Products containing metaldehyde should be removed from consumer shelves. As
I have now learned, there are safe alternatives availabale so why even sell
something that can be fatal to animals and children? Children and pets are
usually in a home's yard. As a consumer purchasing an item for the garden, I
should not have to question whether a product is safe or not. If it is not, it should
be sold and used under controlled situations.
At the very least companies should design their packaging with eye-catching
warnings. Instead of a warning buried deep within the text or at the bottom in
miniscule print, there should be a bright-colored circle with Children/Pets and a
line through it on the front of the box. Some metaldehyde registrants are opposed
to this as consumers may not use the product. SO WHAT?!!! Many of the safer
products are made by the same companies so the financial consequence would
be minimal. How about worrying about protecting lives instead of the almighty
dollar?
Our vet told us metaldehyde poisoning is very common. On a recent Monday our
vet saw 5 cases from the weekend. That is only one hospital, one day!!! We left
the hospital with an estimate of $1,750 and not much hope our dog would survive.
We were one of the lucky ones; our dog survived and we are now more informed.
How many have to die before this active ingredient is removed from consumer
shelves?
Kerry Vermeulen
Roseville, CA
Comment submitted by K. Vermeulen
This is comment on Notice
Metaldehyde Reregistration Eligibility Decision; Notice of Availability
View Comment
Related Comments
View AllPublic Submission Posted: 10/02/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0231-0016
Oct 10,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 10/03/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0231-0018
Oct 10,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 10/12/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0231-0019
Oct 10,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 10/12/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0231-0021
Oct 10,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 10/12/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0231-0022
Oct 10,2006 11:59 PM ET