Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dog Health Care


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:32 PM
sassafras's Avatar
sassafras sassafras is offline
such sights to show you
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJEtzel View Post
I will probably continue using it incorrectly regardless. Because, no one I know in real life cares about the real meaning, and that is what gets the point across. I'm understood just fine by anyone that isn't a science major, apparently. Numerous people in this thread, included...
It's not that I didn't understand your point. It's that I think your point is faulty and based on an incorrect understanding of how "natural" products work and what their risks are.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:34 PM
DJEtzel's Avatar
DJEtzel DJEtzel is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
Posts: 2,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sassafras View Post
The reason why I think it's necessary to get into specifics is that the beliefs that "natural" products are 1. chemical-free and 2. inherently safer than man-made products are incorrect and misleading. It's just fear mongering that interferes with thoughtful risk assessment about what to use (I'm speaking generally here, not just flea/tick control).
I AM interested to know in which cases natural products aren't safer than man-made products, when talking about consumption for humans or dogs? I mean... Organic food is safer than GMOs... natural remedies are safer than flu vaccines... I could go on and on. I feel that there may be a few exceptions to the rule, but generally, natural products are safer for the body than the man-made counterparts.
__________________

Red Dog's Reconnaissance Man CGC CL1-R CL1-H CL1-F CL1-S USJ
General Patton Vom Winter Storm
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:37 PM
sassafras's Avatar
sassafras sassafras is offline
such sights to show you
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJEtzel View Post
I AM interested to know in which cases natural products aren't safer than man-made products, when talking about consumption for humans or dogs? I mean... Organic food is safer than GMOs... natural remedies are safer than flu vaccines... I could go on and on. I feel that there may be a few exceptions to the rule, but generally, natural products are safer for the body than the man-made counterparts.
Well nobody knows if garlic is safer, because the chemical compound hasn't been identified and nobody's done any safety testing other than "a lot of dogs have used it safely." By that standard, ALL the man-made products on the market are just as safe because a lot of dogs have used THEM safely, so why the preference for garlic if that's your standard?

The assumption made about natural products is that they are inherently safe. It's a misleading and potentially dangerous fallacy, and not how I like to make decisions.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:42 PM
DJEtzel's Avatar
DJEtzel DJEtzel is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
Posts: 2,663
Default

So the anecdotal evidence with no reports of dogs being injured in any way from Bug Off Garlic, while MANY cases have been reported of injuries/side effects of products like Bio Spot, doesn't let you assume that one product is safer? What more research is there, if there are no controlled experiments to read by scientists?

The same could be asked of lemon/honey/vit c vs. flu vaccines...
__________________

Red Dog's Reconnaissance Man CGC CL1-R CL1-H CL1-F CL1-S USJ
General Patton Vom Winter Storm
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:42 PM
DenoLo DenoLo is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: MA
Posts: 367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sassafras View Post
Well nobody knows if garlic is safer, because the chemical compound hasn't been identified and nobody's done any safety testing other than "a lot of dogs have used it safely." By that standard, ALL the man-made products on the market are just as safe because a lot of dogs have used THEM safely, so why the preference for garlic if that's your standard?

The assumption made about natural products is that they are inherently safe. It's a misleading and potentially dangerous fallacy, and not how I like to make decisions.
Exactly. Their big study that they cite on their page is one where they force-fed 1/2 pound a day for 7 days, and only found a little bit of damage. So in other words...it's dose dependent. And I'm sure that used at proper dosages it's probably extremely safe. But...typically so are "man-made" products.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:43 PM
sassafras's Avatar
sassafras sassafras is offline
such sights to show you
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,740
Default

Also, my whole original point is that it is ignorant to say something like "I don't like to use chemicals so I use garlic" without the basic understanding that whatever it is in garlic that (maybe) works IS a chemical, nobody knows what it is or how it works, and nobody knows how safe it is.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:45 PM
sassafras's Avatar
sassafras sassafras is offline
such sights to show you
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenoLo View Post
Exactly. Their big study that they cite on their page is one where they force-fed 1/2 pound a day for 7 days, and only found a little bit of damage. So in other words...it's dose dependent. And I'm sure that used at proper dosages it's probably extremely safe. But...typically so are "man-made" products.
There's a saying among toxicologists that is something like "the dose makes the poison." Meaning... it isn't a substance that is dangerous or toxic, it is the dose you are exposed to. Some things take very minute amounts to be harmful and others take a huge amount. Heck, even water is toxic if you drink enough. What you really want, of course, is something that does what you want it to do at a much lower dose than a harmful or toxic dose.

But to assume and proclaim something is "safe" and inherently better because it "isn't a chemical" (which it is - or, stated more correctly, which it contains) and it is "natural" (which doesn't make it safe) when nobody really knows anything about it isn't a good basis for a decision IMO.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:53 PM
Lyzelle's Avatar
Lyzelle Lyzelle is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,713
Default

I've yet to see or hear of a dog drop dead from the wiff of an onion, clove of garlic, or vinegar.

The chemicals in many popular flea and tick medications and products, however...well, they have quite a different track record. Many of the synthetic chemicals used actually work because they interfere with the insects' nervous system. Either by blocking chlorine and therefore causing paralysis or by simply blocking nerve transmission completely. And given how many neurological symptoms have been documented and warned against while using these products...hm. I'll personally steer clear, and that is a decision I'm quite happy with.

There is nothing inherently dangerous about onions, garlic, or vinegar. If there were, I would think we would certainly know and plenty of dogs would be dead by now, given how many food companies put onions or garlic in their formulas.
__________________
Zander and HarleyQuinn
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:55 PM
sassafras's Avatar
sassafras sassafras is offline
such sights to show you
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJEtzel View Post
So the anecdotal evidence with no reports of dogs being injured in any way from Bug Off Garlic, while MANY cases have been reported of injuries/side effects of products like Bio Spot, doesn't let you assume that one product is safer? What more research is there, if there are no controlled experiments to read by scientists?
Well, first of all all topical man-made flea/tick control products are not the same. It's interesting that you use Bio Spot as an example because it traditionally has contained pyrethrins as its active ingredients - which ironically are completely natural, plant derived (from Chysanthemums), and relatively toxic (especially to cats) compounds compared to the active ingredients in something like Frontline or Advantage which are 100% man-made and quite a bit safer. I think very recently Bio Spot has switched to pyrethroids which are pyrethrin-like but man-made.

Anyway, I have thousands of anecdotal reports of dogs using Frontline with no injury/side effects whatsoever.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:58 PM
JessLough JessLough is offline
Love My Mutt <3
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 13,181
Default

We don't use anything, because I'm not a fan of putting (what i find) unnecessary chemicals, natural or not, on or in my dog.

16 years later, with daily hikes in the woods and daily swimming in the summer and we've never had an issue, either. Well, we've had ticks in the house, but it was the foster ferret that was found as a stray
__________________
Ella: 3 year old female ferret
Nacho: ~8 year old male ferret

Goodbye, Rosey. You were the best girl I could have asked for. 10/15/96-03/08/13
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 PM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site