Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Fertilizers And Other Chemicals For Outdoor Use ranks #574 of 838 by danger score (32/100) at ER-volume #535 of 838 (909/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #574
- danger rank of 838
- #535
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 32/100
- danger score
- 909/yr
- estimated ER visits (avg)
Danger score combines injury volume, hospitalization, fatality, and five-year trend. ER volume is the average annual NEISS estimate alone. Rank 1 is highest on each list.
Where this category's danger score sits nationally
Danger score (32/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
32 Lower than most lower than 68% of 838 product categories
scored CPSC product categories, bucketed by value
Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more product categories. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.
Source CPSC NEISS, PlainSafety danger-score model · 2024
Composite verdict
Composite Safety Score: 39/100
One verdict blending 4 independently-sourced dimensions from two separate CPSC systems, each benchmarked against all 838 scored product categories by percentile rather than raw value, so no single huge-volume category can dominate the scale.
| Dimension | Value | National percentile | Weight applied | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) | 7 | 61st | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 909 | 32nd | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | -28% | 23rd | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 2 | 25th | 20% | CPSC SaferProducts.gov public incident report count |
Methodology: each dimension is ranked against the full population's p10/p25/p50/p75/p90 breakpoints and interpolated to a 0-100 percentile; the composite is the weighted average of available percentiles. See methodology for the full benchmark table.
Where 18,173 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1053. Segments sum to 18,173 - a body-map mix, not a danger score or ER-volume rank.
Two danger lenses
Same-group peer scores and this product's dial
The bars compare PlainSafety danger scores inside the Farm & Dairy Equipment group (same CPSC NEISS extract). The dial is this product's score alone on the Low/Moderate/High bands. Do not read a peer bar as an ER-visit count.
Farm & Dairy Equipment danger scores
How this 32/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 909 ER visits/yr Below median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 7.5% Above median admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
- 5-year trend-28%
Band labels compare this category against the corpus of 838 scored CPSC product categories, see the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Across the 20-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2024, injury counts for fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use are declining by about 28% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2008 (1,345 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2021 (534 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 3,387 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by derma/conjunct to the eyeball (1,850 cases). The 45-54 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 3,032 cases over the NEISS window, and males appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 7.5% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 2 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use fail in real households. Every figure on this page comes from CPSC-published data: NEISS projects national estimates from a probability sample of about 100 U.S. hospital emergency departments, while SaferProducts.gov collects voluntary reports from consumers, manufacturers, and clinicians. The danger score, trend indicators, and demographic breakdowns update automatically when CPSC releases a new yearly NEISS file, which is why this page is dated 2024-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.
Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2024)
Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 1,351 | 1,008 | |
| 5-14 | 459 | 509 | |
| 15-24 | 833 | 716 | |
| 25-34 | 1,037 | 781 | |
| 35-44 | 1,498 | 670 | |
| 45-54 | 1,847 | 1,185 | |
| 55-64 | 1,003 | 807 | |
| 65-74 | 1,636 | 672 | |
| 75+ | 1,166 | 997 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| All Parts Body | Poisoning | |
| Eyeball | Derma/conjunct | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Eyeball | Burn, Chemical | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Face | Derma/conjunct | |
| Lower Trunk | Other | |
| Lower Arm | Derma/conjunct | |
| Hand | Derma/conjunct | |
| All Parts Body | Derma/conjunct | |
| Hand | Burn, Chemical | |
| Eyeball | Other | |
| Face | Burn, Chemical | |
| Eyeball | Foreign Body |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
80YOM C/O RIGHT ELBOW AND HAND PAIN SINCE LAST NIGHT, STATES SINCE LIFTING A 50 POUND BAGS OF FERTILIZER YESTERDAY. DX: HAND FRACTURE, ELBOW INJURY
50 YOM C/O INJ TO EYE/FOREHEAD/CHEEK RED, IRRITATED, WHILE USING SOME LIME FOR FOOD PLOTS IN BLEW INTO HIM IN WOODS AT HOME DX CHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS EYE, CHEMICAL BURN TO FOREHEAD /PERIORBITAL AREA AND CHEEK
77YOM MOVING MULCH WHILE DOING YARD WORK. DEVELOPED PAIN IN CHEST. DX; CHEST PAIN
9YOF ATE SOME *** THINKING IT WAS CANDY DX: ACCIDENTAL INGESTION OF A SUBSTANCE
39YOM,PALPITATION INHALED AMYL NITRATE AFTER FELT PALPITATIONS,HEART RATE UP,DX:INHALANT ABUSE
3YOM WAS PLAYING WITH MULCH TODAY IN THE FRONT YARD AND GOT A PIECE EMBEDDED IN RIGHT INDEX FINGER DX: FOREIGN BODY FINGER
39 YOM THREW DOWN A BAG OF LIME (CHEMICAL) WHICH BROKE AND WENT INTO HIS LEFT EYE. IRRIGATED THE EYE. STILL WITH PAIN AND IRRITATION OF LEFT EYE WITH BLURRED VISION. DX CHEMICAL BURN, CORNEAL LESION
77YOF WAS SPREADING FERTILIZER ON HER LAWN GOING ON A DOWN HILL SLOPE AND LOST HER FOOTING FALLING INTO THE CEMENT. DX: GROUND-LEVEL FALL; CLOSED HEAD INJURY; FACIAL ABRASION; ABRASION OF RIGHT KNEE; PAIN IN LEFT HIP
69YOM PRESENTS FROM HOME WITH CHEMICAL BURN. PATIENT STATES HE WAS ATTEMPING TO UNCLOG HIS BATHRUB WITH CHEMICALS WHEN HE ACCIDENTALLY FELL INTO THE TUB AND COULD NOT GET OUT FOR ABOUT 8 MINUTES SUSTAINING BURN TO BACK, BUTTOCKS AND LOWER LEG. DX: CHEMICAL BURN TO LOWER BACK, BUTTOCKS AND LOWER LEG
43YOM WAS SPRAYING WEEDS AND IS CONCERNED FOR CHEMICAL EXPOSURE DUE TO NAUSEA AND BALANCE ISSUES DX NO INJURY
43YOM PRESENTS WITH ABDOMINAL PAIN AFTER APPLYING WEED KILLER TO GRASS WHILE WORKING AND THEN EATING FOOD HIS COWORDER HANDED HIM WITHOUT WASHING HIS HAND. DX: EPIGASTRIC PAIN
39YOM CHEMICAL BURNS TO THIGHS AND UPPER LEGS, FELL INTO A DITCH WITH LIME AND WATER, DX: ALKALI CHEMICAL BURNS, 2ND DEGREE BURNS
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
Purchased Organic Bloom plant food by Espoma company. It comes in a plastic bottle and is a brown liquid. Stored it in my home in kitchen. On July 1, 2018, put the container on my kitchen counter to use in my watering can. Before I even opened it, the product exploded! It went 15 feet - all over my ceiling, walls, furniture, paintings as far as my dining room and hallway! Luckily, I was only hit in chest, arms and hands, but it would have been worse if it had exploded the other direction. This has caused two days of clean up and the need for further paint and professional cleaning. I called the company and they told me this has happened before - they said it was bacteria fermenting. This product needs to be taken off the market before someone is really injured. It is totally unacceptable to not warn buyers of this product. This has caused me great trauma, time and concern during a holiday weekend, that was supposed to be relaxing!
On 12/19/16, I met with Tecumseh Public Schools Super (TPS) intendant [REDACTED], and the [REDACTED] to investigate a complaint of a pesticide being placed in a Pre-K classroom during the first week of December. [REDACTED] informed me that initially on December 7th, a strong odor in the Krouch Early Childhood Center caused the school to have to be evacuated. [REDACTED] stated that the Tecumseh Fire Department and Oklahoma Natural Gas was called out to check for hazards. The odor was pinpointed to one classroom, but they could not determine cause of the odor or if the odor was hazardous, and the students were able to return to the building, but not to the classroom where the odor was originating from. [REDACTED] stated that the next day [REDACTED] who has been a TPS teacher's assistant for 15 years admitted to placing a small amount (couple teaspoons) of the Bee Go, classroom for the purpose of air freshener. I was informed that [REDACTED] was asked for the container of Bee Go and she supplied the school with a mason jar with a few ounces of the product in it, and the product was given to Shawnee Hazmat to look up SDS information about the Bee Go product. I asked [REDACTED] if there was any animosity between the staff that would cause [REDACTED] to angrily place the product in the classroom and he stated "no". When asked if anyone became ill due to the odor of the Bee Go, [REDACTED] stated "no". [REDACTED], [REDACTED], and I then traveled to Krouch Early Childhood Center to visit the classroom where this incident occurred. We met with Principle [REDACTED] to take us to the class. The articles from the classroom were in the hallway, and the class still had the odorous smell. Phoenix Restoration a clean up crew hired by TPS was on site. [REDACTED] stated that the classroom carpet was goint to be replaced and all surfaces cleaned. [REDACTED] supplied me with a written statement of the incident, and [REDACTED] supplied me with a letter that was sent to all the
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Farm & Dairy Equipment
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Fertilizers And Other Chemicals For Outdoor Use: cross-group products nearest on danger score (32/100), estimated annual ER visits (909/yr), and hospitalization share (7.5%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.
Similar danger score
Nearest cross-group products by PlainSafety danger score (100-point scale).
Similar ER visit volume
Nearest cross-group products by NEISS estimated annual ER visits.
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
Related Products in Farm & Dairy Equipment
Read with this product
About this data
CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports form the basis of this page. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments.
According to PlainSafety's CPSC NEISS corpus ranking, Fertilizers And Other Chemicals For Outdoor Use ranks #574 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #535 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use ranks #574 by PlainSafety danger score (32/100) and #535 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (909/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use?
The most common injury is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 3,387 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use increasing or decreasing?
Down 28% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use injuries?
The 45-54 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 3,032 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use?
Of all ER visits involving fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use, approximately 7.5% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (92.5%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with fertilizers and other chemicals for outdoor use?
You can file a consumer incident report at SaferProducts.gov, the official CPSC reporting portal. Reports help the CPSC identify emerging hazards and trigger investigations or recalls. You can also call the CPSC hotline at 1-800-638-2772.
PlainSafety is rendered directly from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall and incident records, no number is typed in by an editor. Product recall timelines and hazard labels are drawn from CPSC recall records for this product. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.