honeysuckle berries - poisonous?
Tracey Pendleton
I have looked at several places online to try and find out if honeysuckle
berries are poisonous to humans or not and seem to find a variety of
opinions, ranging from "no, not at all" through " will give you the runs",
through " eat them at your peril".
So can you please tell me what to believe? My neighbour has a two and a half
year old and is worried about him eating the berries of her honerysuckle.
Can't tell you what variety it is, unfortunately.
TIA
Tracey
Mike
Pendleton <tracey.p...@nospam.ntlworld.com> writes
>
>So can you please tell me what to believe? My neighbour has a two and a half
>year old and is worried about him eating the berries of her honerysuckle.
>Can't tell you what variety it is, unfortunately.
>
>TIA
>
>Tracey
I don't really think that you should be toooooooooo worried about this.
Whilst it is very nice to be neighbourly, (I have always got on very
well with mine), it is not up to you to make your garden safe for their
children. I am not being mercenary in saying that if they have children,
they should look after them. We have had 4 children and we have eyes in
the backs of our heads to look after them.
Are you going to make sure no cars go up and down the road, .. . .
because of your neighbours children?
Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
River Class Assn Dinner Leamington Spa Sept 21st.
National Service (R.A.F) Assn Reunion Hayling Island 11th - 14th October.
H.M.S.Collingwood Assn Trafalgar Dinner
Aston Court Hotel Coventry 18th - 21st October.
ne...@nwjones.demon.co.uk
Most plants are mildly poisonous. This is usually the safest thing to
assume. Honeysuckle is as far as I can tell not deadly. Lonicera
pericyclamen our native one can I have read cause vomiting.
Poisonous plants often have their nature exagerated. (Ragwort is one
example of this. It isn't that deadly.)
I have never heard before of honeysuckle being considered a serious threat
to young children before.
I would suggest you type the words "Children are Berry curious" into
google. (it is a PDF file that you may have to view as HTNL if you don't
have an acrobat reader.)
I found a paper suggesting that an American Lonicera was _not_ poisonsous.
I also found this pets site which listed two loniceras as safe for pets.
http://www.vin.com/PetCare/Articles/VetHospital/M01487.htm
My guess is that honeysuckle is one of those plants that can upset the
stomach. It may take more than a few berries to do this. This sometimes
gets exagerated to "really Poisonous". It is a common plant and if it
killed people regularly we would know.
As for working out the validity of what you see on-line I can only suggest
the following. (I own my own specialist search engine site which you can
find following links from my personal site.)
Try when you are looking for technical answers using technical words.
In this case using lonicera and toxic not Honeysuckle and poisonous.
You tend to find the better sources of technical information like that.
Secondly look at how authoritiative the website is. Is it written by an pro
or by an amateur. If it is an amateur site it could still be very good.
Amateurs often know their subject very well the word comes from the Latin
word for love one of our most powerful emotions.
If it just says "Honeysuckle is poisonous" then that may not mean much.
If it says "our resarch has shown that it contains so many milligrams of
such and such toxin and has been shown to cause death in rats". That is
better information.
It is best to treat all plants as toxic. In this case I would suggest
removing any berries a child might eat if you are really worried.
--
Neil Jones- Ne...@nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.butterflyguy.com/
NOTE NEW WEB ADDRESS
"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
National Nature Reserve
Peter Crosland
> Most plants are mildly poisonous. This is usually the safest thing to
> assume. Honeysuckle is as far as I can tell not deadly. Lonicera
> pericyclamen our native one can I have read cause vomiting.
> Poisonous plants often have their nature exagerated. (Ragwort is one
> example of this. It isn't that deadly.)
I don't know about humans but ragwort is deadly to many animals and it is an
agonising death as well. The poison remains potent even when the plant is
dried as it can be in hay.
The rule with berries, or plants generally, is if in doubt don't eat them!
Nick Maclaren
In article <HYY29.8724$U44.574653@newsfep2-gui>,
ne...@nwjones.demon.co.uk writes:
|> Tracey Pendleton wrote:
|>
|> > I have looked at several places online to try and find out if honeysuckle
|> > berries are poisonous to humans or not and seem to find a variety of
|> > opinions, ranging from "no, not at all" through " will give you the runs",
|> > through " eat them at your peril".
|> >
|> > So can you please tell me what to believe? My neighbour has a two and a
|> > half year old and is worried about him eating the berries of her
|> > honerysuckle. Can't tell you what variety it is, unfortunately.
|>
|> assume. Honeysuckle is as far as I can tell not deadly. Lonicera
|> pericyclamen our native one can I have read cause vomiting.
|> Poisonous plants often have their nature exagerated. (Ragwort is one
|> example of this. It isn't that deadly.)
|>
|> I have never heard before of honeysuckle being considered a serious threat
|> to young children before.
Lonicera nitida is grown so that birds can eat its berries in
the winter. This says little, unfortunately. But I think that
you are right in that the family is not known for lethal poisons.
|> It is best to treat all plants as toxic. In this case I would suggest
|> removing any berries a child might eat if you are really worried.
I wouldn't. I REALLY wouldn't. It is a BAD idea.
Children have to learn, though I should have hoped that they would
have been taught basic safety long before the age of two and a half.
It is a good idea to expose them to the difference between edible
and inedible berries in a context where a mistake or disobedience
is unlikely to be fatal. It is a very bad idea to bring them up
in a sanitised environment, and risk them leaving it temporarily
and finding (say) laburnum seeds.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
Email: nm...@cam.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679
ne...@nwjones.demon.co.uk
>>
>> Most plants are mildly poisonous. This is usually the safest thing to
>> assume. Honeysuckle is as far as I can tell not deadly. Lonicera
>> pericyclamen our native one can I have read cause vomiting.
>> Poisonous plants often have their nature exagerated. (Ragwort is one
>> example of this. It isn't that deadly.)
>
> I don't know about humans but ragwort is deadly to many animals and it is
> an agonising death as well. The poison remains potent even when the plant
> is dried as it can be in hay.
This is not entirely truthful. Ragwort is not as excessively dangerous as
painted. It is only really dangerous in hay. In fact horses and cattle
actually have to eat several STONE in weight of the plant.
There is some quite conclusive research on this. The figures I have seen
say that a horse would eat up to 5.5 STONE of the weed to kill them.
>
> The rule with berries, or plants generally, is if in doubt don't eat
> them!
>
>
>
--
--
Neil Jones- Ne...@nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.butterflyguy.com/
Tracey Pendleton
hmm... interesting. Can I just say that the plant is in my neighbour's
garden, not mine - there's no way I'm child-proofing my garden unless I
produce my own (kids, that is!).
I agree that they need to learn the difference, but not sure my neighbour
will see it that way. Anyway, I will pass all your comments onto her and she
can make the decision.
Thanks
Tracey
"Sacha" <sa...@nospamgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:koqoku4vkg8dt55tg...@4ax.com...
> I don't think she has to worry too much. A child of that age shouldn't
> be out of her sight long enough to make that a problem and while many
> plants have some toxicity, I don't think you'll find any recent
> instances of children dying from eating honeysuckle berries.
> --
> Sacha
> http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk/
Peter Crosland
> > I don't know about humans but ragwort is deadly to many animals and it
is
> > an agonising death as well. The poison remains potent even when the
plant
> > is dried as it can be in hay.
>
> This is not entirely truthful. Ragwort is not as excessively dangerous as
> painted. It is only really dangerous in hay. In fact horses and cattle
> actually have to eat several STONE in weight of the plant.
> There is some quite conclusive research on this. The figures I have seen
> say that a horse would eat up to 5.5 STONE of the weed to kill them.
Well I suggest you check your facts before making such assertions! Your
suggestion that my posting was untruthful amounts to libel quite apart from
illustrating your own stupidity.
Ragwort is a cumulative poison that causes severe liver damage that often
results in death particularly in horses and cattle. Sheep are also affected.
The effects can take weeks and even months to become apparent as any country
vet will tell you. The symptoms include weight loss, depression, decreased
appetite, neurological signs (yawning, head pressing, and ataxia). Swelling
under the abdomen (ventral oedema), photosensitization and jaundice may also
be present. Many horses die within two to four weeks of initial
presentation. Other can take longer though they are usually humanely
destroyed rather that suffer a lingering death. That is why it is one of the
five weeds subject to control under the 1959 Weeds Act.
Tumbleweed
"Peter Crosland" <g6...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aij0pm$beq$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > Most plants are mildly poisonous. This is usually the safest thing to
> > assume. Honeysuckle is as far as I can tell not deadly. Lonicera
> > pericyclamen our native one can I have read cause vomiting.
> > Poisonous plants often have their nature exagerated. (Ragwort is one
> > example of this. It isn't that deadly.)
>
> I don't know about humans but ragwort is deadly to many animals and it is
an
> agonising death as well. The poison remains potent even when the plant is
> dried as it can be in hay.
>
Is there any way to persuade cats to eat it?
--
Tumbleweed
Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Natalie
> >
> > I don't know about humans but ragwort is deadly to many animals and it
is
> an
> > agonising death as well. The poison remains potent even when the plant
is
> > dried as it can be in hay.
> >
>
> Is there any way to persuade cats to eat it?
I hope you have taken cover after that remark Tumbleweed ;~)
What about persuading slugs and snails???
Natalie
A Cat Lover!!!
Tumbleweed
"Natalie" <ha...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aijucr$14ijmd$1...@ID-104725.news.dfncis.de...
They are cleverer than cats. And cuter <VBG>!
Natalie
> > >
> > > Is there any way to persuade cats to eat it?
> >
> > I hope you have taken cover after that remark Tumbleweed ;~)
> >
> > What about persuading slugs and snails???
> >
>
> They are cleverer than cats. And cuter <VBG>!
>
Natalie
Cat Lover - Slug & Snail Hater!!!
ne...@nwjones.demon.co.uk
>> >
>> > I don't know about humans but ragwort is deadly to many animals and it
> is
>> > an agonising death as well. The poison remains potent even when the
> plant
>> > is dried as it can be in hay.
>>
>> This is not entirely truthful. Ragwort is not as excessively dangerous as
>> painted. It is only really dangerous in hay. In fact horses and cattle
>> actually have to eat several STONE in weight of the plant.
>> There is some quite conclusive research on this. The figures I have seen
>> say that a horse would eat up to 5.5 STONE of the weed to kill them.
>
> Well I suggest you check your facts before making such assertions! Your
> suggestion that my posting was untruthful amounts to libel quite apart
> from illustrating your own stupidity.
You know, I would much rather we got along, and I am sure that most people
here would rather people are polite to each other. I don't think it is
very constructive to launch into an ad-hominem attack against a person with
whom you disagree.
I didn't say your posting was "untruthful". I didn't suggest you were
lying. What I said is that what you said was "not entirely truthful". The
largest and most accurate dictionary of the English language, the huge 20
volume Oxford English Dictionary defines "truthful" in this context as
(inter alia) "true , accurate, exact". In the context of poisonous
berries killing children Ragwort is nowhere near as toxic and using the
word "Deadly" would not be an exact description of its effects in this
context. i.e. not entirely accurate. However <smile>, you are the legal
expert . <smile>
Actually, I have extensively researched the matter. I have checked my
facts. I have a whole stack of learned scientific papers on the subject of
ragwort, its genetics, its population dynamics, its toxicity and the
invertebrate fauna it supports. It is a subject of research interest of
mine.
I do not think that you have any evidence to suggest that I lack
intelligence. If anyone wishes to know more about me and my interests in
order to judge for themselves., there is the website in my signature and
also another http://www.wildlifewebsite.com
This is more extensive, around fifteen hundred pages at present, but not as
complete as I would like since I have yet to finally refine the artificial
intelligence systems that support it.
> Ragwort is a cumulative poison that causes severe liver damage that often
> results in death particularly in horses and cattle. Sheep are also
> affected. The effects can take weeks and even months to become apparent as
> any country vet will tell you. The symptoms include weight loss,
> depression, decreased appetite, neurological signs (yawning, head
> pressing, and ataxia). Swelling under the abdomen (ventral oedema),
> photosensitization and jaundice may also be present. Many horses die
> within two to four weeks of initial presentation. Other can take longer
> though they are usually humanely destroyed rather that suffer a lingering
> death. That is why it is one of the five weeds subject to control under
> the 1959 Weeds Act.
What you have said is broadly true. However, my researches suggest, that in
the context of comparing it with poisonous berries, it. over emphasises the
problem. The pyrrolizidine alkaloids in Ragwort, mainly senecionine,
seneciphylline, integerrimine, jacobine, jacozine and jaconine are
cumulative in their effects however they vary in concentration depending on
either genetic or environmental factors. There is also the question of the
digestive system of the consuming animal since the real toxins are the
breakdown products of digestion.
However, in terms of the level of toxicity of the plant there have been
studies performed directly poisoning the animals. One of these performed in
the USA used 400lb calves fed 2.4lb of undried ragwort daily for 20 days
showed only a 75% mortality. ( The plant was disguised in their feed
because they normally hate the taste).
The total dose was 48 pounds (nearly 3.5 stone) or about 12% of body weight
other experiments showed death at 8% of body weight
Figures I have seen in the literature for horses have been 5% of body
weight and 7% of body weight. To translate this into human terms, 5% of a
14 stone man is about 10lbs in weight. It is not the equivalent of a few
berries.
Granted, herbivorous animals can eat vast amounts of food and smaller doses
over longer periods may have other problems but we are certainly not
talking here of a few leaves being deadly. A pasture has to contain a large
amount of the weed for problems to occur. It would be difficult for
this to go unnoticed.
Perhaps now we can be friends?
Peter Crosland
respect of ragwort. Quoting the results of one particular study in isolation
is unwise particularly as the dangers of ragwort toxicity has been well
established for many years. I was not, repeat not, referring to any other
plant. I was also trying to empasise that horses are particularly prone to
poisoning by ragwort. The real point remains that there are numerous toxic
plants in the garden and the wild and the rule of if in doubt don't eat it
is true. As for the berries as others have siad cdhildren need to be given
good advice but parents need to be vigilant as well.
Charlie Pridham
"Sacha" <sa...@nospamgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:koqoku4vkg8dt55tg...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2002 20:56:59 +0100, "Tracey Pendleton"
> <tracey.p...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> be out of her sight long enough to make that a problem and while many
> plants have some toxicity, I don't think you'll find any recent
> instances of children dying from eating honeysuckle berries.
> --
> Sacha
> http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk/
don't think children would be much interested in them (perhaps worth saying
I am talking about the red berries of periclymenum not the black sorts on
henryi etc or the violet ones on pileata) If you are still worried just run
the hedge cutters over the plant to dead head, you should then get lots more
flowers :~)
--
Charlie, gardening in Cornwall.
http://www.roselandhouse.co.uk
Holders of National Plant Collection of Clematis viticella (cvs)
Andy
snip ><
>
>|> It is best to treat all plants as toxic. In this case I would suggest
>|> removing any berries a child might eat if you are really worried.
>
>I wouldn't. I REALLY wouldn't. It is a BAD idea.
>
>Children have to learn, though I should have hoped that they would
>have been taught basic safety long before the age of two and a half.
>It is a good idea to expose them to the difference between edible
>and inedible berries in a context where a mistake or disobedience
>is unlikely to be fatal. It is a very bad idea to bring them up
>in a sanitised environment, and risk them leaving it temporarily
>and finding (say) laburnum seeds.
>
Don't eat anything without asking mummy or daddy usually works. ;-]
Andy
Nick Maclaren
In article <cr8skusautngotjkv...@4ax.com>,
Provided that they don't say "no" without a good reason. The
main reason that most children ignore such instructions is that
they know the answer will be no, irrespective of justification,
because it is easier for the parents.
Mine got a bit annoyed with me for refusing to tell them whether
they would like things, but only telling them what would harm
them. My response to merely unpalatable plants was often the
same as to edible ones. But they knew if I said "no", there was
a very good reason.