In article <
[email protected]>,
Tony Raven <
[email protected]> writes:
|>
|> > I was not prepared for you to get away with propagating an unscientific
|> > urban myth, and claiming that it was based in science.
|>
|> I think in your perpetual state of high dudgeon you should go back and
|> re-read what was written. Peter said that washing up liquid contains
|> salt. You disputed that and asked for evidence.
Sigh. I think in your perpetual state of high dudgeon you should go back
and re-read what was written. Here is what was posted and what I asked
for evidence of:
In article <
[email protected]>,
Simon Brooke <
[email protected]> writes:
|>
|> Hot water with a little squirt of hair shampoo. Car shampoo would be better
|> but I don't keep it round the house. Don't use washing up detergent
|> because it is high in salts which damage the surface of the paint.
Simon Brooke (not any Peter) said that it was "high in salts which damage
the surface of the paint", and I asked for evidence (hoping for some both
for the "high" and the damage). It seems to be the case that there is no
such evidence, though it may indeed contain enough salt to count as
brackish when undiluted.
His decision to use the variant of sodium laureth sulphate that is more
likely to contain less salt (when they are equivalently priced) is
perfectly rational. That is not the point at issue.
|> I provided very clear
|> evidence that washing up liquid does contain significant amounts of salt
|> deliberately added at which you went off on a defensive tangent about
|> dilution and deionised rose water.
I also provided evidence that the maximum amount of a single trip across
salted roads would do FAR more damage than a huge number of washings,
salt from the washing-up liquid is LESS than the maximum amount from the
tap water (by 3:5, see
www.dwi.gov.uk), that and that there were much
larger quantities of other corrosives in domestic water, too. You are
making a fuss about what is demonstrably a minor factor, and probably a
negligible one.
The situation is that there is no more evidence that using washing up
liquid instead of shampoo harms bicycles than there is that wearing a
helmet instead of a woolly cap protects against brain damage.
Sheesh.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
