.

Hey! I don't think we deserved to be shuffled off to the Sandbox! We were still discussing whether or not we need to add a pet toxicity box to the database! Hmmm, guess we have our answer?

Some of us need much larger laps! Zuzu would need several king sized beds to show off the cats!

Would make things less confusing if whoever does the moving of threads to Sandbox status posts a short note as to the whys, etc., wouldn't it. With this topic, my opinion is that someone should ask Dave directly if he thinks the idea is feasible with the ATP database.

Edited to add: Just my opinion. :-D

I posted a link to this thread over on the Pets forum in hopes that some pet owners would chime in and say yes/no to the idea of a check box. I am warming to the check box idea a bit but hope it won't be too cut and dried and there will be room for an explanation...such as edible to humans if cooked properly, toxic to cows, potentially toxic to dogs...or some such thing.

There are lots of animal specific websites that would perhaps be a better place to check or discuss plant-animal toxicity. I also think it depends a bit on one's comfort level of caution.

You immediately run into the problem about daylilies being toxic to cats.

Many sites say they are but several of us would have no cats left if it was true. There is much confusion because many sites assume Hemerocallis is a lily.

This aside, you are going to have to refer to some authority for credibility or blame.

Also there is degree of toxicity. How technical will we need to be. Just one example: Some plants are perfectly safe, but if the person or animal has high blood pressure then the plant is/can be toxic. I'd be okay with a box that says: 'toxic' that would open a window where a person could add a bit more information. If we need to add more than a blurb, then we use the comment box to explain more fully.

One the other hand, this is All Things Plants and not All Things Animals and while I love my animals as I'm sure others do, we cannot expect this site to be all things for all people and all pets. I guess there is or should be a limit as to how in depth we need to go.

Sorry, that all sounds a bit serious. I just woke up.

Ha! How 'bout a checkbox that says "Possibly toxic to pets - check with your vet" (Hey, we're in the Sandbox now, after all.)

Oh, I like that because it will personalize the information to the specific pet and people won't get all freaked out.

Oh, wait then. That's no fun. Hmmm, how 'bout a checkbox that says: "If your pet ate this, PANIC NOW!!! Consult your vet as to how and if to induce vomiting." Oh, yeah. Much better!

I moved this thread to the sandbox because people were starting to post photos of their pets and the conversation had strayed entirely away from the subject at hand. But then it returned back on topic so I restored the thread back to the plant database forum.

I don't have a feeling on whether we should have the checkbox or not. If the consensus is to have it, we'll have it.

Oh, I guess that means we have to be good now.

Seriously, something along the lines of "Possibly toxic to pets" might be a good thing to have under Toxicity, to prompt people to do a little research for their particular pets.

Agreed!

The problem with having a checkbox for toxicity is that almost all vascular plants produce chemicals that can be toxic to animals. It's a result of the never ending arms race between plants and the animals that eat them. Whether a particular plant will harm a particular animal varies greatly depending on a whole host of factors, even within species. It's an awfully complex issue try to summarize with a checkbox in a database for plants.

That's certainly true, Kent, but there are novice gardeners out there who aren't aware that some plants are highly toxic to some pets. Which is why I can see having a gentle nudge in the database towards a bit of research. It does seem that most gardeners also have pets. Heh, which is why we end up with pictures of puppies in inappropriate places.

Yes, but a checkbox in the database tells them what, exactly?

Currently, there's a checkbox in the database for "Toxicity: Leaves are poisonous". A search on that field returns 34,999 results, truth be told it probably should return at least ten times that many results since most plants produce toxic chemicals of one sort or another. How many of those plants have harmed anyone, anywhere in the world, since let's say the turn of the century just to put an end date on it? Almost none. It's really a meaningless bit of information without any context.

This issue seems quite similar to the recent discussion about whether to have some sort of check boxes to identify specific healing properties in herbs. It was decided that would delve too far into medical information (or misinformation) and to simply check that a particular plant is known to have medicinal properties and to use the comment section for further information or discussion.

In our current database, we already have check boxes to identify if part of the plant is toxic (root, leaves, fruit). I think adding an additional box that it may be toxic to pets (dogs, cats, birds, lizards, et al) would be a bit redundant, although I do recognize that some plants that are safe for humans may be toxic to some animals. The key words are 'may' and 'some' - I think that type of squishy information is best placed in the comments section, hopefully with a web link to a reputable source for further research. That then becomes a member's opinion or sharing of information rather than a database fact.

Cross posted with Kent. I agree with his points.

with both of you!