"anton" wrote in message
...

sw wrote in message ...
anton wrote:

Nick Maclaren wrote in message ...
In article ,
Mary Fisher wrote:

No- not amazing. You've just proved that it's perfectly safe if
you follow the instructions on the can. Just like
pesticides ;-)

Sorry, but that's not true... organochlorines aren't 'perfectly
safe'
whether you follow the instructions on the tin or not :-/

Sorry, that's not true. PVC is an organochlorine and is
'perfectly safe' unless you start burning it.

Which organochlorines in which tins are you suggesting ain't
perfectly safe?

I'll get my chair ...

My tame biochemist is unable to think of any organochlorines that are
safe for mammals in large quantities.

Er- we seem to have an instance of moving goalposts. Safe
'if you follow the instructions on the tin' was the original target,
not 'safe for mammals in large quantities'.

Do you know the meaning of the word 'bioaccumulative'?

Yes. Munch on this ragwort.

Why is it significant that organochlorines such as aldrin and dieldrin
have 'half-lives' measured in years?


With respect to this argument, the half-lives of those compounds are of no
significance whatsoever..

It is possible that you misunderstood the concept of "half-life" in this
context. I (possibly wrongly) understand it to mean that if I ate a 1gm of
a substance now, the half-life of that substance in me is the time after
which there will still be 1/2 gm of it left in me. [Franz Heymann]

My suggestion was that
(garden) pesticides are perfectly safe if instructions are
followed. My suggestion was _not_ that previous generations
of pesticides were safe, so don't bother me with aldrin and
dieldrin, or I'll tell you about lead arsenate. Clearly in the light
of the toxicity of water itself my 'perfectly' is an exaggeration,
and I'll withdraw it if you like.

There are some serious health issues on the subject of
pesticides- the use of organophosphates by sheep farmers
for instance- but these hardly apply on a garden scale.

To return to the point, the kneejerk classification of synthetic
pesticides as 'poisons' is merely hysterical when there are so
many natural poisons in the garden, and so many other
'poisons' in all other aspects of modern life.

--
Anton

"anton" wrote in message
...

sw wrote in message ...
anton wrote:

sw wrote in message ...
anton wrote:

sw wrote in message ...
anton wrote:

Mary Fisher wrote in message
.. .


Is urine poisonous?


Of course- in sufficient quantity. Just like pesticides.

Gosh. I've had gallons and gallons of urine in my body over
sixty
odd
years
and I'm still around. My mum is ninety one.

Amazing.

No- not amazing. You've just proved that it's perfectly safe if
you follow the instructions on the can. Just like


pesticides ;-)

Sorry, but that's not true... organochlorines aren't 'perfectly
safe'
whether you follow the instructions on the tin or not :-/

Sorry, that's not true. PVC is an organochlorine and is
'perfectly safe' unless you start burning it.

PVC is generally regarded as a pesticide, is it?


Which organochlorines in which tins are you suggesting ain't
perfectly safe?

DDT, aldrin, dieldrin... just ask an otter. Or a bird of prey.



OK.

Dear Mr Otter,
Please tell me where you have seen a tin of DDT or aldrin or
dieldrin recently, so that I can check the instructions on the tin.
If like me you can't find any, please let sw know which decade
we're in.

Ah, sarcasm. Traditional refuge of the ill-informed. Tins of these
these (and more besides) are still readily available in parts of Africa
and elsewhere;


and the instructions on the tin are?

May I humbly suggest that you have had your mileage on this one by now?
[Franz Heymann]


the substances themselves are persistent in the
environments of countries in which they were banned.


Yes. Returning to the point, compare and contrast the dangers to the user
of current pesticides when properly used with:
a) previously used pesticides, such as lead arsenate
b) other household chemicals
c) urine

--
Anton

Franz Heymann wrote in message ...

"anton" wrote in message
...


Why is it significant that organochlorines such as aldrin and dieldrin
have 'half-lives' measured in years?


With respect to this argument, the half-lives of those compounds are of
no
significance whatsoever..

It is possible that you misunderstood the concept of "half-life" in this
context. I (possibly wrongly) understand it to mean that if I ate a 1gm of
a substance now, the half-life of that substance in me is the time after
which there will still be 1/2 gm of it left in me. [Franz Heymann]


I understood it to mean the half-life in the soil, water, etc, but
you might be right in believing it to be the half-life in our bodies.
Either way, with respect to this argument, the half-lives of those compounds
are of no significance whatsoever.

To return to the point, the kneejerk classification of synthetic
pesticides as 'poisons' is merely hysterical when there are so
many natural poisons in the garden, and so many other
'poisons' in all other aspects of modern life.

--
Anton

Franz Heymann wrote in message ...

"anton" wrote in message
...


Why is it significant that organochlorines such as aldrin and dieldrin
have 'half-lives' measured in years?


With respect to this argument, the half-lives of those compounds are of
no
significance whatsoever..

It is possible that you misunderstood the concept of "half-life" in this
context. I (possibly wrongly) understand it to mean that if I ate a 1gm of
a substance now, the half-life of that substance in me is the time after
which there will still be 1/2 gm of it left in me. [Franz Heymann]


I understood it to mean the half-life in the soil, water, etc, but
you might be right in believing it to be the half-life in our bodies.
Either way, with respect to this argument, the half-lives of those compounds
are of no significance whatsoever.

To return to the point, the kneejerk classification of synthetic
pesticides as 'poisons' is merely hysterical when there are so
many natural poisons in the garden, and so many other
'poisons' in all other aspects of modern life.

--
Anton

In article , anton
writes

Nowhere now- it's not a garden herbicide, and hasn't been
for some time:

That is because it was banned several years ago. Before that it was
regularly used both in horticulture and agriculture.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

"anton" wrote in message
...

Franz Heymann wrote in message ...

"anton" wrote in message
...


Why is it significant that organochlorines such as aldrin and dieldrin
have 'half-lives' measured in years?


With respect to this argument, the half-lives of those compounds are of
no
significance whatsoever..


It is possible that you misunderstood the concept of "half-life" in this
context. I (possibly wrongly) understand it to mean that if I ate a 1gm
of
a substance now, the half-life of that substance in me is the time after
which there will still be 1/2 gm of it left in me. [Franz Heymann]


I understood it to mean the half-life in the soil, water, etc, but
you might be right in believing it to be the half-life in our bodies.
Either way, with respect to this argument, the half-lives of those
compounds
are of no significance whatsoever.

If the term does in fact involve the time for halving the quantity in your
body, then you ahould think again. The longer the half-life, the higher the
equilibrium level in your body, for a given rate of intake. [Franz Heymann]


To return to the point, the kneejerk classification of synthetic
pesticides as 'poisons' is merely hysterical when there are so
many natural poisons in the garden, and so many other
'poisons' in all other aspects of modern life.

--
Anton

"anton" wrote in message
...

Alan Gould wrote in message ...
In article , anton
writes

Yes. Returning to the point, compare and contrast the dangers to the
user
of current pesticides when properly used with:
a) previously used pesticides, such as lead arsenate
b) other household chemicals
c) urine

Where does(did) paraquat stand in this thread?


Nowhere now- it's not a garden herbicide, and hasn't been
for some time:

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/m...es/Poisons.htm
REGISTRATION UNDER THE POISONS ACT 1972
"The following poisons may be sold ONLY to persons engaged in the trade or
business of agriculture, horticulture or forestry and for the purpose of
that trade or business....paraquat"

Very nasty stuff.

"Pathclear" is freely available in garden centres. It contains Paraquat.
"Weedol" is shy about saying what its active ingredient is. If it is not
Paraquat, then what is it?
[Franz Heymann]

--
Anton

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"anton" wrote in message
...

Alan Gould wrote in message ...
In article , anton
writes

Yes. Returning to the point, compare and contrast the dangers to the
user
of current pesticides when properly used with:
a) previously used pesticides, such as lead arsenate
b) other household chemicals
c) urine

Where does(did) paraquat stand in this thread?


Nowhere now- it's not a garden herbicide, and hasn't been
for some time:

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/m...es/Poisons.htm
REGISTRATION UNDER THE POISONS ACT 1972
"The following poisons may be sold ONLY to persons engaged in the trade
or
business of agriculture, horticulture or forestry and for the purpose of
that trade or business....paraquat"

Very nasty stuff.

"Pathclear" is freely available in garden centres. It contains Paraquat.
"Weedol" is shy about saying what its active ingredient is. If it is not
Paraquat, then what is it?
[Franz Heymann]

Addendum: I have just looked up a URL which refers to Weedol and Paraquat.
It confirms that Paraquat is in fact an active ingredient of Weedol. [Franz
Heymann]


--
Anton

anton wrote:

sw wrote in message ...
anton wrote:

sw wrote in message ...
anton wrote:

[-]

Which organochlorines in which tins are you suggesting ain't
perfectly safe?

DDT, aldrin, dieldrin... just ask an otter. Or a bird of prey.



OK.

Dear Mr Otter,
Please tell me where you have seen a tin of DDT or aldrin or
dieldrin recently, so that I can check the instructions on the tin.
If like me you can't find any, please let sw know which decade
we're in.

Ah, sarcasm. Traditional refuge of the ill-informed. Tins of these
these (and more besides) are still readily available in parts of Africa
and elsewhere;


and the instructions on the tin are?

I don't know. The label is printed in English and I'm an illiterate
African farmworker. Alternatively, I'm English, literate, and firmly
believer that if some is good, more is better.

You are welcome to believe that (current) (garden) pesticides are safe
if used according to the instructions on the tin. It may even be true
for some, although the rate at which pesticides are banned as we
discover more about their effects undermines your assumption of safety.
But it's even more important to recognise that many people don't read
the instructions, or don't follow them. Welcome to the real world.


the substances themselves are persistent in the
environments of countries in which they were banned.


Yes. Returning to the point, compare and contrast the dangers to the user
of current pesticides when properly used with:
a) previously used pesticides, such as lead arsenate
b) other household chemicals
c) urine

You forgot to put 'current' in parentheses.
I suspect there's a proper debating term for deciding to change the
rules because you can't win the game.


regards
sarah


--
Think of it as evolution in action.

In message , anton
writes

Alan Gould wrote in message ...
In article , anton
writes

Yes. Returning to the point, compare and contrast the dangers to the user
of current pesticides when properly used with:
a) previously used pesticides, such as lead arsenate
b) other household chemicals
c) urine

Where does(did) paraquat stand in this thread?


Nowhere now- it's not a garden herbicide, and hasn't been
for some time:

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/m...es/Poisons.htm
REGISTRATION UNDER THE POISONS ACT 1972
"The following poisons may be sold ONLY to persons engaged in the trade or
business of agriculture, horticulture or forestry and for the purpose of
that trade or business....paraquat"

Very nasty stuff.

Only if you are daft enough to drink it. And enough people were...

I thought they latterly added bitterex or something similarly vicious
tasting to prevent would be suicide cases using the stuff. Nasty choice
of poison too. ISTR it is metabolised and almost completely removed but
destroys vital organs like the liver and/or kidneys in the process.
Similar problems also occur with natural Amanita toxins.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown

In article , Martin Brown
writes

Very nasty stuff.

Only if you are daft enough to drink it. And enough people were...
It also happened by accident in lots of cases.

I thought they latterly added bitterex or something similarly vicious
tasting to prevent would be suicide cases using the stuff. Nasty choice
of poison too. ISTR it is metabolised and almost completely removed but
destroys vital organs like the liver and/or kidneys in the process.
Similar problems also occur with natural Amanita toxins.

Another now banned substance which used to be popular with gardeners was
nicotine. A few fag ends infused in water overnight would make a very
effective insecticide, but it caused a lot of health and safety
problems. People understood the need to ban that because of its known
dangers to smokers, but some still risk using it.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

[ paraquat]

On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:56:53 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

In message , anton
writes

Very nasty stuff.

Only if you are daft enough to drink it. And enough people were...

It seems like many cases of gardeners accidentally ingesting
chemicals (not just paraquat) have occurred because the solution
was put into a softdrink bottle or something similar -- and then
the thirsty gardener takes a swig on a hot day! Ooopsie!

It is fundamental to the safe use of chemicals of all sorts
around the house that they *never* be mixed or stored, even for a
few minutes, in any container that would ever contain food or
drink. I would go so far as to say that this even applies to the
stuff you wash the kitchen floor with.

Don't depend on anyone remembering that the Coke bottle or the
peanut butter jar has paraquat in it.

Urglers! Don't let your household be the site of a tragedy!

In *this* household, there is a special orange bucket for mixing
herbicides and an orange watering can for applying the stuff, a
further refinement that ensures that herbicide residues don't get
into fertilizer solutions.


--
Rodger Whitlock
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

In message , Alan Gould
writes
In article , Martin Brown
writes

Very nasty stuff.

Only if you are daft enough to drink it. And enough people were...
It also happened by accident in lots of cases.

Something that would definitely be avoided by adding bitterex.

It is insane to store toxic garden chemicals in lemonade bottles, but
people do and it is impossible to legislate against stupidity.

I thought they latterly added bitterex or something similarly vicious
tasting to prevent would be suicide cases using the stuff. Nasty choice
of poison too. ISTR it is metabolised and almost completely removed but
destroys vital organs like the liver and/or kidneys in the process.
Similar problems also occur with natural Amanita toxins.

Another now banned substance which used to be popular with gardeners was
nicotine. A few fag ends infused in water overnight would make a very
effective insecticide, but it caused a lot of health and safety
problems. People understood the need to ban that because of its known
dangers to smokers, but some still risk using it.

News to me. I thought so far the limit of state intervention on nicotine
was to prevent the explicit advertising of the tobacco products to
addicts. Using nicotine extracts as a pesticide was always ill advised
because the LD50 for humans is about the amount you can solvent extract
from just one cigarette. Lucky really that smoking the stuff is so
inefficient.

Major problem with it is you get tobacco mosaic virus as a freeloader.

There are endless versions of fake Organic(TM) "kitchen sink" chemistry
recipes on the net using fag ends that are quite literally lethal if
executed correctly. Fortunately, most of them use the wrong solvent for
extraction.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown

In article ,
Rodger Whitlock wrote:
[ paraquat]

Only if you are daft enough to drink it. And enough people were...

It seems like many cases of gardeners accidentally ingesting
chemicals (not just paraquat) have occurred because the solution
was put into a softdrink bottle or something similar -- and then
the thirsty gardener takes a swig on a hot day! Ooopsie!

Not to say the same being done by children.

It is fundamental to the safe use of chemicals of all sorts
around the house that they *never* be mixed or stored, even for a
few minutes, in any container that would ever contain food or
drink. I would go so far as to say that this even applies to the
stuff you wash the kitchen floor with.

Whereas I would say that you are OTT. SOME chemicals (like bleach
and sodium laureth sulphate) cross the borderline between food use
and other use. If your floor cleaner is just the latter (i.e. a
stronger form of washing up liquid), then there is no problem.

The only pesticide that I both use and don't worry too much about
is Bordeaux mixture. It is easy to check that I have rinsed off
enough that even somebody licking the bowl would come to no harm.
[ Clue: a microgram a day is good for you, an occasional milligram
is completely harmless, and a gram is potentially lethal. ]

Most fertilisers are pretty safe, too.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Rodger Whitlock wrote:
[ paraquat]

Only if you are daft enough to drink it. And enough people were...

It seems like many cases of gardeners accidentally ingesting
chemicals (not just paraquat) have occurred because the solution
was put into a softdrink bottle or something similar -- and then
the thirsty gardener takes a swig on a hot day! Ooopsie!

Not to say the same being done by children.

It is fundamental to the safe use of chemicals of all sorts
around the house that they *never* be mixed or stored, even for a
few minutes, in any container that would ever contain food or
drink. I would go so far as to say that this even applies to the
stuff you wash the kitchen floor with.

Whereas I would say that you are OTT. SOME chemicals (like bleach
and sodium laureth sulphate) cross the borderline between food use
and other use. If your floor cleaner is just the latter (i.e. a
stronger form of washing up liquid), then there is no problem.

The only pesticide that I both use and don't worry too much about
is Bordeaux mixture. It is easy to check that I have rinsed off
enough that even somebody licking the bowl would come to no harm.
[ Clue: a microgram a day is good for you, an occasional milligram
is completely harmless, and a gram is potentially lethal. ]

Most fertilisers are pretty safe, too.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.