly and only after the collision of high-speed particles. These “synthetic” elements include einsteinium (atomic number 99) through organessan (atomic number 118).

Dimitri Mendeleev’s prototype for the periodic table. Source

Creating new elements is an ongoing area of research. The question that divides chemists is whether a limit exists for nuclear mass and, therefore, the number of elements that may exist. Multiple chemists have used Einstein’s theory of relativity to try and determine the limit to the mass of an atom’s nucleus.

The nucleus of an atom exerts a gravitational and magnetic pull on the orbiting electrons. As the mass of the nucleus grows, so does its pull on the electrons, and as modeled by the Bohr equation, orbiting electrons must travel faster to prevent falling inwards. According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, mass increases exponentially with speed. A result of this relationship is that the speed of light presents a universal speed limit for matter.

This universal limit led Richard Feynman and other chemists to propose element 137 as the limit to the periodic table. Feynman argued that beyond element 137, electrons would have to travel faster than the speed of light to remain in orbit and could not exist according to the laws of physics.

Pekka Pyykkö’s proposed 172-element periodic table. Source

However, many chemists argue that the limit for nuclear mass should be much higher. Notably, Pekka Pyykkö from the University of Helsinki published a paper in 2011 that theorized the existence of elements up to atomic number 172. His paper built upon the work of physicists Berndt Muller and Johann Rafelski. The two physicists used the Dirac equation, which considers effects ignored by the Bohr equation, to find the maximum limit for nuclear mass. According to the Dirac equation, orbiting electrons reach the speed of light when the atomic number equals 173 and not 137.

Pushing the limits of the periodic table further still, some chemists and physicists believe that nuclear mass is unlimited. They propose that new quantum behavior of electrons, unknown to present science, allows the orbit of “superheavy” nuclei. Physicist Walter Greiner believes that after element 172, electrons enter a never-ending continuum of negative energy. Greigner believes that the periodic table “will never end!”

In the coming years, chemists and physicists will discover new elements as we develop stronger particle accelerators and detectors with greater sensitivity. However, it remains unknown what the limit to these discoveries will be; only time will tell whether future chemists will see the likes of unquadseptium in their labs.

Is Hair Dyeing Harmful?

Hair coloring (HC) is a beauty practice that changes one’s natural hair colour using chemicals to remove pigments in the hair shaft, melanin, by oxidizing the pigments, and replacing them with other pigments of choice. HC comes in different types, depending on how long a person wants the colour to last by changing the concentration of hydrogen peroxide (HP), ammonia, and paraphenylenediamine (PPD). Ammonia causes the swelling of the hair shaft, opening hair cuticles so HC pigments can penetrate into hair. HP oxidizes melanin in the hair strand, removing its natural colour to create a canvas. Finally, PPD complexes with HP to form a colourful complex, which then binds to our hair to give it a new colour.

Health concerns relating to hair colouring practice.

It is undeniable that HC improves the appearance drastically if you choose the right colour, but the harm of “forcing” hair to change color to health is extremely harmful that not many people are aware of. Several studies reported a possible correlation between certain chemicals in many oxidative-type HC products to a few sub-categories of cancer. Ames et. al. founded that the oxidation reaction between HP and each of the three main chemicals in oxidative-type hair colouring products – PPD, 2,5-diaminotuluene (TDA), and 2,5-diaminoanisole – yield a mutagen Bandrowski’s base. They conducted a facial absorption test on rats and found that this compound is a carcinogen to rats. Some HC users reported experiencing allergic reactions after using an at-home HC product or obtaining HC services from salons. Several hairdressers experienced frequent incidents of hand dermatitis from long-term exposure to HC products. This is because PPD, TDA, and other chemical compounds in many HC products are strong and extreme sensitizing compounds that lead to contact dermatitis (Figure 1) in many people who directly come in contact with the chemicals.

Figure 1: Contact dermatitis occurs when skin comes into contact with a substance that causes our body to elicit one or several allergic reactions. Source: Wikimedia

Why do people still choose to dye their hair?

Despite health concerns surrounding chemical compounds in HC products, HC remains a popular beauty practice these days among all ages, either to change their natural hair colours or to cover up grey hairs. For many people, HC not only improves their appearance and boosts their self-confidence if they choose a colour that matches their complexion but also a way to express their personality. To avoid the harmful effects that come from strong concentrations of HP and other compounds in HC products, experts from the US Food and Drug Administration recommend people to opt for temporary or semi-permanent HC, which contains the same chemical formula in permanent HC products, but at lower concentration. In addition, hairdressers always wear gloves, and some would wear masks to avoid inhaling the fume, while handling HC products. However, HC users and hairdressers should consult dermatologists or health experts if they experience any reactions or health concerns after using HC products to avoid the risk of having cancer.

Acrylic Nails: Are They Worth the Damage?

Among young adult and teen women, acrylic nails have become a popular trend. Despite the range of nail designs possible through acrylic nails, this beauty routine is hotly debated due to exposure to toxic chemicals.

What are acrylic nails?

Long and Complex nail designs can be achieved using acrylic nails (credit: Bvasilev1, Wikipedia Commons)

Acrylic nails are a form of nail extensions that use a liquid and powder formula to create a sturdy fake nail. The powder contains poly(methyl methacrylate), also known as acrylic glass. Acrylic glass is a type of synthetic plastic polymer. This polymer gets activated when in contact with the liquid monomer used in acrylic nail formation. This liquid contains ethyl methacrylate (EMA) and an inhibitor. The inhibitor prevents immediate polymerization between the liquid and powder. The polymer powder is dipped into the monomer to create a malleable bead that is shaped to fit the client’s nail. Within minutes of application, the mixture cures, forming a solid layer.

The debate against acrylic nails

Many health experts argue against the use of acrylic nails due to the harsh chemicals used in their creation. EMA is particularly concerning. Particles of this highly reactive monomer are likely to remain unpolymerized after the nail has cured. This can cause redness, swelling, and pain in the customer’s nail bed. The reactivity and negative effects of monomers have been discussed at length. Prior to EMA, methyl methacrylate (MMA) liquid monomers were used. MMA has since been banned by the Food and Drug Administration due to severe damage to nails and allergic reactions.

Acrylic nails often use chemicals such as toluene, phthalates, methacrylic acid, and formaldehyde. These chemicals have been proven to cause asthma, allergic reactions, short-term memory loss, and irritate eyes, throat, and lungs.

The effects of these chemicals on clients’ nails and overall health have made acrylic nails a debated service. This argument also extends to nail technicians who are surrounded by these chemicals every day.

Acrylic nails can cause damage to the natural nail when not applied or removed by a professional (credit: Pickpik)

The pros of acrylic nails

Despite some backlash regarding the chemicals used in acrylic nails, many people continue to advocate for this practice due to its strength, cost, and appearance.

The hard layer formed by the polymer and monomer serves as protective over the nails. When applied by professionals, acrylic nails can be used to protect natural nails. This is especially helpful for customers with brittle or weak nails.

Acrylic nails also last for up to 21 days, decreasing the number of times customers must return to the nail salon. In the long run, acrylic nails can be a cost-effective way for customers to continue looking their best.

Lastly, acrylic nails provide unmatched customizations for their clients. Customers can choose from a range of lengths, shapes, colours, and designs.

As showcasing creativity via nail designs becomes more popular, customers stay aware of the potential health concerns that surround their beauty regimen.

-Carissa Chua

The Controversy Behind Neem Oil

Since 2012, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) of Health Canada has banned neem oil for its use as a pesticide, despite many benefits it brings in the agricultural field. Nonetheless, neem oil has been been the subject of intensive synthetic research for its impressive biological activity.

Neem oil is commonly known as a pesticide. (source)

What is neem oil?

Neem oil, or margosa oil, is an extracted vegetable oil from the neem tree’s seeds. The seeds are the richest source containing the naturally occurring pesticide called Azadirachtin.

Structure of Azadirachtin (source)

Benefits of neem oil

Azadirachtin is found to be an effective systemic pesticide and to have growth-disrupting effects against more than 200 insect species.

In an urban settings, neem oil is a great solution to a pest infestation. A bottle of neem oil will come in handy when your garden is infested by either mealybugs, thrips, aphids, fungus gnats, spidermites and more. Neem oil effectively eliminates every stage of the pest’s lifecycle, including eggs, larvae, pupas, and adults.

Mealybugs infestation (source)

Ladybugs, earthworms, and other beneficial insects are generally not affected by neem oil.

One other known benefit of neem oil is boosting the process of wound-healing and skin regeneration. Neem oil is also found to help calm eczema and psoriasis. These health benefits are due to neem oil’s components of fatty acids, limonoid, and vitamin E.

Why banned neem oil?

Despite the proven advantages neem oil has, Health Canada said neem oil has not been certified and registered as a pest control product. The government hasn’t had sufficient evaluation to determine whether neem oil is safe to be used as a pesticide, nor the environmental risk it brings.

There are several case reports of neem oil poisoning in children and elderly caused by neem oil ingestion. These cases report symptoms of nausea, vomiting, seizures, kidney failure, restriction in blood supply to the brain. The long term effect of neem oil is also not clear.

Should cigarettes be abolished in Canada?

Smoking tobacco has been prevalent in Canadian communities for a very long time. Indigenous groups in Canada have been known to use tobacco to smoke for thousands of years. Canadians have been smoking cigarettes since the early 19th century. As time has advanced so have our smoking habits. In 2020 the University of Waterloo conducted a smoking prevalence survey where they concluded that 3.2 million Canadians (approximately 10.2% of the entire Canadian population) actively smoke cigarettes. The current trend in cigarette usage has seen a decrease in cigarette usage over the past 20 years. However, despite the decrease, some people feel that cigarettes should be banned altogether.

Common Cigarette

Tobacco use continues to be the leading cause of preventable illness and death in Canada. Over 48,000 Canadians die from tobacco use every year. Smoking legislation has already come a long way since the 19th century. Smokers would argue abolitions is an extremely drastic change however it is important to remember that it was only just over ten years ago that smoking with children in the car was legal. If a smoker was told that they weren’t allowed to smoke in a bar in the early 21st century they most likely would have gone ballistic believing that it is a complete infringement on their rights. Cigarettes are also a major cause of fires in Canada. From 2012-2015 11% of all outdoor fires were deemed to be caused by cigarettes that were improperly disposed of.

Wildfire prevention icon “Smokey the Bear”

In Canada, the cigarette and tobacco economy is one that puts roofs over people’s houses and food in their children’s mouths. There are over 2,300 Canadians working in the cigarette and tobacco manufacturing sector as of 2023. Economics is not the only reason abolition would be the wrong approach. Considering the health of current smokers is extremely important. Out of the 3.2 million Canadians that actively smoke cigarettes 2.6 million of them are daily smokers. If these people can no longer smoke their cigarettes they can experience serious withdrawal symptoms. Feelings of high anxiety, depression, and lack of sleep can severely impact a person’s mental health. Many people believe that being able to buy and consume cigarettes is their human-born right. A right that should not be infringed upon by the government. It does not take a smoker to not want to have freedoms of choice to be limited by the government.

Environmental Hazard to Reusable Material: Converting Plastics and CO2 into Fuel

Plastic waste management has become a serious issue over the last few decades. In 2019, the total amount of plastic produced since 1950 totaled just over 9.5 billion tons, and plastic production hasn’t slowed down, as 400 million tons were added to that in 2020.

The chemical bonds that make up plastics are hard to break and do not degrade in the environment quickly. This makes plastic waste challenging to deal with, leading to a large amount of plastic being discarded or incinerated.

While people have been recycling since the late 1980s, only about 6% of annual waste is recycled, and only a further 20% of that stays recycled. Current recycling methods consist of mechanical recycling, a process by which the plastic is ground or melted down into a new product, or chemical recycling, a process by which chemical additives break down the plastic into more manageable pieces to be used as raw material. However, both methods are not environmentally friendly or cheap, leading to a high volume of plastics that are not recycled (see below).

The final fate of plastics over 65 years. only 1.72% of plastics remain recycled.

Finding new ways to deal with plastic waste is a heavy focus for environmental scientists, leading to catalysis, electrochemistry, and photochemistry developments. One such method, developed by Dr. Resier and his team at the University of Cambridge, has found a way to deal with this waste in an environmentally clean way. Using a perovskite (PVK) based photocathode and a copper-palladium alloy anode in combination with a CO2 reduction catalyst, they transformed PET plastics and CO2 into a variety of useable fuels and by-products, such as carbon monoxide, hydrogen gas, and glycolic acid.

Electrochemical pathway of CO2 reduction into CO and byproducts.

The photoelectrochemical system works upon sunlight exposure under zero applied voltage and generates products 10-100 times faster than other catalytic methods. Further, the catalyst system is not sensitive to the introduction of bio-organic molecules; in fact, the presence of small amounts of food products could increase the activity of the system.

However, this process is anything but cheap. The copper-palladium alloy anode is not cheap to fabricate, and the materials required are rare, palladium being over 15 times rarer than platinum. This increases startup costs, which is not favorable to most companies who could instead dump the waste.

While advancements in this technology are still needed, there is a positive outlook for the future of plastics and environmental contaminants. We may yet be able to save our fragile, yet vital planet from our own advancement.

Tristan Ruigrok