Thread: Treated timber warning

Thanks for the warning but what a terribly sad way to discover this!!

If there are MSDS warnings on thongs like MDF, why not on treated timber furniture????

Originally Posted by artme

Thanks for the warning but what a terribly sad way to discover this!!

If there are MSDS warnings on thongs like MDF, why not on treated timber furniture????

Sales would probably take a hit if they had to have a sticker that says "warning: if your dog or small child chews on this it will probably die"

My Brother in law is a pest exterminator for a big name company.

They advise dogs to be kept away after spraying for some time, the chemicals they use are highly toxic to dogs. He mentioned once in a conversation that the vet has some sort of magic injection.

They have killed many, despite warning owners in the sternest terms.

Timber treatment is supposed to kill whatever eats it: that's the whole point. In some cases it's not termites that give it a chew, which can have sad consequences. There is no magic bullet treatment thats going to adhere to timber all by itself and only kill termites and fungus unfortunately, and given a choice between cheap and treated and expensive and durable the hip pocket nerve wins nearly every time.

Also, some timber species are toxic in and of themselves. For instance Cooktown Ironwood and Georgina Gidgee: both timbers are naturally resistant to damm near everything, and would almost never be available as a treated timber product but some of that resistance stems from the high naturally occurring loading of sodium fluroacetate.
Sodium fluroacetate is also known as 1080 - the best dog killing poison known to man, used in dog baiting programs all over the world. Kills dogs, pigs, humans that lick their fingers after handling it, etc etc. The leaves of the tree will kill cattle if they eat them, which is why you never park a cattle truck under an Ironwood tree. Native species with naturally occurring concentrations of this, and other compounds like arsenic are far more common then most realise. But if you don't chew the wood, and don't go leaving splinters in when you've been handling the stuff... it's never a problem.

Ergo, while I hate most of the chemical treatments such as CCA, beat up on them whenever I can, and heartily endorse the use of naturally resistant timbers in their place, I'd not be necessarily be saying it was timber treatment that killed the dog. Eating the wood was what killed the dog, but maybe a splinter punctured through his gut into an artery and he bled out internally too.

Tony, sometimes the obvious conclusions are not necessarily the correct ones. I think that Lab. should have been examined by someone with the relevant skills. I would not be surprised if the cause of death was something unrelated to the furniture chewing. I've seen too many cases where the owner was convinced their animal has been poisoned (though usually by "the neighbours", not the barbeque furniture), however, the actual cause of death was definitely not poisoning!

OK, it's entirely possible the furniture in question was treated with something it shouldn't have been treated with, and did cause the dog's demise, but any of the legal chemicals used for treating such wood would be highly unlikely to kill a large dog within 24 hours, in the doses they are likely to ingest by chewing on a leg or two. If it was due to the furniture-eating, then it's a matter of some concern that should be addressed & a few recall notices issued. I sure wouldn't want such dog-destroying furniture around my house, even outdoors. (Furniture-destroying dogs have been more of a problem round our way..... ).

My 2c,

was examined and attended by very qualified vet who has both country and city expertise over many years, dont take fools lightly this guy... I like him a lot