Jumping spider and essential oils

[Stylopidae]

Thank you for the clarification. I am always open to discussion of my beliefs/assumptions and always wanting to learn. Your reply was very thorough and put in language I can understand.
I also appreciate the respectful way you delivered the info. very helpful.

No problem! We're all here to learn, right?

And here is where we get to see the hair splitting and words 'unreasonable and overly restrictive' are tossed about by Monsanto and friends and enemies
RfD does not take into account cumulative effects over time or lifetime exposure. Numerous law suits have been filed by the chemical manufacturers to ignore this gigantic herd of elephants in the room. Only what is established as RfD, immediate non lethal dosage level, is used as reference in establishing the safety of the chemical.

One consumer advocacy group pointed out this is akin to firing a gun at a person and if the bullet does not strike a vital organ it is considered safe.

RfDs take into account chronic and sublethal effects, as I mentioned above. So the gun analogy doesn't quite work here; we'd be able to see obvious sublethal effects from a gunshot. This is simply incorrect.

This is precisely why many 'consumer advocacy' groups are not taken seriously by regulatory entities.

Either way, to bring it back to the topic at hand, essential oils are probably fine to use around arthropods. Not recommended, but a Glade plug-in will not harm your invert collection.

 

[The Snark]

RfDs take into account chronic and sublethal effects,

Note the exceptions "other than". Reading through the fine print there is lots more hedging and dodging. That has been hammered on numerous times in courts until the chemical companies got cut slack. Loopholes everywhere and subject to interpretation. Also, lots of 'until proven otherwise' as glyphosate long term effects are presently turning up that went ignored.

Reference Dose (RfD): Description and Use in Health Risk Assessments | US EPA

This concept paper describes EPA's principal approach to and rationale for assessing risk for health effects other than cancer and gene mutations from chronic chemical exposure.

www.epa.gov

Until proven otherwise
Sep 23, 2022Glyphosate. Glyphosate is a widely used herbicide that controls broadleaf weeds and grasses. It has been registered as a pesticide in the U.S. since 1974. Since glyphosate's first registration, EPA has reviewed and reassessed its safety and uses, including undergoing registration review, a program that re-evaluates each registered pesticide .
This is presently in courts with the manufacturers pouring money into avoiding various risk assessment and liability issues. (This particular chemical is a serious problem as a whole galaxy of medical disorders are coming to light in the in the medical profession among third world farmers.)

This is precisely why many 'consumer advocacy' groups are not taken seriously by regulatory entities.

And your comment is precisely why consumer advocacy groups get sidelined and downplayed. They don't have the financial resources and are going up against dozens of attorneys from the chemical manufacturers. People assume all bases have been covered and public safety is assured when the fact stands more often than not attorneys fees ultimately end up deciding what is safe.
Those attorneys file dozens of cases in courts in various jurisdictions. They often get rejected or lose their cases. But it only takes one win in one court for a precedent to bet set.

Want some fun reading? Search engine: litigation involving glyphosates. A $10 billion slap on the wrist after it was safe and in use for 40 years. The cancer loophole. Just one of dozens of chemicals that are 'safe'.

So go ahead and fill your environment with 'safe' essential oil smog. RfDs can't ever be wrong. Unless they are, or there's a loop hole, or a court precedent, or further research has proven otherwise.

 

[ratluvr76]

So go ahead and fill your environment with 'safe' essential oil smog. RfDs can't ever be wrong. Unless they are, or there's a loop hole, or a court precedent, or further research has proven otherwise.

Oh man, I missed you Snarky

 

[Stylopidae]

So go ahead and fill your environment with 'safe' essential oil smog. RfDs can't ever be wrong. Unless they are, or there's a loop hole, or a court precedent, or further research has proven otherwise.

So in this thread, we’ve gone from ‘air fresheners will drown your bugs’ to ‘you can’t prove air fresheners won’t give your bugs cancer’.

I’m pretty happy with the distance those goalposts have moved.

Bayer is an extremely unethical company because they don’t hire the majority of their employees…instead opting to illegally use temp agencies to fill their rosters.

Although there is no actual evidence glyphosate causes cancer, I refuse to defend them.