I have some clover in my lawn here in DC that is out of control. I
understand that some clover is beneficial, but this is definitely too much
of a good thing.

Is there something safe that I can put on it? I have 2 little ones, and I
am not about to put anything toxic on the lawn.

On a side question, my neighbor, who lot is slightly higher than mine, uses
chemicals freely, like Weed-B-Gone. Should I worry about runoff from his
lawn?

"Buck Turgidson" wrote in message
...
I have some clover in my lawn here in DC that is out of control. I
understand that some clover is beneficial, but this is definitely too much
of a good thing.

Is there something safe that I can put on it? I have 2 little ones, and I
am not about to put anything toxic on the lawn.

Years ago, I read that clover is an indicator that your lawn is either
deficient in a particular nutrient or has too much of it. Since I like
clover, I promptly flushed the information from my knowledge archive. But,
go to www.hort.cornell.edu and poke around for more info. You can DEFINITELY
solve the clover problem by getting your soil tested and making SAFE
corrections. By the way, clover is not really a problem - it's actually a
good soil conditioner. You just don't like it. :-)


On a side question, my neighbor, who lot is slightly higher than mine,
uses
chemicals freely, like Weed-B-Gone. Should I worry about runoff from his
lawn?

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven safe
for contact with people. So, I'd urge the neighbor to work with you to
minimize or eliminate their use entirely. They are the lazy person's way of
dealing with lawn problems.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven
safe
for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.

"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven
safe
for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.



Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers. Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison populations for
testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be exposed to
agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody asked
for our permission.

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:32:28 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven
safe
for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.



Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers. Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison populations for
testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be exposed to
agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody asked
for our permission.


It was done in '96..results were not allowed..earlier this year a
panel of gou't offficials gave the O.K. to use the results of such
tests

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4314918/
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/NEWS...4/02_24_04.htm
http://www.enn.com/news/20-02-2004/s_13311.asp


Lar. (to e-mail, get rid of the BUGS!!


It is said that the early bird gets the worm,
but it is the second mouse that gets the cheese.

"Lar" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:32:28 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and
proven
safe
for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.



Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers.
Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison
populations for
testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance
in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be
exposed to
agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody
asked
for our permission.


It was done in '96..results were not allowed..earlier this year a
panel of gou't offficials gave the O.K. to use the results of such
tests

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4314918/
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/NEWS...4/02_24_04.htm
http://www.enn.com/news/20-02-2004/s_13311.asp

Too busy to read extensively at the moment. What do you mean by "results
were not allowed"???

In article , "Buck Turgidson"
wrote:

I have some clover in my lawn here in DC that is out of control. I
understand that some clover is beneficial, but this is definitely too much
of a good thing.

Is there something safe that I can put on it? I have 2 little ones, and I
am not about to put anything toxic on the lawn.

On a side question, my neighbor, who lot is slightly higher than mine, uses
chemicals freely, like Weed-B-Gone. Should I worry about runoff from his
lawn?

Clovers prefer a low-nitrogen soil without too much organic matter. Making
soil loamier with good levels of nitrogen keeps the clover from
dominating. You can increase the loamy content under grass (which will
help microorganisms produce more nitrogen) by sprinkling a fine very
crumbly compost all over the surface of the lawn, then use the side of a
two-by-four, or perhaps just a leaf-rake, to rub the grass surface, & the
compost will vanish into the grass.

If you're getting water run-off from your neighbor's chemical-saturated
yard, then yes, you have something to worry about.

The degree of dangerousness of Weed-B-Gone & similar products is debated
mainly because manufacturers are providing a whelter of muddling
information so that customers won't see clearly what is known. What is
known is that dogs that live or play in lawns treated with these chemicals
die of cancer at twice the rate of dogs not exposed [Hayes et all in
Journal of the National Cancer Inst, Sept 1991]. Studies on farmworkers &
railroad workers (the latter spraying these herbicides along railroad
tracks) show an increased cancer risk for people [Zahm et al in
Epidemiology, Sept 1990].

Children in homes where lawn herbicides are used are three to nine times
more likely to get cancer than are children who play in areas never
exposed to such chemicals, & these lawn treatments are rightly suspected
as the chief cause for the spiraling increase in lymphoma disease &
lymphoma cancer in children fifteen to nineteen years old. Golf course
attendants exposed to these chemicals have increased incidents of brain,
intestine & prostate. The alarming increase of brain cancer in children
during the last thirty years is of unknown cause, but the two most cited
probable causes are direct exposure to weedkillers & pesticides, & an
early diet of cow's milk after cows are exposed to sundry chemicals.

The most suspected chemical in Weed-b-gone, & similar herbicides is
2,4-chlorophenoxyacetic Acid, a phenoxy herbicide which the EPA has
established beyond doubt is a cancer-causing agent. The question comes
about as to level of "safe" exposure, but these decisions are made to
promote business more than to protect the population, or at best as a
"trade-off" of how many extra cancer cases would be permissible for the
economic gains for continued use.

All phenoxy herbicides are unsafe, & are listed in herbicides under
various names (2,4-dichlorophenoxy-acetic acid,
2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid, Triclopyr, & Dicamba). The product
names include not only Weed-b-gone but also Weedone, Weedmaster, Crossbow,
Banvel, Garlon, Grazon, MCPA, Weed-n-Feed, Miracle, Brush Killer, Demise,
Lawn-Keep, Ded-Weed, Hormotox (wadda name, contracting Hormone Toxic),
Plantgard, Raid Weed Killer, & a great many othe trademark names. Some
other phenoxy herbicides have already been banned for use, & in the future
more will be banned, but not before new alternatives perhaps no safer can
be readied for market. Here is a short FAQ on 2,4-D:
http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/eh/ChemFS/fs/24d.htm

The Cancer Prevention Coalition included Weed-b-gone in its "top-dozen
list" of the most dangerous chemicals most apt to harm families [Cancer
Prevention News, Fall 1995]. The most common cancer associated with
herbicides generally & especially 2,4-D is non-hodgson's lymphoma, the
most common cancer in dogs exposed to 2,4-D treated lawns, & several
studies show that humans are susceptible to the same range of cancers as
dogs, & especially non-hodgsons [Hoar et al, J. Med. Assoc, Sept 1986;
Axelson et all, Scand. J. of Work Environment & Health, Mar 1980; Cantor
et al, Cancer Research, Aug 1980; & so on].

Workers in chemic al plants that manufacture these weed-killers have a 46%
increased cancer rate, which was discovered by the first independent study
of the issue as conducted by the National Institutes of Occupational
Safety and Health. Previous studies conducted in-house by Monsanto & BASF
found no such risk, but it has repeatedly been shown that these vested
interests fake results [see for example "Monsanto Studies Under Fire," in
Science, Feb 8, 1991].

Manufacturers generate their own stkudies to prove safety, which is why of
99 human studies of the carcinogenity of commonly used herbicides, 75
indicate a significant connection between exposure to pesticides and
lymphomas, but 24 give the same products a clean bill of health. The
happier findings tend to be conducted with chimical manufacturer funding
or in-house by chemical companies, or by researchers who've been invited
to serve on chemical industry boards.

It is not a good assumption that only 2,4-D is the danger, since even some
of the "inert" ingredients in weed killers have toxic properties.
Something like 20 admitted "inert" ingredients in the products include at
least a quarter-dozen that are known independently to be carcenogenic.
Though the levels of exposure for each individual ingriendient is set at
an allegedly safe level of exposure if the products are used as directed,
no study shows what their combined toxicity or their interactions might be
for human illness. So all that is known for sure is that the weed killers
most often slathered onto lawns, farms, & railroad tracks do increase
cancer rates in humans & animals.

If your neighbor's use of these dangerous lawn treatments reaches you as
dust carried by wind, you'll be getting a strong dose. Run-off chemicals
will be diluted. Short of a very large & thick living hedge that works as
a barrier against both run-off & wind-carried chemical pollutants, you're
probably having risks imposed on your family & pets only slightly less
worrisome than what the ignorant jackass is doing to himself & his own
family.

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com

"paghat" wrote in message
news

If you're getting water run-off from your neighbor's chemical-saturated
yard, then yes, you have something to worry about.


Two points to add:

1) If you can't provide enough detail to be interesting, why bother posting
a response, Ms. Ratgirl? (sarcasm assured here) :-)

2) This past spring, NPR ran a story about studies looking into why people
in Japan, who have a relatively low rate of certain cancers, seem to lose
their edge when they (meaning Japanese immigrants in general) have been here
for a generation or two. The easy answer seemed to be diet, but the
scientists interviewed put a lid on that idea for reasons I don't recall.
What they suspect is....guess what? Chemicals.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven

safe

for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.




Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers. Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison populations for
testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be exposed to
agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody asked
for our permission.


I am not aware of any food or food components that have been "proven" to
be safe for ingestion without adding the qualifier "in normal amounts."
Asparagus, tomatoes, salt, sugar and even water can provoke a fatal
reaction when ingested in large enough quantities. Some, such as
peanuts or wheat products, can be fatal to some people in minute amounts.

Some foods are deemed to be safe for most people under most conditions
in normal quantities, and the same can be said for lawn chemicals that
are sold over the counter. Of course, that's not saying much when you
really think about it.

"Heidi the Wonder Dog" wrote in message
...


Doug Kanter wrote:
"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven

safe

for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.




Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers. Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison populations
for
testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be
exposed to
agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody
asked
for our permission.


I am not aware of any food or food components that have been "proven" to
be safe for ingestion without adding the qualifier "in normal amounts."
Asparagus, tomatoes, salt, sugar and even water can provoke a fatal
reaction when ingested in large enough quantities. Some, such as
peanuts or wheat products, can be fatal to some people in minute amounts.

Some foods are deemed to be safe for most people under most conditions
in normal quantities, and the same can be said for lawn chemicals that
are sold over the counter. Of course, that's not saying much when you
really think about it.


Fine. Forget food. Think of medicines. Here's an exercise. Let's say you had
athlete's foot and could not get rid of it after 6 months of using over the
counter products. You go to a dermatologist. She says "Well, here's a cream
that's been around for decades and it works in about 2 weeks. But, there's
this new thing - I just read that it's about to go to clinical trials next
year. It's a pill. But, so far, it's caused cancer within a month for the 18
animal species it's been tested on. Wanna try it?"

What would you do?

See...the chemical companies don't give you that choice. Your only option is
to avoid exposure. You have absolutely NO idea what their products may do to
you.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Heidi the Wonder Dog" wrote in message
...


Doug Kanter wrote:

"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and proven

safe


for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.




Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers. Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison populations

for

testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be

exposed to

agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody

asked

for our permission.


I am not aware of any food or food components that have been "proven" to
be safe for ingestion without adding the qualifier "in normal amounts."
Asparagus, tomatoes, salt, sugar and even water can provoke a fatal
reaction when ingested in large enough quantities. Some, such as
peanuts or wheat products, can be fatal to some people in minute amounts.

Some foods are deemed to be safe for most people under most conditions
in normal quantities, and the same can be said for lawn chemicals that
are sold over the counter. Of course, that's not saying much when you
really think about it.



Fine. Forget food. Think of medicines. Here's an exercise. Let's say you had
athlete's foot and could not get rid of it after 6 months of using over the
counter products. You go to a dermatologist. She says "Well, here's a cream
that's been around for decades and it works in about 2 weeks. But, there's
this new thing - I just read that it's about to go to clinical trials next
year. It's a pill. But, so far, it's caused cancer within a month for the 18
animal species it's been tested on. Wanna try it?"

What would you do?

See...the chemical companies don't give you that choice. Your only option is
to avoid exposure. You have absolutely NO idea what their products may do to
you.

a good psychiatrist might be able to help you.
WOOF!

"Heidi the Wonder Dog" wrote in message
...


Doug Kanter wrote:
"Heidi the Wonder Dog" wrote in message
...


Doug Kanter wrote:

"Michel Buonarroti" don't e-mail me wrote in message
...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


It is absolutely impossible for lawn chemicals to be tested and
proven

safe


for contact with people.

The same thing can be said about any food item. Duh.




Duh. Food and medicines can be tasted/tested on human volunteers. Drug
companies have occasionally solicited volunteers from prison
populations

for

testing particularly risky drugs, but I am not aware of ANY instance in
which a chemical company has asked for volunteers to ingest or be

exposed to

agricultural chemicals. You and I are the test population, but nobody

asked

for our permission.


I am not aware of any food or food components that have been "proven" to
be safe for ingestion without adding the qualifier "in normal amounts."
Asparagus, tomatoes, salt, sugar and even water can provoke a fatal
reaction when ingested in large enough quantities. Some, such as
peanuts or wheat products, can be fatal to some people in minute
amounts.

Some foods are deemed to be safe for most people under most conditions
in normal quantities, and the same can be said for lawn chemicals that
are sold over the counter. Of course, that's not saying much when you
really think about it.



Fine. Forget food. Think of medicines. Here's an exercise. Let's say you
had
athlete's foot and could not get rid of it after 6 months of using over
the
counter products. You go to a dermatologist. She says "Well, here's a
cream
that's been around for decades and it works in about 2 weeks. But,
there's
this new thing - I just read that it's about to go to clinical trials
next
year. It's a pill. But, so far, it's caused cancer within a month for
the 18
animal species it's been tested on. Wanna try it?"

What would you do?

See...the chemical companies don't give you that choice. Your only
option is
to avoid exposure. You have absolutely NO idea what their products may
do to
you.

a good psychiatrist might be able to help you.
WOOF!


Me??? You're either very young, or you forgot to read the newspapers since
1960. Knucklehead. What makes you think yard chemicals are safe?

Doug Kanter wrote:


a good psychiatrist might be able to help you.
WOOF!



Me??? You're either very young, or you forgot to read the newspapers since
1960. Knucklehead. What makes you think yard chemicals are safe?



You seem to be angry at half the world and jealous of the other half.
Psychiatry can do wonders these days. Try it for your own good.

"Heidi the Wonder Dog" wrote in message
...


Doug Kanter wrote:


a good psychiatrist might be able to help you.
WOOF!



Me??? You're either very young, or you forgot to read the newspapers
since
1960. Knucklehead. What makes you think yard chemicals are safe?



You seem to be angry at half the world and jealous of the other half.
Psychiatry can do wonders these days. Try it for your own good.


Angry? How you are I feel about the sins of chemical companies is in NO way
connected with the reality of what they do. I may be angry at the fact that
GE has yet to take responsibility for what it did to the Hudson River. You
may think it's not a problem. But, the crap they dumped is still there. Get
it? Your misplaced faith in the company doesn't make it safe to eat the
striped bass that are contaminated by the dumping.

"Doug Kanter" expounded:

Me??? You're either very young, or you forgot to read the newspapers since
1960. Knucklehead. What makes you think yard chemicals are safe?

It's a troll, Doug, they always kick up around the end of the summer.
Don't feed it.
--
Ann, Gardening in zone 6a
Just south of Boston, MA
********************************