What if I told you one of the most dangerous chemicals known to man is probably sitting in your kitchen right now, waiting to cause havoc? It’s true … or at least it sounds that way. Remember your high school chemistry classes? No? Well, scientists and chemists certainly do — and they are all too aware of the dangers lurking in a chemical called dihydrogen monoxide.

For those who don’t quite recall their high school chemistry, here’s a rundown of some of its well-documented hazards:

• It’s a major component of acid rain

• It accelerates the corrosion of metals and contributes to rust

• It may cause severe burns in its gaseous form

• It contributes to the greenhouse effect

• It has been found in the excised tumours of terminal-cancer patients

If this hasn’t got you worried yet, dihydrogen monoxide is also widely used in industrial solvents, in nuclear power plants, as a fire retardant, and even in the production of styrofoam!

It’s clear this chemical poses some significant risks, yet — shockingly — no global initiative has managed to ban it.

This brings us to 1997, when 14-year-old Nathan Zohner brought this terrifying chemical to public attention. Through his science fair project, Zohner succeeded in persuading 43 out of 50 of his classmates to vote for a ban on dihydrogen monoxide.

Spoiler alert: it’s just water

Of course, dihydrogen monoxide is just a chemical name for water (H₂O). Zohner’s experiment was never truly about banning water but about showcasing how gullible people can be when presented with facts, skewed in just the right way. His classmates weren’t uninformed, but they were overwhelmed by scientific jargon and a lack of critical context.

This phenomenon is now known as “Zohnerism” — the use of true facts to lead an uninformed or unsuspecting public to a false conclusion. It’s a trick that’s still very much alive today, especially in politics and media, where carefully crafted facts are used to mislead, rather than inform.

The dihydrogen monoxide parody: why we fall for it

The dihydrogen monoxide parody is a playful illustration of how easy it is to incite unnecessary alarm. By presenting familiar information — in this case, the properties of water — with unusual language, it highlights how much we rely on surface-level understanding rather than deep knowledge. The parody has been used in numerous contexts, from prank shows to election campaigns, to demonstrate how a lack of scientific literacy or critical thinking can lead to misplaced fears.

For example, in 2011, a Finnish voting-advice application asked parliamentary candidates whether “hydric acid, also known as dihydrogen monoxide” should be restricted. Nearly half the candidates (49 per cent) said yes. Similarly, in New Zealand, a staffer in the Green Party voiced support for banning this “toxic substance”, further proving how even the educated can fall for the parody when unfamiliar terminology is involved.

The science of gullibility

Why do people fall for these tricks? It all comes down to the way we process information. Often, we make decisions based on emotional responses or incomplete knowledge, then rationalise those decisions afterward. This is why two people can look at the same facts and arrive at wildly different conclusions.

Zohner’s experiment demonstrated how presenting information in a way that triggers an emotional response — especially fear — can override logical thinking. The scary-sounding facts about dihydrogen monoxide were all true, but when stripped of context, they became a compelling argument for an unnecessary ban.

The dihydrogen monoxide parody continues to demonstrate how easily we can be misled by scientific jargon or biased presentations of facts. It’s a reminder that, while we may be the smartest creatures on Earth, we are also vulnerable to our own gullibility.

Next time you read a headline screaming about the dangers of some unpronounceable chemical, remember this article. A little scepticism – and a quick Google search — might just save you from banning water.

• Christian Chin-Gurret is a Bermudian writer with a Master of Science in Innovation and Entrepreneurship and a Bachelor of Science in Product Design, who offers a unique perspective on shaping the future of business through innovation, disruption and technology