Let’s count the number of lies of omission in the latest hit piece on boron from the lamestream media in this article.
- They don’t say how many mg of boron is in a pinch of borax.
A simple google search reveals: 1/16 teaspoon
If you want to get very technical and scientific, a pinch is generally defined as 1/16 teaspoon.
A 1/8th teaspoon of borax contains 55 mg of boron, which we take daily. So half of that is 27.5 mg, which is contained in “the pinch” of borax. This is a moderate and effective dose.
Rex Newnham, the scientist who discovered that boron cures arthritis, which they cited, advocated 20 mg boron in the 1960’s to the 1990’s.
From the article: “In the case of borax, some TikTok creators cited “one researcher’s claim” that boron is “an essential nutrient for healthy bones and joints.””
“one researcher’s claim” was linked to this:
Essentiality of boron for healthy bones and joints
R E Newnham
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7889887/ That’s a great short article.
- The NBC article only cites one researcher, too.
“Johnson-Arbor, a toxicology physician and co-medical director at the National Capital Poison Center, routinely writes articles for the center’s website that correct the record about dangerous health fads.”
“Borax, she said, can cause stomach irritation and potentially result in blue-green vomit or diarrhea if ingested.”
A search for “National Capital Poison Center” brings up poison.org, and a search for boron at that website brings up:
And I found a similar quote: ” Short-term consumption of borax can result in stomach irritation, vomiting, and diarrhea. Vomit and stool may turn a blue-green color after eating borax.”
And the article is written by the same Johnson-Arbor.
She cites no sources for this quote. And I have never heard this about boron.
She does make many citations though, and some are good ones that advocate boron, such as the following:
Pizzorno L. Nothing Boring About Boron. Integr Med (Encinitas). 2015 Aug;14(4):35-48.
Hunt CD. Dietary boron: progress in establishing essential roles in human physiology. J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2012 Jun;26(2-3):157-60.
She actually cites 17 sources on boron, at least 2 of which are positive ones that I recognize from my own prior research, which flatly contradict the NBC article that uses the words “one researcher’s claim”, which suggests that there is only one researcher that advocates boron, which is not true. NBC omits that there are many other researchers that advocate boron.
- Cite number 5 from Johnson-Arbor is this scary-sounding article:
Seizure disorders and anemia associated with chronic borax intoxication
Ok, so how much boron did the baby get?
“The borax and honey mixture, which is available at all drug stores without prescription, contains 10.5 g. of borax and 5.25 g of glycerin in 84.25 g honey. The child had received approximately one ounce per week since the age of 1 month, that is, approximately 125 g of borax over a 12-week period.
Let’s translate that to mg per day.
125 grams of borax contains 11% boron.
125 grams x 11% = 13.75 grams, or 13750 mg total.
12 weeks x 7 days/week is 84 days.
13,750 mg / 84 days is 164 mg of boron per day. For a 1 month old infant who weighs 10 pounds.
I’m 200 pounds, so for an adult like me, this would be about 20 times more, which would be 3280 mg per day.
The NBC article claims, based on citing this one researcher’s work, and presumably then, this source, that 27 mg is toxic. That is a lie of omission, because details and numbers matter, and note, they did not mention either number, because if they did, their claims would be obviously refuted.
Furthermore, this article is from 1973, and most people today know that you are not supposed to give infants honey.
A quick google search for “can babies have honey” reveals: “Honey. Occasionally, honey contains bacteria that can produce toxins in a baby’s intestines, leading to infant botulism, which is a very serious illness. Do not give your child honey until they’re over 1 year old. Honey is a sugar, so avoiding it will also help prevent tooth decay.”
The baby in the study may also have been vaccinated, which is another lie of omission. Yes, there were regular shots given to infants at 2 months old back then.
So this also means there are three variables, not one. It’s not just about the excessive borax, there is the excessive honey, and possible vaccines.
Furthermore, it’s a case study of one, which renders any claims of causation meaningless.
I believe this is more than enough evidence to say that the NBC article has been fact checked, and soundly refuted as misinformation. And that’s how we use their buzz words against them.