HRCH Scaupgetters Tarnation QAA
HR Blackie 2 CGN, WCI
Metras's Hashtag Mickey
"Knowing how important right timing is in accomplishing right actions"
Yikes! Time to break out the canvas.
While I am all for keeping our dogs safe and healthy, there are some glaring problems with the implications of this report.
- There are no studies that indicate trace levels of these chemicals cause harm to dogs.
- The one study they cite that found higher levels of these chemicals in dogs than in humans could not determine the source(s), (i.e., they have not controlled for environment).
- This study acknowledged that chewing caused higher release of the target chemicals; bumpers are rarely used as chew toys and such use is typically against the manufactures recommendations. No levels were ID'd for chewing vs non-chewed. It could be that non-chewed exposure is at a level that is more acceptable.
- This study did not use real dog saliva and therefore any conclusions derived in reference to dogs is complete speculation.
- This is unpublished. That is to say, it is not yet verifiable "science" as it has yet to withstand the rigors of peer review.
The EHN knows all these weaknesses and yet they are irresponsibly propagandizing this since it fits their world view. Expected of an Environmental special interest organization.
IF it is found that there really is an immanent health risk then certainly I would expect bumper manufacturers will alter their manufacturing. But the way this is presently being reported is scientifically and socially irresponsible.