Lymphoma?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Beth on
-
The report I saw was on increased risk of lymphoma from pesticides; I haven't heard anything on fertilizer or even weed killer.
I would just keep them off it til after you've had a soaking rain; I'd be more worried about local irritation than cancer risk, though I personally fertilize minimally and use an organic fertilizer (and have a lousy lawn as a reward!)
-
Permalink Reply by Rachael & Waffle on
-
Weed killer is a pesticide.
-
-
You're right to be worried--though I would worry much less about the lymphoma risk and more about the poisoning risk from accidental ingestion. Is it possible to walk your dog to potty away from your apartment complex? I would probably do so until it rains heaily, as Beth suggested.
-
Permalink Reply by Sam Tsang on
-
Hi Elizabeth
Here's the latest one from 2012, go to your public library / school and access this via pubmed. This one from lymphoma association summarize varies studies, P.50 is on dog studies. This one is not lymphoma related, but it gets quoted all the time.
-
-
Rachael, I can't reply to your post directly for some reason. Traditionally, "pesticides" refer to chemicals used to kill insects and other animals. "Herbicides" refers to weed-killers. "Pesticide" is USUALLY not used as an umbrella term to describe both. But of course the individual studies would tell you which chemicals were studied.
-
-
I also can't edit posts for some reason. I meant to say that in the vernacular we differentiate between herbicides and pesticides. Studies would tell you which they refered to.
-
-
Your body's cells don't care what the vernacular is. Weed killer is a pesticide. Wikipedia says a herbicide is a type of pesticide for killing plants, and my agricultural engineering classes lumped pesticides and herbicides into one umbrella term- pesticides. Say what you want, they are all poisons and they all are a health risk.
In addition, chemical lawn treatments aren't purposed to get rid of ants or mice (usually), they get rid of weeds, and a study was posted here recently stating that chem lawn treatments greatly increased the risk of lymphoma in dogs. Beyond Pesticides talks about these chemical lawn treatments and weeds--they do not differentiate between the two different vernaculars. They are one in the same, and at least 2/3 of the lawn care pesticides are by no means safe.
-
Permalink Reply by Elizabeth Throneberry on
-
Thank ou everyone for you input iv been trying to reply to all of you but my Internet is slow. I own the house I live in and have a couple acres for the dogs. My father inlaw shares the tar with us cuz his house is next door so he keeps the up keep on it. It's been a couple weeks and the dogs haven't gotten sick iv just been hearing so much about lymphoma in dogs I get worried.
-
Permalink Reply by John Wolff on
-
Chemists -- the people who study, work with, and sell the stuff -- have an ancient and notorious track record of underestimating the hazards of chemistry. Think: mad hatters (mercury), Marie Curie (radium poisoning); lead water pipes (Latin for lead is plumbum, that's where we get "plumbers" and the odd symbol Pb). Wet chemistry has long been a dangerous profession. Example: I, in an undergrad chemsitry lab 1970, have washed my bare hands in benzene -- now recognized as a rather nasty carcinogen. Chloroform was used as an anesthetic. Carbon tetrachloride was used in fire extinguishers, and teachers gave carbon tet and a putty knife to schoolkids on detention to scrape gum off the school hallways. http://www.johngeiger.net/frozen.html -- lead poisoning from newfangled tinned food may have contributed to the demise of the Franklin Expedition, cool book, there's a childrens' picture book version.
We laugh at those idiots in the 19th century, with their ubiquitous arsenic and other poisons; look around you at all the commonplace items that will make the future laugh at us.
Some of the early (1960s) herbicides were extremely dangerous because 2,4,5-T (not, I think, 2,4-D) was contaminated with dioxins. Agent Orange.
Remember that They -- the corporations -- will sell Us anything -- anything -- that we will buy.
"Safe" means "if it kills you, you'll have a hard time proving it in court". Whatever consumer protection apparatchiks this country ever had have been long since gutted.
If something is very dangerous (tobacco, say), it is relatively easy to prove this, but it is almost impossible to prove that something is safe. Even if something is demonstrably dangerous (lead paint, say, or cigarettes) it is extremely difficult to get it off the market, at least in this country. Once lead paint was shown to be hazardous, back in the 30's, the Europeans started getting rid of it, but in the US, the corporate response was a PR campaign -- that's where all that lovely "Dutch Boy" art came from -- delaying its removal for many decades (this from Science, some years back). Oddly, there's still leaded aviation fuel in the US, even though the nonlead antiknock additives that replaced lead in European aviation gasoline long ago are actually cheaper; that's why there's measurably more lead in your soil if you live near a small airport (recent NPR report).
Dogs live closer to the dirt than we do. When they wash their paws, they do it with their tongues. My dogs walk the city streets and play on an asphalt playground, all covered with a film of the gunk that comes out of our air and our machines and our asphalt itself. Salmon spawning in our urban Seattle watersheds have a very poor success rate, and our dogs are walking on all that stuff before it flows into our streams.
Not to mention melamine in our dog food.
I spot-applied some 2,4D to my parents' lawn back around 1968. Never saw our tame grey squirrel again. I've always wondered....
I'll take the weeds and the dirt over the weedkillers and the leafblowers any day.
Rescue Store
Stay Connected
FDA Recall
Canadian Food Inspection Agency Recall
Groups
We support...
Badge
© 2024 Created by Sam Tsang.
Powered by
