This is where education is the key. As a relatively intelligent person, I always read the labels on products and workout what is toxic and non toxic. My favourite is the safe for allergy sufferers with 'low fumes' attached. Just because it's low fumes, doesn't mean its safe. As an artist, I prefer to use stinky turps to clean my oil brushes, as the odorless turps they push now is just as toxic. But the stinky turps reminds you to be careful and only use it in well ventiltated rooms etc. All these people using anything low fumes splash it around with complete andonment of oh&s. The same goes for fly sprays. Perhaps this is one way of breeding out the stupid people?????? oh damn that optimism

There is no valid reason for Australia to be anything but a world leader in product safety. Bureaucratic inertia or a lack of political wherewithal are the only possible explanations. UNACCEPTABLE.

If you think fly spray is dangerous, check out aspartame, sugars chemical replacement in all diet fizzy drinks.

Jeff, the compounds in insecticides are acetylcholineesterase (ACE) inhibitors. Reversible (ACE) are used in medical practice for glaucoma and myasthenia gravis. Irreversible ACE inhibitors are used as insecticides as well as being used for chemical warfare, an example being Sarin. With all such things - insecticides, medicines, vaccinations etc -one needs to consider the toxicity, danger of bioaccumulation and the short vs long term benefit of the product. DDT (probably the major component of the fly sprays of your youth) was able to dramatically decrease the incidence of malaria in countries where it was endemic. Later it was found to persist in the environment and its use discontinued. There is always a balancing act with compounds of this nature. Will the short term benefits outweigh the potential risks? Should we, for example use a medication which can cure 99.99% of people with a certain condition, but kills the other 0.01%. If the condition was tinea, the answer is no, but if it was congestive heart failure the answer would probably be yes. While Choice (a laudable organisation) suggest that we have a permissive attitude to poisons, I would suggest that is not quite correct, and that Australia will have differing attitudes to different compound based on the level of evidence available. The Eurpoean model of placing the onus on the manufacturer top demonstrate a product is safe is also misleading, as many “safe” compounds are often found to be not safe over the years or under different circumstances DDT being a case in point, along with thalidomide and more recently the COX 2 inhibitors (Celebrex, Vioxx) The bottom line is we all need to weigh the benefits versus the risk with all things we consume, and to stay on top of the literature! (if you know how)

It's a sign of madness talking to yourself.

directeur - by the time i got half way through your comments i was just about passed out. you could compile a book of your comments and sell it as a sleeping aid.

zzzzzz: if you have a short attention span, limited intelligence and poor comprehension skills you should confine yourself to reading moron's comments, which while boring and inane are at least brief.

I recently discovered a book called Additive Alert. It tells you all about the hidden chemicals and toxins in everyday food. It certainly is an eye opener! Jeff, you'll never look at peanut butter the same again.

I enjoyed your post Directeur Sportif. very relevant to cancer treatment eg steroids:avascular necrosis.

thanks for your tips sporty - i'll try to remember them.