Mgpaquin,

"...but that seems WAY too poisonous for me to want to put on anything that I EVER plan on putting into my mouth."

I should think so. Daconil is for use on production ornamentals ( both greenhouse and nursery), golf course tees, fairways, greens, non-residential turfgrasses, sod farms, and ornamental turfgrasses, and not for vegetable gardens or anything edible.

I also am not an organic gardener, although I do use some of their methods like compost piles, but I prefer to use something completely safe on my veggies, like GreenCure.

MM

Actually there is a formulation that *is* intended for edibles. Many of them.

Next time you are in a garden center take a look at the fungicides intended for use on edibles and look at the active ingredient. If it is Chlorothalonil, it's the same active ingredient as Daconil.

I believe Daconil used to be approved for residential lawn use, but has been restricted and now requires a license to apply.

I am not sure if the Daconil product for edibles has been pulled off the market or not, but I have seen fungicides labeled for edible use in the garden center with the same Chlorothalonil as the active ingredient.

The commercial stuff is 80% or so Chlorothalonil, but the stuff for edibles is usually 20% or less.

I love the warning label which reads in part: "Corrosive. Causes irreversible eye damage. May be fatal if
inhaled."

And if one wishes to use it 'safely' they must:

wear
 coveralls over short-sleeved shirt and short pants
 chemical resistant gloves made of any waterproof materialÂ
Category A (e.g., barrier laminate, butyl rubber, nitrile rubber,
neoprene rubber, natural rubber, polyethylene, polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) or viton)
 chemical resistant footwear plus socks
 protective eyewear
 chemical resistant headgear for overhead exposure
 chemical resistant apron when cleaning equipment, mixing, or
loading.
 and a dust/mist filtering respirator (MSHA/NIOSH approval
number prefix TC-21C) or a NIOSH approved respirator with
any N, R, P or HE filter
 For exposures in enclosed areas, such as a greenhouse, applicators
and other handlers must wear a respirator with an
organic vapor-removing cartridge with a prefilter approved for
pesticides (MSHA/NIOSH approval number prefix TC-23C),
or a canister approved for pesticides (MSHA/NIOSH approval
number prefix TC-14G), or a NIOSH approved respirator with
an organic vapor (OV) cartridge or canister with any N, R, P
or HE prefilter.

And people actually *do* use the stuff on food they grow for themselves. Go figure. I would think the label would be enough to scare anyone away. Heck, a pack of smokes simply says 'may cause cancer'. That warning is mild in comparison. At least if I want to smoke cigarettes I don't need a nuclear contamination suit and it won't permanently blind me if I get some smoke in my eyes.

Smokers are routinely viewed as stupid people taking stupid risks with their health by overweight people eating foods laced with known carcinogens and feeding it approvingly to their kids. Heck some of them even grow their own food and make sure to spray it with poisons so toxic a head to foot protective suit and respirator has to be used to apply it 'safely'.

Daconil for gardens needs to be highly diluted, using one tablespoon per gallon of water. It is used early in the growing season to prevent fungus from taking hold. And you can't compare the high concentration mixture that is for landscaping use with the highly diluted stuff you would spray on tomatoes early in the season.

I am part of my plant's HAZMAT team, and we have well over 80,000lbs of anhydrous ammoina as a refridgerant stored in our facility. In the event of a massive ammonia spill, we require Level A protection. Level A is also required for cyanide, ammonium chloride and other "quick acting" lethal gases/liquids.

The level of protection that is reccomended for the "safe" application of this Daconil is rated level C, falling short of Level B ONLY by the requirement of a full "rainsuit", like a firefighter would wear.

Take that warning that justaguy posted VERY seriously if you value your skin, eyesight and lungs. That stuff falls (practically) only 1 level below a weapons-grade chemical substance, as toxicity goes.

"Corrosive. Causes irreversible eye damage. May be fatal if inhaled."

If you read the MSDS here: http://sti.fmpdata.net/ftp/datasheet/MSDS-CableSpray.pdf

It seems a bit downplayed to me, considering the protection requirements to "safely" apply the substance.

I dunno...maybe I am overreacting becasue I am HAZMAT biassed, but I sure as hell won't ever use that stuff.

Clock

Yeah, I posted the wrong link, my bad. THat was the MSDS for a cable spray, yep.

Now, if the solution is so dilute that:

"For application of product in accordance with label instructions, no special eye protection
is needed."

"For application of product in accordance with label instructions, no special respiratory
protection is required."

....then it must be pretty weak. But I tell you, it still freaks me out.

Clock

I've seen this controversy on the tomato forum soo many times before. Daconil is nothing more than Ortho Garden Disease Control which is 29% Chlorothalonil and is the most widely used fungicide for vegetables. Daconil is formulated in many different concentrations for different uses but the 29% concentrate is what you want for tomatoes.

If it wasn't for Daconil, I would have no tomatoes and I don't use other chemicals in my garden.

I just did a search on the tomato forum on Daconil and got 83 hits.

Here is a link that might be useful: Results of Daconil search

I use it on my tomatoes and am going to start this year as soon as they are planted (end of this week). I don't wear protective clothing, goggles,whatever, and have been using it for years. In the weak solutions approved for home use, it is less poisonous than table salt (which is lethal in fairly small quantitites!). I know a lot of people get their jollies from scare tactics and if you want to go to all the work of caring for tomatoes and then losing them to early blight, that's your lookout. But a little accuracy in statements made would be a lot more helpful to new growers.

I stand corrected. My bottle of Daconil contains 0.87% Chlorothalonil.

It's too bad this forum has no moderators to remove blatantly misinforming posts... there'd be little left of this thread besides kubota's, peggy's & roser's posts.

I'm sorry, I rarely call people out on a public forum but it's gone on too long with nobody stepping up or taking corrective measures.

One person maybe has an agenda and starts an opinionated thread on a product that doesn't apply to us, another agrees and misinforms in the process, then somebody mentions the error but then lists all the precautionary equipment needed for the wrong product, plus throws in an insult to smokers & overweight people! A HAZMAT Team member reading the wrong MSDS label? What implications might this have to your co-workers when something goes wrong at work? I think you're getting off easy by just saying a "my bad." Then you follow it up with an opinionated comment, "it still freaks me out."

"To each his own, but that seems WAY too poisonous for me to want to put on anything that I EVER plan on putting into my mouth."

There's a good chance something you bought at the supermarket had Daconil on it at one time...it's one of the most widely used fungicides.

"I should think so. Daconil is for use on production ornamentals ( both greenhouse and nursery), golf course tees, fairways, greens, non-residential turfgrasses, sod farms, and ornamental turfgrasses, and not for vegetable gardens or anything edible."

This is simply wrong, it's used on many vegetables and edibles.

"Actually there is a formulation that *is* intended for edibles. Many of them."

Correct.

I believe Daconil used to be approved for residential lawn use, but has been restricted and now requires a license to apply.

I am not sure if the Daconil product for edibles has been pulled off the market or not,..."

Daconil does not require a license, nor has it been pulled off the market.

"The commercial stuff is 80% or so Chlorothalonil, but the stuff for edibles is usually 20% or less.

I love the warning label which reads in part: "Corrosive. Causes irreversible eye damage. May be fatal if
inhaled." "

Home use is typically 29.6%, not "20% or less"... there are some formulations even higher that are used on edibles without any license.

The warning you quoted is not applicable here, wrong info/product.

"And people actually *do* use the stuff on food they grow for themselves. Go figure. I would think the label would be enough to scare anyone away. Heck, a pack of smokes simply says 'may cause cancer'. That warning is mild in comparison. At least if I want to smoke cigarettes I don't need a nuclear contamination suit and it won't permanently blind me if I get some smoke in my eyes."

Wrong info/product.

"The level of protection that is reccomended for the "safe" application of this Daconil is rated level C, falling short of Level B ONLY by the requirement of a full "rainsuit", like a firefighter would wear.

Take that warning that...

mgpaquin,

Only you can decide what you're going to ingest. Some people have success with using a baking soda spray to prevent some fungus diseases. Use a spray of 1 1/2 tablespoons of baking soda per gallon of water. Some add 1 T of horticultural oil to the mix.

• Posted by OkieDawn Z7 OK (My Page) on

  Wed, May 4, 05 at 10:13

Assuming it is early blight, which is one of the problems that shows up at this time of year (May-June timeframe), there is an entire range of products available. I'll run through them, starting with the MOST TOXIC and ending with LEAST TOXIC. You can then choose what you are most comfortable with using.

1. Over-the-Counter General Use Products Containing Chlorothalonil (2,4,5,6-tetrachloroisophthalonitrile):

DACONIL (actually discontinued by mfg. but still available if stores haven't depleted their stock) 29% chlorothalonil

GARDEN DISEASE CONTROL by Ortho -- the replacement for Daconil I think, generally available wherever gardening supplies are sold. Costs roughly $15.00 a pint.

BRAVO--available in several formulations, containing from about 30% to about 80% chlorothalonil--more of a commercially-oriented product for ag users and forest service. If you buy Bravo be sure to the 30% one. That is the concentration the government rates as safe for use in vegetable gardens.

FUNG-ONIL by Bonide--essentially the same as Ortho Garden Disease Control

All of these are generally considered safe for use in the chemical world, but they break down into compounds that are toxic to fish and mammals. They are very effective though, and to be honest, they are more effective than anything we organic gardeners use. That doesn't mean I would use it. If used, protect eyes and skin as it may irritate them. Generally the MOST EFFECTIVE product available for treating blights. All these products use chlorothalonil from the same manufacturer so they are all pretty much the same, although one might be 27% active ingredient and another one might be 29%. They may have different inert ingredients.

2. COPPER-FUNGICIDES Copper products are the "big gun" in the organic world and some organic people use them. However, they are technically considered an Inorganic Fungicide and are used as a broad-spectrum foliar fungicide. They are somewhat effective but are not as effective as chlorothanlonil. I don't like using them as copper can also be toxic to fish and can cause a whole host of symptons/irritations to the person putting the copper products in their garden.

KOCIDE: Its active chemical ingredient is cupric hydroxide.

If you decide to use a copper product, please google and do some research on it first. I honestly think it would be safer to use a Daconil-type product than a copper-type.

The next three are probably equally safe (non-toxic) for use, but I put Seranade first because it might be more effective than the other two.

3. SERANADE--Organic Control For Disease,...

Hi,

Since a couple have responded directly to my post I thought I would respond.

Yes, the application warnings I listed were for a stronger concentration that what is available to home users.

Yes, I understand some tomato growers say they have to use it to get a crop.

To each their own.

I really don't care what anyone uses on the stuff they will eat - not my business.

Nevertheless I would think the fact that daconil is no longer approved for residential lawn use, but *is* still approved for edible garden use *might* cause users a little bit of concern.

If not, OK. It's your garden, your rules, your judgment.

I would point out another perspective on this issue:

• Daconil is a poison. It has a rather broad spectrum use on fungi but how it works is still not completely understood.

• It does require special handling and protection when using.

• Daconil lacks complete safety testing. It's only been tested for a few things that are required to put it on the market. There are still questions about it's effects both acute and chronic that are still not known.

• Exposure in humans can be negative and have already been documented to create responses by the human immune system (meaning your body doesnt want it and it makes that system work harder to rid itself of it).

• There is research showing it harms other non-target organisms (other than fungi) effecting both reproductive and respiration functions.

Daconil's use is wide spread. It and its metabolites can be found in the environment away from it's target area. This is partly what prompted studies on harm to non-target organisms.

One can only be certain of the things one can measure and test. As a biochem prof who specialized in toxicology once said "Abscene of proof is not proof of abscence". Many products are put on the market with limited testing and "assurances" from manufacturers or government entities only to be later pulled. Many times it is only the manufacturer doing the safety testing and only disclosing what they want to when reporting.

Since daconil lacks thorough testing, is considered a toxin by label standards, can trigger immune responses in humans, effects the metabolisms of non-target organisms, and lacks appropriate double blind studies for acute and especially chronic exposures, I choose to avoid it.

Long term, my health, that of others around me and responsibility to the environment are far more important than the short term concerns about a tomato plant.

Even when I lived in North Carolina, I was always able to manage early blight and septoria by just using cultural methods.

The home use Daconil is only 29.6%.

Here's some FACTS from the proper MSDS:

TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION
ACUTE
MSDS

EYES:Eye irritant (rabbit and monkey); reversible corneal, iridal and conjunctival
effects; maximum mean scores (noted at 24 hours): Rabbits - 23.3/110; Monkeys -
25.3/110. This product is considered to be a moderate to severe eye irritant. All irritation
clearing by day 21. EPA FIFRA toxicity category - II.

DERMAL LD50:Pratically non-toxic, (Rat) LD50 >5.8 gm/Kg); EPA FIFRA toxicity
category - IV. Slightly irritating to skin (Rabbit); EPA FIFRA toxicity category - IV.

ORAL LD50:This product is practically nontoxic if ingested. Rat LD50 >17.4 g/kg. EPA
FIFRA toxicity category - IV.

INHALATION LC50:This product if inhaled is practically nontoxic. 4 hour inhalation
LC50 for rats >7.16 mg/liter. EPA FIFRA toxicity category - IV.

SENSITIZATION:Guinea pig - no evidence of allergic skin reactions.

There is no epidemiology data classifying chlorothalonil as a human carcinogen.

STATE REGULATIONS

PROPOSITION 65 STATEMENT:Chlorothalonil is on the California Prop. 65
list. When this product is used according to the label directions, exposure and thus risk is
below the level which requires a Prop 65 warning.

........................

Obviously, don't spray it in your eyes... I wonder what the MSDS would be for vinegar or a lemon...

* Daconil concentrate for home gardens contains 29.6% chlorathalonil.
* Daconil is diluted anywhere from 1 to 3 tsp (1 tbsp) per gallon depending on crop.
* There are 768 teaspoons in a gallon.
Daconil
Ratio
chlorathalonil (%)
undiluted
~3:1
29.6%
1 tsp
768:1
.039%
2 tsp
384:1
.077%
3 tsp (1 tbsp)
256:1
.116%

I think for tomatoes the recommended application rate is 2 teaspoons.... 0.077%

Meanwhile the MSDS for Serenade (an OMRI-approved organic fungal control) contains these facts:
* May be irritating to skin for some individuals.
* If product comes into contact with skin, irritation may occur.

and from the Serenade label:
If inhaled: Move person to fresh air. If person is not breathing, call 911 or an ambulance, then give artificial respiration, preferably mouth-to-mouth if possible. Call a poison control center or doctor for further treatment advice.

If in eyes: Hold eye open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15-20 minutes. Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice.

PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS

HAZARDS TO HUMANS & DOMESTIC ANIMALS

CAUTION
Harmful if inhaled. Avoid breathing spray mist. Remove contaminated clothing and wash before reuse. Avoid contact with skin, eyes, or clothing. Wash thoroughly with soap and water. (The above is for Serenade, not Daconil.)

Hortist, did you find any documented link between Autism and 29.6% Chlorothalonil, or 0.077% Chlorothalonil?

Would you consider sodium chloride a poison too, or no?

Is there any documented info or links on 0.077% chlorothalonil...

with mercury falling from the sky, radon oozing up from below and 2nd hand pollutants spewing from too many orifices i am grateful to be alive. my use of daconyl is restricted, with strict adherence to label directions and application. often i will reduce the strength by 10 percent (on most all my chems) , risk some loss and enjoy the lower crop yield. nature has it's way with us, no matter what we do. we must go with the ebb/flow of her gentle tides...

I've just got a concentrate bottle of Daconil from Amazon (Gulfstream Home & Garden Daconil Fungicide Concentrate) but the instruction does not state the mixing ratio for strawberry application. Is it OK if I go with the tomato's ratio ?

Thanks.

I think YOU are the one throwing insults around. Some estimates go up to 80% overweight. For "obesity", the confirmed figures are forty to fifty per cent. The SAD, or Standard American Diet is certifiably known to be the most toxic diet on earth. The comment was NOT directed as an insult but listed for comparison purposes in the general discussion of toxcicity -- THE LESS TOXINS OF ANY KIND and FROM ANY SOURCE, THE BETTER. Each and every ingredient listed as contained in any given processed food has also likely, itself, undergone many processing steps . "Overweight" is a EUPHEMISM, here, for the innumerable problems existing as a result of the Standard American Diet, or "SAD" -- pointing out the fact that most people in the US feed toxic, processed foods to their children can hardly be ascribed the status of "a thrown in insult". You're not just being insulting you're imputing ! So far as error, you list many differnt instances as a whole, long string of citations in order to weight your arguement against any single one of them AND the persons who posted them (none of whom claim, in the first place, to be an expert or authority in any branch of science or law) -- a device know in the study of rhetoric by the technical term "Climax". Your words also impute foolhardiness, negligence, wrongfulness to the commentor. BUT YOU'RE THE ONE WRONG. And you DO claim irrefutable authority ! And you're plain wrong about the smoking statement, too ! A cigarette smoker already carries AWARENESS of the very real "possibility" of toxic exposure -- but the point being make here is : MOST non-smokers are AWARE of repeated, continual (and alarming) health warnings -- so THEY view smokers as stupid people who wrongfully partake of a dangerous and regulated substance. As if smokers had no first hand knowledge and awareness, and as if ENVIRONMENTAL TOXINS were something separate in the lungs than "stupid" cigarette smoke.

YOU RAIL AGAINST WHAT YOU CALL "BLATANT" misinformation or errors -- again, an INSULTING IMPUTATION of your own, considering that the word "errors" would be sufficient and adequate to the meaning of your sentence -- AND THE ITEMS YOU GO ON TO LIST ARE NOT EVEN ERRORS -- IT IS YOUR OWN STATEMENTS THAT MISINFORM the decently concerned person, a person who, likely and suitablY, seeks to lessen the TOTAL AMOUNT OF TOXIC EXPOSURE FOR THEMSELVES AND OTHERS.

For example, Wikipedia states that when Daconil breaks down in the environment, it becomes THIRTY TIMES MORE TOXIC than it was at the time of it's application.

For another -- THIS SUBSTANCE HAS IN FACT BE BANNED AND PROHIBITED in other parts of the globe.

BANNED.

NOW WHICH COMMENTS SHOULD BEAR YOUR FAIRY-TALE CALUMNIES ? "BLATANT", "ERROR", "MISINFORMATION" ! "THROWN IN", eh ?. YOU HAVE THROWN IN A LITTLE MORE THAN INSULTS, AND, PLEASE REMEMBER, THOSE WERE NO INSULTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. NOT ONLY DO YOU ATTACK OTHERS WHILE BEING THE ONE ACTUALLY IN ERROR -- YOU...

I'm going with those who calmly presented facts and not screamed with ALL CAPS.

Daconil isn't purified water, but in the very diluted form recommended for tomatoes it's safe enough for its intended use. Organic substitutes may or may not work as well, but I think gardeners can figure this out on their own, and use whatever approach works for them.

Well, here it is 7/1/21 and I just got my second rash on my outer thighs after trimming the roses my husband treated with Daconil in May. Never used it before, but our local garden center recommended it. I was not wearing gloves because it was 91 degrees and I was hot. It was sprinkling rain and cloudy, though, so I wanted to get the job done before the heavier rain arrived or the full sun returned. I wiped my hands on my pants often, and I guess that is what caused the rash. I got hives/rash the last week of May and they lasted for a month. Now I have them again. Nasty-looking rash! I also got the rash on my elbows, probably from kneeling and touching my pants that were contaminated. Has to be the Daconil as I have not been in contact with anything other than the sprayed roses.

From the Daconil MSDS.

Symptoms of Acute Exposure: Harmful if inhaled. Causes eye irritation. Prolonged or frequently repeated skin contact may cause allergic reaction in some individuals. Overexposure to spray mist may cause respiratory tract irritation.

Daconil as an irritant is well known. The current MSDS seems to be more specific about that then the one quoted here from 14 years ago. Some more about that in this ancient piece. Evidently some people are VERY alllergic to it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1983/06/18/lawsuit-filed-against-makers-of-the-fungicide-daconil/d12a2919-2d47-4788-856d-50aedb6af096/