Search results for query: *

There's no "explanation" needed if you understood what I said You're making a big deal about it "being toxic", but ignoring the AMOUNTS that have to be consumed to actually cause harm Here's a good example from your source: Quote: It took nearly 9 grams to kill a bird that only weighs 30-40...

I imagine he'd have to consume about a POUND before he had enough to harm him. People love to list foods that may CONTAIN "toxins", but they rarely consider the AMOUNTS needed to actually produce harmful effects. Realism ruins the dramatic effects

Each bird would need to consume nothing but raw potato skins all day to get enough to hurt it I thought you knew something truly POISON Just because foods contain small amounts of toxins doesn't mean they will actually cause harm in the small amounts normally consumed by healthy birds...

Got a list?