Here’s a script for you:
“Putting gasoline on a horse’s feet as a hoof hardener is not a good idea because (insert reasoning)”
Now wasn’t that easy? :winkgrin:
If you can though take a step back and see that for the average person, Venice Turpentine, formaldehyde and Stockholm tar and so on are all basically “nasty chemicals” and there’s no huge distinction between them.
You sure wouldn’t eat any of them, and getting most of them on your skin is reason to run to wash it off. So why is it OK to paint formaldehyde on a horse’s feet, a known carcinogen, and not gasoline? Why Venice Turps, very toxic and highly flammable, and not gasoline? Stockholm tar, often laced with carcinogenic creosote?
And why is there a need to belittle someone for not knowing why one is OK and another not, if it’s even true?