Where do these myths come from?

[CosmicOwl]

I feel like most people who are in the hobby have at one point probably believed a reptile/snake. I don't mean ridiculous myths, such as snakes only growing as larges as their enclosure. I'm talking about the myths that get passed around forums and betweeb experienced keepers as if they were the truth. For instance, a lot of people still believe that feeding snakes in a separate enclosure will make them tame. There is also the belief that reptiles shouldn't be kept on sand because it causes impaction and can get under scales.

Where do you guys think these idea originate from? Sometimes I think a lot of them could probably be traced back to a misquoted scientific study or the opinion of a breeder. Is it possible that anybody might know original source for some of the most common and pervasive myths that have taken root in the community?

[LadyWraith]

I feel like a lot of the myths probably stem from poorly understood husbandry back in the day. Also, some of the products sold at pet stores can be/are harmful and could have led to some of them. Dunno where the separate enclosure for feeding thing came from. Talked with my hair stylist today, who owns a male Retic, and she feeds in a separate tub. He's a juvie but I can't imagine pulling a hungry 6 foot retic out for feeding time O.o. She was also under the impression it would lead to aggression and impaction from consuming substrate.

[wrecker45]

I had a couple tell me. They watched a milk snake suck milk from a cow. A woman told me today she had a 10 ft. eastern fox snake on her property.

[drumcrush]

Bad experiences?

[robertjnovak59]

They all came from me!

[wareagleA5]

Probably from old books that were written by people who just wanted to sell books, before the internet it was the only way to learn things.

[wrecker45]

How about the hoop snake. Can put its tail in its mouth and roll down a hill like a hoop.

[red ink]

Sand does/can cause impaction in captivity, place a carpet python on sand in it's enclosure and then have a close looks at labial scales and cloacal scales after a few weeks.

[poison123]

Sand does/can cause impaction in captivity, place a carpet python on sand in it's enclosure and then have a close looks at labial scales and cloacal scales after a few weeks.

Not a carpet but I have my hognose on sand and he does not get sand stuck in between his scales.

Impaction can still happen in good conditions but its just not as high of a risk with a healthy animal.

[CosmicOwl]

Sand does/can cause impaction in captivity, place a carpet python on sand in it's enclosure and then have a close looks at labial scales and cloacal scales after a few weeks.

I doubt that the sand itself is causing the impaction. Rather, not providing the snake with appropriate husbandry would make it so the snake is unable to pass the sand. Either way, I think a snake would be far more likely to become impacted from eating aspen, fir bark or cypress mulch than sand.

And like poison, I have a snake(not a carpet) on sand/soil and after something like 8 weeks, I haven't noticed anything wrong with his scales. He's a heavy burrower who digs his own tunnels and underground chambers.

[red ink]

I doubt that the sand itself is causing the impaction. Rather, not providing the snake with appropriate husbandry would make it so the snake is unable to pass the sand. Either way, I think a snake would be far more likely to become impacted from eating aspen, fir bark or cypress mulch than sand.

And like poison, I have a snake(not a carpet) on sand/soil and after something like 8 weeks, I haven't noticed anything wrong with his scales. He's a heavy burrower who digs his own tunnels and underground chambers.


You made a sweeping statement about "reptiles/snakes" myths and sand... I gave you a specific scenario where its not a myth in regards to scales. Neither you or poison own a carpet, but you do own reptiles yet still believe otherwise. Sand in captivity can cause impaction in bearded dragons... again a reptile. Not really a myth, poor husbandry does play a factor in it and sand is not the only cause. It is'nt entirely a myth either in the same respect.

I have kept a bearded dragon in a sanded enclosure for over a decade... I also hear stories of BDs being kept in sand and being impacted within a month. The details in husbandry practices is the difference. Regardless of the difference in the details.. it was sand that was in the stomach.

[infernalis]

You made a sweeping statement about "reptiles/snakes" myths and sand... I gave you a specific scenario where its not a myth in regards to scales. Neither you or poison own a carpet, but you do own reptiles yet still believe otherwise. Sand in captivity can cause impaction in bearded dragons... again a reptile. Not really a myth, poor husbandry does play a factor in it and sand is not the only cause. It is'nt entirely a myth either in the same respect.

I have kept a bearded dragon in a sanded enclosure for over a decade... I also hear stories of BDs being kept in sand and being impacted within a month. The details in husbandry practices is the difference. Regardless of the difference in the details.. it was sand that was in the stomach.

Spot on mate....

Incorrect temperatures, insufficient humidity, improper gradients, insufficient cage size..... all play roles.

Some people are bent that materials must be sterilized or sanitized because captive animals will get cootie bugs / parasites and become ill if everything is not washed down...

The core of that problem stems from weakened immunities in captive animals from other aspects of care.

Most reptiles are iron clad machines when it comes to immunities, in the wild there has been documented cases of snakes and lizards covered in so many ticks that they could barely see.. yet the other aspects of said animals health were just fine.

Give that same animal sub-optimal care and it's white blood cell count drops to unacceptable levels and suddenly the whole organism shuts down from sickness.

Impactions/constipation is NOT the substrate's fault (like sand/dirt).. An otherwise properly cared for reptile can ingest some pretty amazing things and pass them right out the other end.

[CosmicOwl]

You made a sweeping statement about "reptiles/snakes" myths and sand... I gave you a specific scenario where its not a myth in regards to scales. Neither you or poison own a carpet, but you do own reptiles yet still believe otherwise. Sand in captivity can cause impaction in bearded dragons... again a reptile. Not really a myth, poor husbandry does play a factor in it and sand is not the only cause. It is'nt entirely a myth either in the same respect.

I have kept a bearded dragon in a sanded enclosure for over a decade... I also hear stories of BDs being kept in sand and being impacted within a month. The details in husbandry practices is the difference. Regardless of the difference in the details.. it was sand that was in the stomach.

It was a sweeping generalization because people often say that sand is bad for reptiles in general. I didn't say that sand can't cause an impaction or would never get under the scales of a reptile, just that it doesn't always do so. The myth is that sand causes impactions, not that occasionally sand can cause an impaction if other factors, such as incorrect husbandry are also present. There is a wealth of evidence that at least suggests that sand itself isn't a problem for many reptiles. Obviously, reptiles that wouldn't natural encounter sand might have some problems with it. That is a completely different issue.

[red ink]

It was a sweeping generalization because people often say that sand is bad for reptiles in general.

There's a reason for that... it would be due to the fact that very few reptile species are actually endemic to a "pure" sand environment.

In "general", new or even long term pet keepers know sweet FA about the natural environment of the animals they keep. They see a picture of an animal on sand on the internet... not bother to do the further research and find out that that sand is actually just an inch deep of top soil and fill the tank with six inches of the stuff with no other medium in it - mostly fine desert sand, the red stuff that looks real nice but harms so many reptiles. Unless of course they happen to keep sand swimmers (but hey how popular are they right? that's why the pet industry caters sand specifically for them with the fine desert sand).

The animal tries to burrow and continually hit nothing but sand... all over it, no respite, no ceasing.... no ill effects right?

That's the reason why in "general" sand is bad for reptiles because "generally" most people are either lazy or inept to do actual research that the species they keep don't live on sand... despite what it looks like in the pretty pics on the interweb.

[LarryS]

Not really a "myth", but I find it interesting that certain practices are condoned/condemned on one forum and then looked at entirely different on another.

[Pareeeee]

Sand impaction is true for lizards. Not sure about snakes, since their digestive process is different.

http://images.beardeddragon.org/images/articles/impaction01.jpg

http://s1.hubimg.com/u/121968_f260.jpg

My experiences with repti-sand:
When I had a beardie year's ago, I had her on sand for a while. It was always in her eyes and they always looked weepy, as did her nose.

When I first got my rosy boa, I had him on sand. It was always packed under his scales and around his eyes. His scales always looked scratched and dehydrated.

I changed substrates...

I think most sand made for reptiles is too fine, making easy to get under scales etc. It's dusty, which can also cause RI's. It clumps like kitty litter, which causes impaction.

[limey]

Not sure where they come from, but being a zookeeper/curator I have heard many ridiculous things come out of the mouths of the public whilst in the reptile house.

Here are the silliest of them all:

* "Milk snakes drink milk, son. That's why they are called milksnakes."

* "Corn snakes are poisonous"

* (Pointing at skink) "Look at that snake, it has little legs"

* "That anaconda is about 5 feet long, it could eat you whole."

* Excuse me sir, snakes eat biscuits, right? Just like dogs?

* (I have 7 ft burmese around my shoulders) *Black woman with 2 kids freaks out* "Oh my gaWWWWWD!!! Is it poisonous??? Stay away from it, kids!!!"

* "Snakes need to be wet or they'll dry out and die" (mother says to young son)

* "I don't want a snake because they are pointless, smelly, dirty animals. Snakes smell, really bad" - Random middle-aged woman

* "We find a snake near our house, we shoot it dead." - Macho man visiting our zoo

* (Points to me cleaning out alligator pond) "Look, son, that's why you go to college. So you don't have to clean out gator poop for a living like that guy."


Just thought I would share... :)

[Mikoh4792]

lmao biscuits

[CosmicOwl]

There's a reason for that... it would be due to the fact that very few reptile species are actually endemic to a "pure" sand environment.

In "general", new or even long term pet keepers know sweet FA about the natural environment of the animals they keep. They see a picture of an animal on sand on the internet... not bother to do the further research and find out that that sand is actually just an inch deep of top soil and fill the tank with six inches of the stuff with no other medium in it - mostly fine desert sand, the red stuff that looks real nice but harms so many reptiles. Unless of course they happen to keep sand swimmers (but hey how popular are they right? that's why the pet industry caters sand specifically for them with the fine desert sand).

The animal tries to burrow and continually hit nothing but sand... all over it, no respite, no ceasing.... no ill effects right?

That's the reason why in "general" sand is bad for reptiles because "generally" most people are either lazy or inept to do actual research that the species they keep don't live on sand... despite what it looks like in the pretty pics on the interweb.

This seems like a problem with the sort of reptile sand products available in pet stores, which are notoriously bad for most reptiles. Beach sand and washed play sand are better alternatives because they don't seem to clump up or stick to dry surfaces and they aren't as fine or dusty. If you're using sand as a substrate that a species wouldn't normally wouldn't encounter it, that is an issue of husbandry. If you were ignorant of their humidity requirements, you could probably make certain animals sick by putting them on mulch or eco earth, but does that make those substrates bad?

[poison123]

When I first got my rosy boa, I had him on sand. It was always packed under his scales and around his eyes. His scales always looked scratched and dehydrated.


Interesting. I am using a sand/soil mix for my rosy and never had this problem. Were you using just pure sand?

[jarich]

Its rarely easy to trace a myth back to its source, although sometimes you can. The myth that butter worms are high in calcium can be traced back to a single guy giving an interview when he first started importing them into the country. Obviously he was just trying to drum up business for his new import. Ever since then you see all over the internet that they have "twice as much calcium as other feeders" like it was some kind of scientific fact. You can often even see it listed that way in charts. All the other insects will have actual numerical measurements and under butter worms it says "twice as much calcium". Haha!

[red ink]

This seems like a problem with the sort of reptile sand products available in pet stores, which are notoriously bad for most reptiles. Beach sand and washed play sand are better alternatives because they don't seem to clump up or stick to dry surfaces and they aren't as fine or dusty. If you're using sand as a substrate that a species wouldn't normally wouldn't encounter it, that is an issue of husbandry. If you were ignorant of their humidity requirements, you could probably make certain animals sick by putting them on mulch or eco earth, but does that make those substrates bad?


Can the highlighted statement be considered a "myth" as well...? Interesting couple of sentences there... How many reptile species are endemic to beaches or washed playsand for these substrates not to be a husbandry issue?

[KORBIN5895]

China. Everything comes from China.

[CosmicOwl]

Can the highlighted statement be considered a "myth" as well...? Interesting couple of sentences there... How many reptile species are endemic to beaches or washed playsand for these substrates not to be a husbandry issue?

It's an observation. Play sand and beach sand don't really clump up when wet.

Pure sand would not be ideal for many animals, but mixing it with topsoil would create a natural substrate for a lot of species of reptiles. Bags of play sand/the beach is just a place to source the sand from.

[red ink]

I feel like most people who are in the hobby have at one point probably believed a reptile/snake. I don't mean ridiculous myths, such as snakes only growing as larges as their enclosure. I'm talking about the myths that get passed around forums and betweeb experienced keepers as if they were the truth. For instance, a lot of people still believe that feeding snakes in a separate enclosure will make them tame. There is also the belief that reptiles shouldn't be kept on sand because it causes impaction and can get under scales.

Where do you guys think these idea originate from? Sometimes I think a lot of them could probably be traced back to a misquoted scientific study or the opinion of a breeder. Is it possible that anybody might know original source for some of the most common and pervasive myths that have taken root in the community?

It's an observation. Play sand and beach sand don't really clump up when wet.

Pure sand would not be ideal for many animals, but mixing it with topsoil would create a natural substrate for a lot of species of reptiles. Bags of play sand/the beach is just a place to source the sand from.


So not really a myth hey that sand is "generally" bad for reptiles?

[CosmicOwl]

So not really a myth hey that sand is "generally" bad for reptiles?

If you are simply looking to twist my words around and misrepresent what I am saying, I'm not going to have this discussion. There have been enough bickering sessions that have derailed too many threads lately.

[red ink]

If you are simply looking to twist my words around and misrepresent what I am saying, I'm not going to have this discussion. There have been enough bickering sessions that have derailed too many threads lately.

Not looking to twist your words mate... those qoutes are verbatum .

Neither am I misrepresenting what you're saying. You made a sweeping statement about sand as it eluded to being a myth. I sought to correct that sweeping statement.

Firstly by stating that some species do get sand stuck in their scales, secondly by stating that it can cause impaction in reptiles. Another poster even provided an X-ray on the matter.

I am not bickering either, we are having a discussion.

I don't see how a discussion on a topic you brought up in your opening statement is de-railing the thread?

[Mikoh4792]

Another one would be that cage size stunts growth. Wonder how that one got started...

[drumcrush]

China. Everything comes from China.

Ahahahahaha omg this cracked me up :D

[CameronVarnish]

How about the hoop snake. Can put its tail in its mouth and roll down a hill like a hoop.

Lol. probs was thinking of an armadillo lizard?

[CameronVarnish]

I had a couple tell me. They watched a milk snake suck milk from a cow. A woman told me today she had a 10 ft. eastern fox snake on her property.

Yea and I saw a corn snake eat an ear of corn once... And then there was a 65 foot anaconda in my backyard in NJ. And it sprayed venom at me.

[jarich]

Not looking to twist your words mate... those qoutes are verbatum .

Neither am I misrepresenting what you're saying. You made a sweeping statement about sand as it eluded to being a myth. I sought to correct that sweeping statement.

Firstly by stating that some species do get sand stuck in their scales, secondly by stating that it can cause impaction in reptiles. Another poster even provided an X-ray on the matter.

I am not bickering either, we are having a discussion.

I don't see how a discussion on a topic you brought up in your opening statement is de-railing the thread?

Ya, you know how I like a good argument. ;)

The difference is in the additives. "Calci sand" and various other reptile branded substrates have a cementing agent added to them. Concrete is sand, water and a cementing agent, nothing more. But sand alone (washed play sand) doesn't give you a sidewalk. Small particulate matter is something reptiles, like all ground dwelling animals, are adapted to digesting. If you swallow a handful of dirt, it's not going to impact you anymore than it will a healthy reptile. Take that same reptile, put it in a tiny enclosure where it's dehydrated and can't get normal peristaltic movement, and all of a sudden even small particulates can become a problem. It's got nothing to do with the small particulate, it's to do with the animal and the husbandry. If you are dehydrated enough, even enough water will kill you. It's not because water is bad for you, anymore than sand is bad for you. It's that the conditions are set to make just about anything problematic.

In short, sand doesn't cause impaction, bad husbandry causes impaction.

[red ink]

Ya, you know how I like a good argument. ;)

The difference is in the additives. "Calci sand" and various other reptile branded substrates have a cementing agent added to them. Concrete is sand, water and a cementing agent, nothing more. But sand alone (washed play sand) doesn't give you a sidewalk. Small particulate matter is something reptiles, like all ground dwelling animals, are adapted to digesting. If you swallow a handful of dirt, it's not going to impact you anymore than it will a healthy reptile. Take that same reptile, put it in a tiny enclosure where it's dehydrated and can't get normal peristaltic movement, and all of a sudden even small particulates can become a problem. It's got nothing to do with the small particulate, it's to do with the animal and the husbandry. If you are dehydrated enough, even enough water will kill you. It's not because water is bad for you, anymore than sand is bad for you. It's that the conditions are set to make just about anything problematic.

In short, sand doesn't cause impaction, bad husbandry causes impaction.


Agreed.. I've already eluded to that in my post that wayne qouted.

You made a sweeping statement about "reptiles/snakes" myths and sand... I gave you a specific scenario where its not a myth in regards to scales. Neither you or poison own a carpet, but you do own reptiles yet still believe otherwise. Sand in captivity can cause impaction in bearded dragons... again a reptile. Not really a myth, poor husbandry does play a factor in it and sand is not the only cause. It is'nt entirely a myth either in the same respect.

I have kept a bearded dragon in a sanded enclosure for over a decade... I also hear stories of BDs being kept in sand and being impacted within a month. The details in husbandry practices is the difference. Regardless of the difference in the details.. it was sand that was in the stomach.

Being dismissive about the so called "myth" is just as bad as not knowing anything about particulate substrate husbandry. To simply make a sweeping statement about sand use (and the dangers it may pose) being a myth is rather short sighted.

I also agree that reptiles are adapted to ingesting small particulate... adapted meaning in a natural environment. In all my post I have refered to the use of sand in captivity, there's a difference there.

[red ink]

While we are on the subject of substrates... there's a myth over there that I've always found funny.

The myth that most of my country's terra closely ressemble tiles... hence it's wide and taunted use in Australian agamid husbandry.

No Idea where that has started from... I can assure you though that it did'nt start from us here.

[jarich]

While we are on the subject of substrates... there's a myth over there that I've always found funny.

The myth that most of my country's terra closely ressemble tiles... hence it's wide and taunted use in Australian agamid husbandry.

No Idea where that has started from... I can assure you though that it did'nt start from us here.

Of course, everyone knows the ground there is made from paper towels. Just like Africa. ;)

[aRepDysfunction]

There is a pretty simple answer for where these myths come from. Correlation. We have discussed the sand myth, and we have covered that impaction in such a case is a mixture of factors, not just the sand. But of course if you remove the sand from that equation the impaction doesnt happen. correlation = the sand causes impaction not bad husbandry. There you have a myth in the making. Just about any myth runs along the same line.

[Pareeeee]

Interesting. I am using a sand/soil mix for my rosy and never had this problem. Were you using just pure sand?

Yeah, just pure Repti-sand.

[CosmicOwl]

Agreed.. I've already eluded to that in my post that wayne qouted.



Being dismissive about the so called "myth" is just as bad as not knowing anything about particulate substrate husbandry. To simply make a sweeping statement about sand use (and the dangers it may pose) being a myth is rather short sighted.

I also agree that reptiles are adapted to ingesting small particulate... adapted meaning in a natural environment. In all my post I have refered to the use of sand in captivity, there's a difference there.


I didn't really have time to respond to this until now, so I'd like to try to explain what I meant my calling it a myth.

Firs of all, we have to consider what substances are being referred to as "sand". Often, the sand in question is one of the various products found in pet stores. These products often contain dust, additives and/or dyes. So right from the start, we have several different substances being called "sand" and maligned as dangerous.

There is a real potential for ingested sand to cause an impaction, but how is that different than any particle substrate? Is natural sand more likely to cause an impaction in an animal that aspen, cypress mulch or coco fiber? Would you rather have a bearded dragon accidentally eat one of those substrates instead of sand?

Dry, pure sand would be a terrible substrate for most animals but for a variety of other reasons that would be worse than the risk of impaction. As such, I think that using a sand substrate for animals that naturally don't live on pure sand would fall into the category of bad husbandry. Sand as a part of dirt is a common substrate that many reptiles encounter in the wild. If sand were such a serious threat to their health, we wouldn't find any reptiles living in the soil. If it's used properly, I don't believe it poses a greater risk to reptiles than any other substrate except maybe tiles.

[red ink]

I didn't really have time to respond to this until now, so I'd like to try to explain what I meant my calling it a myth.

Firs of all, we have to consider what substances are being referred to as "sand". Often, the sand in question is one of the various products found in pet stores. These products often contain dust, additives and/or dyes. So right from the start, we have several different substances being called "sand" and maligned as dangerous.

There is a real potential for ingested sand to cause an impaction, but how is that different than any particle substrate? Is natural sand more likely to cause an impaction in an animal that aspen, cypress mulch or coco fiber? Would you rather have a bearded dragon accidentally eat one of those substrates instead of sand?

Dry, pure sand would be a terrible substrate for most animals but for a variety of other reasons that would be worse than the risk of impaction. As such, I think that using a sand substrate for animals that naturally don't live on pure sand would fall into the category of bad husbandry. Sand as a part of dirt is a common substrate that many reptiles encounter in the wild. If sand were such a serious threat to their health, we wouldn't find any reptiles living in the soil. If it's used properly, I don't believe it poses a greater risk to reptiles than any other substrate except maybe tiles.

I don't get it? You explained all of that which would mean you considered it and yet you still made a sweeping statement about sand and its impact upon being as myth in your opening post. A comparative discussion of natural substrate and sand in captivity is void as you have already stated natural substrate isn't the items sold in pet stores and labelled "sand"

If natural additives are added to the sand as a substrate (i.e. soil, clay, loam, etc) in captivity then it is no longer "sand", rather a "sanded" substrate.

Let's focus on one discussion at a time rather than introducing other substrates such as aspen, coco fiber or cypress mulch into the discussion (we wouldn't want the thread to get de-railed now do we?)... and yes those substrates also pose a chance for impaction in captivity, any particulate substrate does. They would pose an impaction possibility in a natural setting in the wild if the peice ingested was big enough and not digested. The mouth is bigger than the cloaca in reptiles.

[CosmicOwl]

I don't get it? You explained all of that which would mean you considered it and yet you still made a sweeping statement about sand and its impact upon being as myth in your opening post. A comparative discussion of natural substrate and sand in captivity is void as you have already stated natural substrate isn't the items sold in pet stores and labelled "sand"

If natural additives are added to the sand as a substrate (i.e. soil, clay, loam, etc) in captivity then it is no longer "sand", rather a "sanded" substrate.

Let's focus on one discussion at a time rather than introducing other substrates such as aspen, coco fiber or cypress mulch into the discussion (we wouldn't want the thread to get de-railed now do we?)... and yes those substrates also pose a chance for impaction in captivity, any particulate substrate does. They would pose an impaction possibility in a natural setting in the wild if the peice ingested was big enough and not digested. The mouth is bigger than the cloaca in reptiles.

The reason I called it a myth is because various products are labeled as "sand" and then blamed for causing impactions. That would be akin to labeling aspen, bark and cypress as "mulch" and then claiming they are bad because they don't hold humidity. When I said sand in my original post, I meant natural sand, or washed play sand, not reptile products calling themselves sand. I think people continue to assert that sand causes impactions because many products are labeled as sand, or because the right husbandry wasn't provided.

Additionally, sand is singled out for being more likely to cause impactions than other substrates. So the issue is not a sand issue, as much as it is an issue of particle substrates possibly causing impaction. If the all the animals that had died of sand based impactions had been put on another substrate, do you think they would still be alive?

[Mikoh4792]

Wouldn't sand cause impaction when consumed in large numbers and clumps together /clogs the GI tract even with high temps/hydration? I thought only small amounts were passable.

[bigsnakegirl785]

Not sure where they come from, but being a zookeeper/curator I have heard many ridiculous things come out of the mouths of the public whilst in the reptile house.

Here are the silliest of them all:

* "Milk snakes drink milk, son. That's why they are called milksnakes."

* "Corn snakes are poisonous"

* (Pointing at skink) "Look at that snake, it has little legs"

* "That anaconda is about 5 feet long, it could eat you whole."

* Excuse me sir, snakes eat biscuits, right? Just like dogs?

* (I have 7 ft burmese around my shoulders) *Black woman with 2 kids freaks out* "Oh my gaWWWWWD!!! Is it poisonous??? Stay away from it, kids!!!"

* "Snakes need to be wet or they'll dry out and die" (mother says to young son)

* "I don't want a snake because they are pointless, smelly, dirty animals. Snakes smell, really bad" - Random middle-aged woman

* "We find a snake near our house, we shoot it dead." - Macho man visiting our zoo

* (Points to me cleaning out alligator pond) "Look, son, that's why you go to college. So you don't have to clean out gator poop for a living like that guy."


Just thought I would share... :)

This was my favorite, like people are thinking about cleaning out alligator pens/ponds when they go college. :wacky: I always thought that was flipping hamburgers at McDonald's. Although I guess it depends on where you live, if alligator ponds are where you for the weekend I could see that comment being made I guess. haha

[red ink]

I didn't really have time to respond to this until now, so I'd like to try to explain what I meant my calling it a myth.

Firs of all, we have to consider what substances are being referred to as "sand". Often, the sand in question is one of the various products found in pet stores. These products often contain dust, additives and/or dyes. So right from the start, we have several different substances being called "sand" and maligned as dangerous.

There is a real potential for ingested sand to cause an impaction, but how is that different than any particle substrate? Is natural sand more likely to cause an impaction in an animal that aspen, cypress mulch or coco fiber? Would you rather have a bearded dragon accidentally eat one of those substrates instead of sand?




The reason I called it a myth is because various products are labeled as "sand" and then blamed for causing impactions. That would be akin to labeling aspen, bark and cypress as "mulch" and then claiming they are bad because they don't hold humidity. When I said sand in my original post, I meant natural sand, or washed play sand, not reptile products calling themselves sand. I think people continue to assert that sand causes impactions because many products are labeled as sand, or because the right husbandry wasn't provided.

Contradictory statements... First you acknowledge there are multiple substrates labelled as "sand".... and "maligned" as being dangerous. On your next post you call the causality of them being reason for impaction a myth.

We are going around in circles here... and I have been trying to get you to see the point so I will just be blunt about it.

Do not make sweeping statements about a fallacy when you do not have evidence about it.
As I sated natural or not.. some species of reptiles should not be on sand (carpet pythons for one).

Be succinct in what you are saying as ironically, that's how myths get started. So if you mean "sand" as a natural substrate... say that. By your own admission plenty of products are called sand which are actually dangerous, therefore not a myth in the potential harm they can cause.


As I've already stated:
"Being dismissive about the so called "myth" is just as bad as not knowing anything about particulate substrate husbandry. To simply make a sweeping statement about sand use (and the dangers it may pose) being a myth is rather short sighted."

[Derek Roddy]

Yea and I saw a corn snake eat an ear of corn once... And then there was a 65 foot anaconda in my backyard in NJ. And it sprayed venom at me.

Haven't seen a snake eat corn but, I have seen this.......

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/derekroddy/Carpets/carpeteatingbrocolli.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/derekroddy/media/Carpets/carpeteatingbrocolli.jpg.html)


D

[Derek Roddy]

As far as digesting substrate....has anyone watched a snake kill and eat something in the wild?
They ingest huge amounts of sand, bark, small stones....all types of foreign objects with no ill effect.

Any ill effect from digesting such materiel would be because of captive conditions. Too dry, too hot/cool, size of living space, frequency of movement, access to optimal conditions, etc

D

[CosmicOwl]

Contradictory statements... First you acknowledge there are multiple substrates labelled as "sand".... and "maligned" as being dangerous. On your next post you call the causality of them being reason for impaction a myth.

We are going around in circles here... and I have been trying to get you to see the point so I will just be blunt about it.

Do not make sweeping statements about a fallacy when you do not have evidence about it.
As I sated natural or not.. some species of reptiles should not be on sand (carpet pythons for one).

Be succinct in what you are saying as ironically, that's how myths get started. So if you mean "sand" as a natural substrate... say that. By your own admission plenty of products are called sand which are actually dangerous, therefore not a myth in the potential harm they can cause.


As I've already stated:
"Being dismissive about the so called "myth" is just as bad as not knowing anything about particulate substrate husbandry. To simply make a sweeping statement about sand use (and the dangers it may pose) being a myth is rather short sighted."

They aren't contradictory statements. I also stated several posts ago that I was talking about natural sand, but you said that the point was void. I should've have been clear about it in my OP, but I didn't expect somebody to come along and blow it out of proportion.

And I've acknowledged that some species don't do well on sand. However, some species don't do well on aspen, or any other substrate for that matter. But ironically, people don't generalize those substrates as being dangerous in the same way that they do sand. And as I have stated many times, if an animal that doesn't belong on sand is housed on it and happens to ingest and become impacted, that is a husbandry issue. Just as it would be a husbandry issue if a snake wasn't given the proper humidity and developed a RI.

You are correct in saying that this discussion is going in circles. If you want to keep discussing this, I'd prefer we did so in private.

[Pareeeee]

Haven't seen a snake eat corn but, I have seen this.......

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/derekroddy/Carpets/carpeteatingbrocolli.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/derekroddy/media/Carpets/carpeteatingbrocolli.jpg.html)


D

?!?!??!?! Silly snake. :O_o: