Swiffer cleaning fluids=toxic

[malkin]

Mine looks a lot like the one in Oakleaf's link except that it is blue and made (or labelled) Euro-Pro. I had a crumby little one before this, but it broke completely and utterly, so I got this one without my normal level of obsessive comparison because it was in stock at the store nearby.

[Andrea]

This makes me wonder if my Murphy's Oil Soap is harmful to the dogs (though I always lock them in the bedroom until it's totally dry)... I've just always used it because it's what my mom used on wood floors & what my horseback riding instructor told us to use to clean our tack. It works fabulously on both

[TsPoet]

Murphy's
http://www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/saf...OIL%20SOAP.htm

Swiffer
http://www.pg.com/content/pdf/01_abo...se_Cleaner.pdf

Neither has anything of concern in it.

[Andrea]

Thanks for the link! I just read the Murphy's bottle, and I'm guessing it's safe to use around the pets since the only "warning" type instructions it gives are "if swallowed, drink a glass of water to dilute"

[Dogmama]

Murphy's
http://www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/saf...OIL%20SOAP.htm

Swiffer
http://www.pg.com/content/pdf/01_abo...se_Cleaner.pdf

Neither has anything of concern in it.

Would we expect Proctor & Gamble to release something saying that their product is harmful & shouldn't be used around pets & children?

[Eden]

Would we expect Proctor & Gamble to release something saying that their product is harmful & shouldn't be used around pets & children?

Those are MSDS sheets..... while they are likely written by the manufacturer its also likely that they are accurate, otherwise the company would be opening themselves up to liability...

they are not really meant for the consumer, but rather for people who work in an environment where they are likely to come in contact with fairly large quantities of the products regularly (or at least quantities that can harm... some things don't take much). They aren't likely to mention pets or children at all.

[TsPoet]

MSDS for products like that are only going to come from the manufacturer. They are required and they are monitored and if they are incorrect the manufacturer is not only likely to be sued, they will face multiple gov't sanctions.
MSDS for the components are likely to come from other sources.
Contrary to fictional TV shows, I have never run into someone with some nefarious plot to destroy mankind just because they work for a chemical company. Chemical companies, like nearly everyone else, are out to make money. Getting sued or even just a bad reputation, does not make them money.
I think I've posted this before, but I guess I'll do it again - my mini cv

BA - Cellular Biology, University of Colorado
MS - Toxicology, University of Arizona
PhD - Pharmacology/Toxicology, University of Arizona.
Major Employment
CIIT, now the Hamner Institute, where I primarily studied MTBE (The gasoline additive)
Pacific Northwest National Laboratories, where I study multiple environmental contaminants, especially pertaining to risk assessment and biologically based modeling of dosimetry at target sites of toxicity.
My current focus is on organophosphorous pesticides, but I also work with fumigants like methyl bromide (now that's toxic!)

[OakLeaf]

Contrary to fictional TV shows, I have never run into someone with some nefarious plot to destroy mankind just because they work for a chemical company.

Way off topic here... but if you're interested in fiction about chemical companies, I suggest the novel Gain by Richard Powers. It's a very thoughtful book (with no villains and no nefarious plots). Ultimately I found it unsatisfying because I read fiction to make me feel, not to make me think; but this book makes the reader think a lot. Essentially, he argues convincingly that (to invert an old truism) the corporate entity alienates the capitalist from the consequences of production, with disastrous results for everyone.

methyl bromide (now that's toxic!)

And yet it's these same "benign" chemical companies who sell that stuff to farmers, lobby the states not to regulate it, etc.....

[Dogmama]

My pets cannot tell me, "Mom, I don't feel so good the day after you mop the floor." So, I'll err on the side of caution. Just because a company says something is safe doesn't make it so. Remember Vioxx?

It's pretty obvious that we won't agree, so maybe we should smoke the peace pipe & put this to rest?

[badger]

another reason why I stopped using swiffer is because I'm trying to avoid P&G as much as possible; they still actively engage in animal testing. I found it ironic they own Iams.

[newfsmith]

The original e-mail cited for this "rumor" said the dog died of liver failure. That is not the usual cause of death in anti-freeze poisoning, acute kidney failure is the usual pathway. Dogs are prone to liver failure and cancer. They are far more likely to die of that or chronic kidney disease. We all look for something to blame for stealing away our loved ones, but we need to accept that death happens to all.