Toxin vs toxic vs toxicant

[Michael Gochfeld]

Yes, "toxicant" is a legitimate alternative to "toxic substance", but 
has always seemed awkward, as if it should mean something else. I don't 
use it, but there are also objections to using "toxic" as a noun.

My freshman English teacher was death on using adjectives as nouns. I 
got downgraded for using constructs like "kitchen door" and "traffic 
jam"  insead of "door of kitchen" and "jam of traffic" (really!). 

His overbearing rigidity on this and other grammatical topics was 
reflected by his committing suicide halfway through our first semester. 
But the legacy lingers on. Therefore, I use the constructs "toxic 
chemicals" or "toxic substances" as the umbrella term which would 
include "toxins" as well as a large variety of naturally occurring 
non-biologic agents (such as heavy metals) and synthetics (such as 
PCBs).  

For lep purposes, the word "toxin" is suitable for referring to the 
noxious chemicals in caterpillars which discourage predators, while 
"toxic substance" would refer to pesticides used to kill the 
caterpillars. There are toxic substances which specifically affect the 
immune system (immunotoxic chemicals), but being allergenic does not 
usually result in the designation "toxic" (which is where this thread 
began).  Allergens can be toxic, but not all allergens (e.g. normal 
pollens) are toxic. 

On the other hand, having just survived the worst allergy season on 
record (with pollen counts 5x higher than some annual maxima), and 
having felt extremely ill, it's easy to imagine why allergens seem toxic 
to those of us who respond badly to them. Anaphylaxis is the extreme of 
allergic reaction and is often fatal (sounds pretty toxic). 

M. Gochfeld

 

 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl