TCDD? a sub-mg dose came close to killing a Ukrainian leader. Why not actually READ the LD50? Why not read about the chronic toxicity. It's more toxic than VX, for example. It's chronic toxicity is also nasty.
The thiophosphinates are less toxic but still seem to produce the same chronic damage as sub-lethal doses on the nerve agents. The carbamates are VERY nasty. Yes - I certainly do have reference to the nerve agents. ISBN-10: 0849314348, ISBN-13: 9780763724252 ISBN-10: 1782628037. The first details the agents, the second is battlefield medicine, the third medical facility response. There are about 4000 refs all told and it's interesting to note some of the agents have more than 1 toxic effect. Regarding the example I gave, consider that it has an imine moiety so if you breathe it in, what happens? Phosgene->perfluoroisobutylene->iminohslophosphinates. THAT is why it's considered (by the authors who are simply restating the references - many from Edgewood Arsenal (declassified) on the rather graphic depictions of animal studies) to be the most deadly. A whiff of it and it's a race between 2 different effects both aimed at ending you. Weaponization means finding desired characteristics (persistence, physical characteristics, safe-handling, stability) and that which won't remain stable for decades won't be developed.
HF in eye-drops? Well the dose makes the poison but it's not a strong acid, it's more the fact that it's presenting the body with a labile F- which likes to bind to all manner of things. Last year an Australian case saw 100mL spill onto the leg of a lab worker and proved fatal. It doesn't cause a painful burn (the skin goes white) but if you don't get calcium gluconate onto the site quickly, it's a race against time to remove the limb (a frequent outcome) or the victim dies. In Australia, they were too slow. Now, we are seeing acid attacks in the UK... but which acid is the MOST dangerous?
