kendall Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 http://apvma.gov.au/node/311 The above site allows owners, vets, etc to report adverse effects of pesticides - snail and rat bait, pyrethrin etc If your pet has been affected by these products despite the false warnings that they are pet safe please report the case. We may be able to get these products removed or changed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest belgian.blue Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Brilliant idea! Never had it happen to any of my pets as I've refused to have it in my house tho ages ago my ex was determined to buy snail bait as the packet said 'pet safe' I put my foot down and it worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whippets Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 It's not just that. Read all the ingredients on dog products you buy unless they say "secret formula" :rolleyes: , then god only knows what's in the product. I have been looking at an organic pet shampoo. It contained cocoa butter. I would never use cocoa butter on a dog. Same goes for citrus extracts for dogs that spend most of their time outdoors. I test the pH of dog shampoos I buy and some don't even have the correct pH for a dogs coat. I make my own skin products so I'm going to make it for my dogs now. I don't want SLS's, parabens, artificial colours, DEA's, TEA's, Mea's and petrolatums in my own products and I don't want it on my dogs. The industry for human cosmetics/toiletries isn't regulated enough so it would be common sense to suggest that dog products would be even less regulated. In humans : 50 yrs ago we had a 1 in 100 chance of getting some form of cancer. Now we have a 1 in 5 chance (source= National Cancer Institute). Asthma has increased 58% in ten years (source= National Institue of Health). The auto-immune diseases have increased substantially. I believe it's the onslaught of synthetics we use and consume (preservatives). A study found more than 350 synthetic chemicals inhuman breast milk (source= Women's Environmental Network). Why wouldn't this hold true for dogs? Auto-immune diseases have been linked to inbreeding (they use the old mathematical of COI to calculate). Instead of blaming line or inbreeding for the increased auto-immune disorders in the dogs. Did the researchers even think about all the synthetic chemicals in the environment rather than 100% blame breeding programs? Synthetics are in most dog foods, it's in dog grooming products, it's in any product that is imported from oversea's. Products get blasted with pesticides by AQIS before they can released. Dams can pass the synthetic chemicals onto their puppies (just like humans do). Oh wow I went way off tangent there. But it is an issue I have close to my heart and wish to share it. I hope it gets people thinking outside the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravyk Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 It's not just that. Read all the ingredients on dog products you buy unless they say "secret formula" :rolleyes: , then god only knows what's in the product. I have been looking at an organic pet shampoo. It contained cocoa butter. I would never use cocoa butter on a dog. Same goes for citrus extracts for dogs that spend most of their time outdoors. I test the pH of dog shampoos I buy and some don't even have the correct pH for a dogs coat. I make my own skin products so I'm going to make it for my dogs now. I don't want SLS's, parabens, artificial colours, DEA's, TEA's, Mea's and petrolatums in my own products and I don't want it on my dogs. The industry for human cosmetics/toiletries isn't regulated enough so it would be common sense to suggest that dog products would be even less regulated. In humans : 50 yrs ago we had a 1 in 100 chance of getting some form of cancer. Now we have a 1 in 5 chance (source= National Cancer Institute). Asthma has increased 58% in ten years (source= National Institue of Health). The auto-immune diseases have increased substantially. I believe it's the onslaught of synthetics we use and consume (preservatives). A study found more than 350 synthetic chemicals inhuman breast milk (source= Women's Environmental Network). Why wouldn't this hold true for dogs? Auto-immune diseases have been linked to inbreeding (they use the old mathematical of COI to calculate). Instead of blaming line or inbreeding for the increased auto-immune disorders in the dogs. Did the researchers even think about all the synthetic chemicals in the environment rather than 100% blame breeding programs? Synthetics are in most dog foods, it's in dog grooming products, it's in any product that is imported from oversea's. Products get blasted with pesticides by AQIS before they can released. Dams can pass the synthetic chemicals onto their puppies (just like humans do). Oh wow I went way off tangent there. But it is an issue I have close to my heart and wish to share it. I hope it gets people thinking outside the box. That is REALLY interesting...and very scary!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest belgian.blue Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 It's not just that. Read all the ingredients on dog products you buy unless they say "secret formula" :rolleyes: , then god only knows what's in the product. I have been looking at an organic pet shampoo. It contained cocoa butter. I would never use cocoa butter on a dog. Same goes for citrus extracts for dogs that spend most of their time outdoors. I test the pH of dog shampoos I buy and some don't even have the correct pH for a dogs coat. I make my own skin products so I'm going to make it for my dogs now. I don't want SLS's, parabens, artificial colours, DEA's, TEA's, Mea's and petrolatums in my own products and I don't want it on my dogs. The industry for human cosmetics/toiletries isn't regulated enough so it would be common sense to suggest that dog products would be even less regulated. Oh wow I went way off tangent there. But it is an issue I have close to my heart and wish to share it. I hope it gets people thinking outside the box. Agree all the way! I amuse myself reading the small print on anything in a package. Reading through many dog treats they make me feel seriously ill that people actually spend money in this rubbish .. because they have no idea. I want a new shampoo for Ivy but everything I've seen is shite and I won't buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share Posted February 27, 2009 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted March 3, 2009 Author Share Posted March 3, 2009 bump again sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neatz Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Possibly the reason there are statistically more reported cases of cancer is due to a greater awareness of the need to screen. Also screening techniques today as opposed to 50 years ago would have changed dramatically. Our diets and lifestyle has changed (ie we eat more and exercise less), more stress etc etc. I'm just saying....that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whippets Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 People die of cancer, it's recorded. If they didn't get screened for cancer, ended up with mets and subsequently died from that cancer, well that death is recorded as cancer. The statistics are there and yes that was my point about how the world we live in has changed. It doesn't matter whether you are screened or not, the chances of getting cancer are higher than 50 yrs ago. That is a fact. Screening increases the chance of early detection and has nothing to do with rates. I'm just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted March 3, 2009 Author Share Posted March 3, 2009 Hey guys can we keep this thread to reporting pestidice toxicities please. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neatz Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 People die of cancer, it's recorded. If they didn't get screened for cancer, ended up with mets and subsequently died from that cancer, well that death is recorded as cancer. The statistics are there and yes that was my point about how the world we live in has changed. It doesn't matter whether you are screened or not, the chances of getting cancer are higher than 50 yrs ago. That is a fact. Screening increases the chance of early detection and has nothing to do with rates. I'm just saying Great thread for lodging data on actual cases of adverse reactions to chemicals/products etc. But do we really need another "everything is going to kill us" post. Ps Virbac make a range of shampoos that are PH correct for dogs (available from your vet). I haven't read the entire ingredient list so I'm not sure there isn't some type of carcinogen in it. I'm sure you'll point it out to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted June 20, 2009 Author Share Posted June 20, 2009 Just thought I would give this a bump for any newbies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redangel Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 (edited) Hello Im not sure if this is the posting place (confused by prev replies) anyway I was wanting to post about the product Advantix. A fellow breeder of poodles used this product on her three dogs. All had a reaction. Minor symptoms were general unwellness and the dogs feeling like "they had ants crawling all over their body". One of the dogs even suffered a burn reaction to the application area. The manufacterer was contacted...they offered reimbursement for product. Apparently general opinion is swf are prone to such a reaction to this product. Interesting but I believe it must be more widespread. If this is the wrong thread pls move to appropriate thread. Damage & hair loss Regrowth (very slow and not healthy) Edited July 29, 2009 by redangel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted January 23, 2010 Author Share Posted January 23, 2010 (edited) Bumping to remind people about reporting adverse affects. redangel - sorry I missed your post. What a terrible reaction It might be worth your friend also reporting the issue through the site mentioned - not just to the manufacturer. Edited January 23, 2010 by kendall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted January 15, 2012 Author Share Posted January 15, 2012 bump :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 I don't think this service (subset of general forum) is functioning well. Toxicity and the question of 'what kills you in the long term' are very different quesions. My parent both lived to 75 yrs plus, and both died of cancer. If they had died at 60 yrs, the cause of death would have been different. It would be better if this section of the forum was used to report acute toxicity. Eg, my dog had fits after applying such-and-such a drug or pesticide. It's not just that. Read all the ingredients on dog products you buy unless they say "secret formula" :rolleyes: , then god only knows what's in the product. I have been looking at an organic pet shampoo. It contained cocoa butter. I would never use cocoa butter on a dog. Same goes for citrus extracts for dogs that spend most of their time outdoors. I test the pH of dog shampoos I buy and some don't even have the correct pH for a dogs coat. I make my own skin products so I'm going to make it for my dogs now. I don't want SLS's, parabens, artificial colours, DEA's, TEA's, Mea's and petrolatums in my own products and I don't want it on my dogs. The industry for human cosmetics/toiletries isn't regulated enough so it would be common sense to suggest that dog products would be even less regulated. In humans : 50 yrs ago we had a 1 in 100 chance of getting some form of cancer. Now we have a 1 in 5 chance (source= National Cancer Institute). Asthma has increased 58% in ten years (source= National Institue of Health). The auto-immune diseases have increased substantially. I believe it's the onslaught of synthetics we use and consume (preservatives). A study found more than 350 synthetic chemicals inhuman breast milk (source= Women's Environmental Network). Why wouldn't this hold true for dogs? Auto-immune diseases have been linked to inbreeding (they use the old mathematical of COI to calculate). Instead of blaming line or inbreeding for the increased auto-immune disorders in the dogs. Did the researchers even think about all the synthetic chemicals in the environment rather than 100% blame breeding programs? Synthetics are in most dog foods, it's in dog grooming products, it's in any product that is imported from oversea's. Products get blasted with pesticides by AQIS before they can released. Dams can pass the synthetic chemicals onto their puppies (just like humans do). Oh wow I went way off tangent there. But it is an issue I have close to my heart and wish to share it. I hope it gets people thinking outside the box. :laugh: That is REALLY interesting...and very scary!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sje78 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 good to know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ngaire Ingham Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 (edited) On 2/27/2009 at 12:50 PM, Ravyk said: That is REALLY interesting...and very scary!! and very true Edited September 23, 2017 by Ngaire Ingham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marpera Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 Thx for your idea, its very fantastic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now