4 ms·
The biggest issue with every one of these websites: dogs are amazingly size-diverse. They range from a 4lb chihuahua to a 200+lb mastiff. If humans were simila
by sandworm101 3y ago
The biggest issue with every one of these websites: dogs are amazingly size-diverse. They range from a 4lb chihuahua to a 200+lb mastiff. If humans were similarly diverse, we would run from 60lb dwarfs to 3000+lb giants. Poisons are all about the dose, or at least the dose per mass of dog. A Hersey bar that might kill or at least cause suffering for the chihuahua will likely do absolutely nothing to the mastiff. Dogs are also very diverse in health and constitution, from very sensitive purebreds with allergies and strong reactions, to resilient mutts that shrug off most things. So trying to create a website of what is and isn't deadly to "dogs" in general is very difficult.
Maybe a website about poisons for house cats. They range from perhaps 5 to 20 lbs.
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y agoMy boss from my highschool job had a big dog that loved to get into our candy bars. They were milk chocolate and he was a big boy, so he was fine.
- leovander 3y agoAre dogs allergic to American, watered down, chocolate or chocolate proper like you'd get from Cadbury in the UK or other countries?
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y agoProper chocolate like this? https://www.britishcornershop.co.uk/cadbury-white https://www.britishcornershop.co.uk/cadbury-white
- excalibur 3y ago+1 for cats. But yeah be careful with the dispensing of medical advice, someone is going to feed their pet something toxic and then sue because your site said it was okay.
- kanbara 3y agomost american/anglo content ever. why can’t we just take knowledge from others and recognise that we have some obligation to ourselves to use our brains?
- userbinator 3y agoUnfortunately, because lawyers want to profit.
- dumbo-octopus 3y agoThis site https://www.petmd.com/dog/chocolate-toxicity https://www.petmd.com/dog/chocolate-toxicity has an input where you enter the dog weight, type of chocolate, and amount consumed, then it plots your "danger level" on a sliding scale. Would be fantastic to have that for more substances, but I don't know how solid the canine "LD50" data is in general.
- fs_tab 3y agoRelated, the verified record holders for lowest and highest adult weights are (by species): Canis familiaris (Dogs): ~371x difference 0.45 kg | 1. lb | Milly | Chihuahua 167. kg | 368.17 lb | Benedictine | Saint Bernard Felis catus (House cats): ~31x difference 0.68 kg | 1.50 lb | Tinker Toy | Blue Point Himalayan 21.23 kg | 46.8 lb | Himmy | Tabby Homo sapiens (Modern humans): ~298x difference 2.13 kg | 4.7 lb | Lucia Zarate 635. kg | 1400. lb | Jon Brower Minnoch Edit: Formatting
- why_at 3y agoGiven what I know about humans, Lucia was obviously a newborn. I'm less confident when it comes to dogs so I don't know if Milly was a baby or not. Either way, doesn't including babies throw things off a bit? I feel like the the difference between the smallest and largest adult dog is much bigger than the same ratio in people, unless there is a person with very extreme dwarfism or something.
- sandworm101 3y agoNeither of the people on either side of that scale are what anyone would call "healthy". A 4 lb dog can be completely normal and healthy, so too a 200 lb mastiff. A 2-lb person will not be healthy, nor any 1000+lb person. Those are nano-percentage outliers. Fyi, the wikipedia entry for Lucia Zarate cites larger numbers, as much as 14 lbs.