Suggestions are requested at the top of the page for sorting out this article. Please have a fresh read through the article and identify any parts of it which require the following:
a re-write to meet wikipedia standards (clarity, grammar)
a reference to justify the claims
removal due to unsuitability for inclusion in the article (are a how-to, or an opinion)
general reformatting (use of pictures in text, bullet points and section headings)
additional information that is currently lacking
As soon as there is any general agreement on any area, I suggest that edits are made.
Here's my suggestions:
Domestic uses: generally this area is used for a wide range of usage information, some of which are not "domestic" by standard definition. Some of the uses appear to take the form of a "how-to" and should be posted somewhere else. The entire section should be re-organised and if necessary, a new section made to hold any uses that are neither domestic, industrial, therapeutic or propellant.
References are required for many of the stated "uses" and the chemical properties
Hazards section should be based on published MSDS's. Additional articles can then be used to extend the basic information.
"High Test Peroxide" seems to have been written as an article on its own and doesn't seem to fit properly within the rest of the article. It could form part of a new section with a name like "commercially available grades" which would include domestic and 35-50% peroxide. The section has no references, only links to companies. Wikiwayman (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone have a cite for the density listed in the infobox (1.463 g/cm3)? Because the places I found all say 1.44. Ariel. (talk) 17:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I added the reduced form to the table since the EMF depends on this, I removed hydroxyl since I can't find a reaction for hydroxyl that produces 2.8V. The figures in the table have no source, nor does any other part of the section.Sf5xeplus (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The very first line "Hydrogen peroxide is an oxidizer" is somewhat misleading as it may also act as a reducing agent, dependent on solution conditions (see for example section 4.2). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikaellund (talk • contribs) 19:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
3% H2O2 is effective in continuing wound treatment.
The main article assumes that ONLY regular germs infect wounds, which is also the apparent AMA position. This is false. All wounds get an airborne dose of spores of various kinds, which take days to "get going" and therefore escape cursory notice. It is known that 3% Peroxide standard Pharmacy supply, is effective if initially and repeatedly used on virtually all spore/yeast/fungus infections, which otherwise typically emerge after a week of a wound nearly healing, and then stopping or nearly stopping the healing process as yeasts etc. take hold. By that time, the spore-based attack has established tendrils into surrounding flesh, and by then escapes to a degree most topically applied remedies. However, if a regimen of fungicide treatment accompanies antibacterial treatment from the very beginning, rapid and complete healing is usually seen in younger patients. Older patients will greatly benefit from 1% Hydrocortisone sparingly applied along with the antibacterial and antifungal daily treatment. These mixtures are unstable and cannot be prepared very long in advance, because of short shelf life, which is primarily why they are not seen on Pharmacy shelves, nor even acknowledged as cash flow equals reality in modern culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.37.112.176 (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And your evidence for all this is what studies? I can't seem to find them.
Hydrogen peroxide has not been well enough studied in wound care to really know how to use it. It is widely used in dermatology and dentistry at 3%, because it very rapidly controls capillary bleeding of the type that is seen in wound debridement and dentistry. [1] However, 3% is enough to kill fibroblasts and is enough to cause scarring in the mouse fetus that otherwise heals without scars. That cite is given in the article. A study in rabbits showed that most common antiseptics at standard concentrations are cytotoxic including hydrogen peroxide, but peroxide at 3% did not interfere with wound healing. Probably this is about the concentration where good and bad balance. Probably (as with hypochlorite) there is a concentration of peroxide which kills bacteria but doesn't hurt open wounds. We don't know what it is. [2]. A controlled study of a 1% hydrogen peroxide creme in horse leg wounds found it better than nothing or petrolatum (which were the same) but the bacteria involved were the usual suspects of Staph and Strep. [3]. This is the kind of thing there SHOULD be good human studies on, but aren't due to lack of pharma company support, and the usual lack of NIH enthusiasm for studies of non-brand/generic drugs and non-prescription treatments, which should be a chief use of public research money (but isn't). Idiocy! SBHarris22:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"In 2009, another catalyst development was announced by workers at Cardiff University.[14] This development also relates to the direct synthesis, but, in this case, using gold–palladium nanoparticles. Under normal circumstances, the direct synthesis must be carried out in an acid medium to prevent immediate decomposition of the hydrogen peroxide once it is formed. Whereas hydrogen peroxide tends to decompose on its own (which is why, even after production, it is often necessary to add stabilisers to the commercial product when it is to be transported or stored for long periods), the nature of the catalyst can cause this decomposition to accelerate rapidly. It is claimed that the use of this gold-palladium catalyst reduces this decomposition and, as a consequence, little to no acid is required. The process is in a very early stage of development and currently results in very low concentrations of hydrogen peroxide being formed (less than about 1–2 wt%). Nonetheless, it is envisaged by the inventors that the process will lead to an inexpensive, efficient, and environmentally friendly process.[13][14][15][16]"
TerpeneOtto (talk) 08:24, 8 December 2016 (UTC) I also think this section should be removed. Initial research of hydrogen peroxide began with barium peroxide. Other routes of hydrogen peroxide production are galvanic cell production and the anthraquinone process. Today, research in the hydrogen peroxide industry focuses on enzyme production of hydrogen peroxide and direct combination of H2 and O2. So far no research articles have found a worthwhile direct combination catalyst for hydrogen and oxygen (yield 3% max). If you look at the anthraquinone the overall chemical reaction is H2 + O2 --> H2O2. One enzyme responsible for the creation of hydrogen peroxide is used today in diabetes test strips. glucose is oxidized to gluconate and hydrogen peroxide is created. The hydrogen peroxide is titratated in the blood to determine blood glucose levels. This wiki page should state that "hydrogen peroxide is oxidized water" it can really help chemists understand hydrogen peroxide. *As a side note, hydrogen peroxide is the energy source in glow sticks. The 30% hydrogen peroxide solution reacts with the organic dye inside the glow stick and produces light as product of the reaction.[reply]
The image provided in the 'Decomposition' section, with the caption "Manganese dioxide decomposing a very dilute solution of hydrogen peroxide", is blurry and has a low-contrast background. Does anyone have a higher-quality image? Perhaps none is needed. Please comment or substitute/delete. Kmva (talk) 23:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Manganese dioxide decomposing a very dilute solution of hydrogen peroxideI'm here more than eight months later to make the same complaint. The image is completely incomprehensible. I don't recognize any part of it as something I've ever seen before anywhere. It looks like an abstract painting. I'm copying it here so maybe someone will be inspired to come up with a better image or a better description, something that would make the image comprehensible to someone who is not an expert in the field.
The full description on the image page – "The catalytic decomposition of a very dilute solution of hydrogen peroxide by manganese dioxide can be seen by a thin stream of oxygen bubbles rising from the manganese dioxide chunk" – sounds like it would be helpful until you try to find the thin stream of oxygen bubbles that evidently is the key to understanding the image and can't even find that. A one-piece wooden clothespinI don't even know where look, since I have no idea what part of the abstract composition is a manganese dioxide chunk. What does manganese dioxide look like? Beats me. All I see is something that looks sort of like an old non-hinged wooden clothespin coming down from the upper left corner to the lower center of the image, but that could just as well be a cartoon dragon or some sort of Freudian or Jungian dream symbol.
It's very frustrating, but it's more than frustrating: it's an obstacle to gaining a better understanding of this subject by a layman, whom Wikipedia is supposed to be for. A chemist might instantly recognize and appreciate what the image shows, but an ignorant layman like me and most other Wikipedia readers is only distracted and discouraged by its complete incomprehensibility.--Jim10701 (talk) 19:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was convinced and took it out. I've seen this reaction many times and it's incomprehensible. The black crap is MnO2 but you can't even see oxygen bubbles.SBHarris14:26, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Previously, standard enthalpy of formation has been -4.007 kJ/g. As I used this page for a quick reference, I found strange numbers (eg for temperature of decomposition products of high-test peroxide) resulting from this value. CRC Handbook for Chemistry and Physics 88ed (page 5-13) gives value: -187.8 kJ/mol, which equals -5.521 kJ/g. Have corrected this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.175.8.183 (talk) 13:52, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that Hydrogen Peroxide is not useful in wound care is questionable
Both citations they have are from seconday sources, the New York times and CNN. Only the NYT gives an indirect reference to an actual study that they are citing, but no link to the actual study or a way to accurately find it. In fact going to THE JOURNAL OF FAMILY PRACTICE and searching on peroxide turns up at least one study that suggests that it may indeed have some effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corwynofamber (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here in Vancouver, B.C., St. John's Ambulance service stopped adding hydrogen peroxide to their first aid kits in favor of alcohol because (as I was told) hydrogen peroxide kills newly formed cells as well as pathogens, inhibiting healing. I did not read if the issue in question is the exact one as I am mentioning, but in case it is, I thought I just should mention some info that might be relevant.23.16.152.103 (talk) 23:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)BeeCier[reply]
There seems to be a few studies that the NYT and CNN are referencing that do support the claim made in the article. However the previous wording was slightly misleading suggesting it wasn't an antiseptic. I changed the wording slightly to make this more clear. Shadowjams (talk) 01:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hydrogen peroxide has not been well enough studied in wound care to really know how to use it. It is widely used in dermatology and dentistry at 3%, because it very rapidly controls capillary bleeding of the type that is seen in wound debridement and dentistry. [4] However, 3% is enough to kill fibroblasts and is enough to cause scarring in the mouse fetus that otherwise heals without scars. That cite is given in the article. A study in rabbits showed that most common antiseptics at standard concentrations are cytotoxic including hydrogen peroxide, but peroxide at 3% did not interfere with wound healing. Probably this is about the concentration where good and bad balance. Probably (as with hypochlorite) there is a concentration of peroxide which kills bacteria but doesn't hurt open wounds. We don't know what it is. [5]. A controlled study of a 1% hydrogen peroxide creme in horse leg wounds found it better than nothing or petrolatum (which were the same) but the bacteria involved were the usual suspects of Staph and Strep. [6]. This is the kind of thing there SHOULD be good human studies on, but aren't due to lack of pharma company support, and the usual lack of NIH enthusiasm for studies of non-brand/generic drugs and non-prescription treatments, which should be a chief use of public research money (but isn't). Idiocy! SBHarris14:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is useful. It kills topical foreign agents, and doesn't cause any visible damage to the skin or any kind of drying or pain even if applied twice daily topically indefinitely in the concentrations that are sold on store shelves (a bottle I have here says 3%.) Were it not useful for treating infections and cleaning wounds there wouldn't be so much of it produced and sold. It wouldn't have any reason for existing! Whereas alcohol dries the skin and causes near immediate redness and bleeding. It cannot be used repeatedly, that is why peroxide is used. It can be applied with bare hands. I've never had problems handling peroxide and my hands are very prone to drying and cracking in the winter. I got here from [7] which is another page on Wikipedia where this kind of information doesn't likely belong. The reading on that page suggests that peroxide doesn't even harm microbes. If you have a flesh eating infection that is enough to make you climb the walls, the minor scarring that peroxide might cause under extreme conditions isn't going to change your mind about the immediate relief it will bring. Furthermore on the "Misconceptions list" the content suggests that this is an old misconception rather than something that is likely just based on a "scientific study" very recently, which have a track record of contradicting one another almost on a biannual basis; almost as if different commercial industries are jockeying for position--184.63.132.236 (talk) 00:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Useful in restricted use for wound debridement, but NOT without risk in large volumes per area of exposed tissue
Further, the mechanical debris removal achieved by the fizzing of hydrogen peroxide in contact with blood and tissue fluid, where it is split up into oxygen and water by enzymes (catalases), can be useful in the practice of cleaning wounds (wound toilet). This is not without hazard, and many articles now point to this; the earliest I found is this one, [1] because released oxygen can be absorbed over large tissue areas, such as might be found in a large internal abscess or fistula, which can lead to formation of dangerous oxygen emboli (gas embolism) in deeper blood vessels and structures, but used judiciously, peroxide can be of practical usefulness for cleaning external wounds. Trevor H. (UK) 12:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevor H. (talk • contribs)
References
^Shaw A, Cooperman A, Fusco J. Gas embolism produced by hydrogen peroxide. N Engl J Med 1967; 277: 238–41.
What Is Used To Test The Concentration Of Hydrogen Peroxide In A Solution?
The enthalpy of reaction reported in the Decomposition section is inconsistent with the standard enthalpy of reaction calculated from the enthalpies of formation of H2O2 and water. Am I missing something, or was this value calculated incorrectly? I'd like to see a source for the value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.51.21 (talk) 18:01, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Other bleaching applications are becoming more important as hydrogen peroxide is seen as an environmentally benign alternative to chlorine-based bleaches.[48] However scientific studies have found hydrogen peroxide to be ineffective in certain cases, and generally instruct hospitals, medical institutions, and other locations where public health is monitored, to use chlorine-based bleaches for disinfection. [49]
The "reference" [48] reads: "This view is usually advocated by the environmental movement and found on blogs and websites affiliated with this movement, for example a comparison of the two on the 'Green Living Tips' blog": an editors observation about the environmental movement together with a link to a blog isn't considered a reliable source. References are supposed to provide sources for claims made in an article, not add more unsourced claims to the page.
Bleaching means whitening, decreasing the color and increasing the brightness of the treated material. As a verb it doesn't mean disinfecting. And cleaning hospital rooms is not an industrial application. You can't have a section on industrial applications that starts with "other bleaching applications" and only mention one application, one that's not industrial and doesn't involve bleaching.
Toothpaste:
"Hydrogen peroxide mixed with baking soda and salt is used as a toothpaste, but its use was shown to be no more effective than toothpaste."
This was part of an oral hygiene program known as the Keyes Technique which was was widely promoted (by dentists) in the United States in the late 1970s and early '80s. The study investigating the effectiveness also found that those using the baking soda regimen were three times as likely to stop following their oral hygiene program because it was inconvenient. "is used" may be a bit optimistic...
Acne treatment:
Hydrogen peroxide and benzoyl peroxide are sometimes used to treat acne.[56] This too has been challenged by the medical establishment, after research showed that hydrogen peroxide even at minute quantities is harmful to the healing process.[2][4] A fundamental difference from benzoyl peroxide is that hydrogen peroxide is not lipid soluble. Benzoyl peroxide selectively concentrates in the follicles and sebaceous glands because of its lipophilic properties, but hydrogen peroxide is much less soluble in lipids and is a much smaller molecule. This allows it to penetrate at any point in the skin and enter damaged cells relatively easily, leading to the aforementioned harm to the healing process.
Reference [56] conclusions were: "HPS has shown to be as effective as BP in reducing both inflammatory and noninflammatory AV lesions in patients with mild-to-moderate disease. In comparison with BP 4% gel, HPS cream shows a better local tolerability profile."
Reference [2] doesn't mention acne at all, it reports the effect of topical application of H2O2 in 10mM and 166 mM concentrations on wound healing. "H2O2 was found to enhance angiogenesis and wound closure at 10 mM but retarded wound closure at 166 mM". Seems to me that of the two concentrations, the one that would fit the description "minute quantities" best is the 10 mM, not the 166 mM. The first words of the paper also contradict the claim that minute quantities are harmful to the healing process: "It has been established that low concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) are produced in wounds and is required for optimal healing."
Reference [4] is about a fraudulent scheme in which 35% H2O2 is sold, to be diluted and used in “Hyper-oxygenation Therapy” for AIDS, cancers and more than 60 other conditions, among them acne. That has no relation to the HP gel used for acne, neither does it say anything about the usefulness of HP for acne treatment. Some "alternative" healers claim vitamin C can cure anything from cancer to scurvy. They're right about the scurvy...
The whole benzoyl peroxide vs hydrogen peroxide bit is unsourced and possibly WP:Original research.
Looking at the history of this article after my edit, you can see how all references to the dangers and fraudulent claims about H2O2 (which I was fascinated with as a kid), have all been slowly played down and finally removed. Sometimes with false claims in the edit history, such as: 'missing reference' (where a reference clearly exists), or 'not referred to in reference' where again the subject clearly is.
I hope some other responsible editors can help bring the article back to its correct form, clearly showing the false claims - in medical and pseudo medical usage (including false claims about toothpaste, acne, and of course lethal cancer treatment), its dangers during manufacturing, and its use as an explosive.
If you have identified that parts of the article are incomplete or misleading, you are one step ahead of any editor who might make the necessary corrections. If you are not confident enough to make the corrections yourself, the best option would be to identify a suitable editor and contact them on their talk page and work collaboratively, perhaps with you identifying issues, and the other editor checking and making any necessary changes. You might find one by looking at the article history, or at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals. And before you ask, I do not have the time to help with what sounds like quite a few issues. Wikiwayman (talk) 14:09, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's NFPA 704 health risk level is listed as 3, "brief exposure causes serious injury." That of Chlorine Bleach(Sodium Hypochlorite) is only 2, by comparison. No sources appear to be cited for this at a cursory examination, and even if the wisdom of using it as an antiseptic is being called into question, this still seams very questionable given that, even though the practice may actually slow healing and cause scarring and it may not be a good idea, people routinely pour it into wounds without life-threatening side effects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.198.129.138 (talk) 05:46, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unless anyone objects, I intend to reorganise this article. Currently is has 55 sections, 9 of which contain only 1 line of text. I think that's a rather excessive level of sub-division.Project Osprey (talk) 21:16, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it. I removed a large section on the use of H2O2 for water treatment. All of these statements, which seemed overly glowing, were supported by documents associated with a company h2o2.com. If you or others think that my edit was too harsh or such, feel free to revert. This article is collecting a lot of mom-and-pop uses, it is always difficult to figure out the notability of these everyday functions, so my approach is usually to collect them into a section called "Niche uses" or "domestic uses". --Smokefoot (talk) 00:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting there. After reading the whole article I decided that it needed improvements throughout. I think I've gotten as far as its redox reactions. I'll reinvestigate the water treatment possibilities when I get down that far. Project Osprey (talk) 08:14, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article states that it can be used as a basic disinfectant, but says nothing about concentrations or time of exposure needed. Chlorine bleach is not considered a "magic disinfectant" that kills everything at any dilution on any surface for any brief exposure, and I assume hydrogen peroxide is the same! Can basic examples of a disinfecting procedure at least be listed? Such as: a 3 wt% solution takes __ minutes, a 6 wt% solution takes __ minutes, and a 30 wt% solution takes __ minutes. 2601:A:5780:2EA:E57B:731D:76CF:9AE7 (talk) 15:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"On 15 August 2010 a spill of about 30 US gallons (110 L) of cleaning fluid occurred on the 54th floor of 1515 Broadway, in Times Square, New York City."
"Historically, hydrogen peroxide was used for disinfecting wounds, partly because of its low cost and prompt availability compared to other antiseptics."
Guess how much money rural developing-country people who barely survive have available to use on disinfectants. Guess how available they are in their villages. Yeah, hydrogen peroxide is still a good solution and actually in use in wound care. Kumiponi (talk) 00:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As the western editor who wrote that line I have to be honest and say I have no idea what those people are using. I've spend a good 30 min searching the literature and I've found nothing linking hydrogen peroxide to current day disinfaction in developing-countries. If you have any pointers I'd be greatful to see them. --Project Osprey (talk) 10:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whether the concentrations or forms it's used in work or not, it's still widely used. There are probably no studies of how widespread the use is. (Who would finance such a thing?) One benefit is cleaning the wound of debris, instead of using possibly dirty water or some traditional folk medication. Kumiponi (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There should be a section added that addresses the use in residential water treatment systems for Iron removal, disinfecting, and such. - KitchM (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Percentage solution and Parts-per notation should have the relevant information without the need to add to this article. There's nothing special about hydrogen peroxide with respect to percentage solutions or ppm. Also bear in mind both can be quoted as w/w, w/v and v/v so a conversion table could easily be misunderstood. Wikiwayman (talk) 21:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
TerpeneOtto (talk) 04:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC) The quality of the introduction paragraphs is poor and confusing. I edited those paragraphs a few weeks ago and they were perfect. An introduction paragraph is not the place to talk about topics that cause confusion to the reader. My introduction paragraph stated that Hydrogen peroxide is water in a higher oxidation. I'm going to edit them again. Please leave a post here If you have relevent information that truly belongs in an opening paragraph.[reply]
"Perfect" is obviously your opinion...of your own work. User:Smokefoot already disputed part of it, and rather than respond you merely re-did your own wording that he feels is poor. I agree with him that your "water in a higher oxidation state" makes little sense and does not serve as a good lay introduction to the paragraph about decomposition. Instead, the previous wording, noting that it seems like water but actually isn't that much like it, and that the difference is an extra oxygen, helps lay readers realize that this seemingly small change is actually very important. Please undo that aspect of your changes so you don't accidentally wind up getting into WP:EW trouble. DMacks (talk) 05:59, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A recurring problem which this article is people trying to draw analogies with water. That's entirely understandable, as it's often described in that way in schools etc, but it is flatly wrong. There are no similarities; it's reactive, unstable, and in the pure form terrifyingly dangerous. Hence the need to state so explicitly in the lead. I would suggest that discussion of oxidation states (which would apply to the individual atoms, not the molecule) would make more sense in the section on Redox chemistry. --Project Osprey (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
With respect to physical properties: Composition, presence of two OH bonds, H-bonding, b.p. are areas of significant similarity between water and peroxide. Yes, one is an oxidant and one is not, etc. Just saying... I am not a big fan of oxidation states because the concept takes so much explaining that one gets lost. But maybe that's just me. Maybe emphasize that the O-O bond is always a source of high reactivity in toward organics and biomass. --Smokefoot (talk) 13:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
_____
I apologize for using the word perfect to describe my own own work. I wrote a "classic" introductory paragraph that described hydrogen peroxides properties without inputing irrelevant details. I have a Phd. in physical chemistry and hydrogen peroxide is water in a higher oxidation state. Another way of phrasing this statement would be, "water can be oxidized to hydrogen peroxide". If this concept is confusing to you please research barium peroxide. Barium peroxide is an inorganic peroxide that oxidizes water to hydrogen peroxide. If you are interested in books (pdf is online) - Descriptive Inorganic Chemistry by Canham and Overton has published the oxidation water to hydrogen peroxide and the reduction potential in the back of their book. Please reference the book or website below that describes hydrogen peroxide as "water but with one more oxygen atom" or I am going to rewrite the second introductory paragraph again on 1/18/2017.
I am still critical of the second introductory paragraph because it is poorly written in terms of english and chemistry. This page would be better off without the second paragraph. Instead of talking about safety associated with hydrogen peroxide we should talk about its instability. Safety does not provide the reader with relevant information since the average person can not get 100% hydrogen peroxide. The introductory paragraph skips the details describing what leads to the instability of the peroxide bond. My short basic recommendation of a secondary paragraph is:
"Hydrogen peroxide is unstable and will slowly decompose in the presence of base or a catalyst. Numerous catalysts lead to the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide. Hydrogen peroxide is typically stored with a stabilizer in a weakly acidic solution because of its instability. Hydrogen peroxide is found in biological systems including the human body. Enzymes that use or decompose hydrogen peroxide are classified as peroxidases." TerpeneOtto (talk) 03:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for getting in touch. The issue seems to be in the process of being resolved - but in response to your comments both here and at my talk page: You can certainly oxidise water to get hydrogen peroxide, however oxidation state is a discreet concept in chemistry which applies only to atoms. As such the statement "Hydrogen peroxide is water in a higher oxidation state" isn't a very good description. I understand what you're trying to say but an accurate description would be much longer.
The sentence attempting to debunk that "hydrogen peroxide is water with one more oxygen" is a response to lots of bad medical advice that can be found on the internet. Earlier versions of this page were frequently altered to advertise the alternative medical practice of drinking or injecting hydrogen peroxide and its apparent similarity to water was often part of the argument. It was never an ideal statement for a page intro but at the time it seemed necessary.--Project Osprey (talk) 11:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Hydrogen peroxide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have used contact lenses for years and use a disinfecting cleaner which is hydrogen peroxide. This has to be a main use, but I did not see it mentioned184.66.140.196 (talk) 00:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 3 external links on Hydrogen peroxide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
It is a common misconception that hydrogen peroxide is a disinfectant or antiseptic for treating wounds.[1][2] While it is an effective cleaning agent, hydrogen peroxide is not an effective agent for reducing bacterial infection of wounds. Furthermore, hydrogen peroxide applied to wounds can impede healing and lead to scarring because it destroys newly formed skincells.[3]
^Carroll, Aaron E.; Rachel C. Vreeman (July 12, 2011). "Medical myths don't die easily". CNN. Archived from the original on 2014-01-16. Retrieved July 13, 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
This section makes the claim that eau oxygénée now refers to water containing dissolved oxygen. However, even today, in French eau oxygénée unambiguously refers to hydrogen peroxide or an aqueous solution thereof, in any conceivable situation. Water almost always contains dissolved oxygen on Earth anyways. I tagged it as incorrect. Pylade (talk) 22:35, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
