Message Board
May 2010
CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
(03/02/10) Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, P.C., has filed a complaint seeking class action status on behalf of pet owners whose household pets were allegedly injured or killed by certain flea and tick products. The complaint was filed in United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against three pet product companies.
The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief in the form of a recall of the offending products, a refund of the purchase price, for compensatory damages, punitive damages and other relief.
For additional information concerning this lawsuit, click here.
If your pet was harmed by a flea and tick product, and you would like to participate in this class action to help get these products off of the market, please contact:
Jacqueline Mottek
Positive Legal Group
415.302.5371 (cell)
***************************************************************************************
ANOTHER CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
A class action law firm Green & Pagano LLP is currently investigating complaints from
New Jersey and New York residents whose pets were harmed by spot-on products.
If your pet was harmed by a spot-on product within the past couple years and you live
in New Jersey or New York, please go to: www.SpotOnComplaints.com
or call Michael Green at (732) 390-0480.
For additional information concerning this lawsuit, click here.
***************************************************************************************
I so wish I had the sense to research the dangers of these flea and tick treatments a month ago. I have 3 cats and have recently moved to a rural area where ticks are a big problem so
I thought it would be a good idea to treat my cats since they do get to go outside with supervision every so often. Two of my cats seemed to have no noticeable reaction other than being a bit more lethargic than usual. The other cat however developed a large bald spot where the Zodiac Spot On Flea and Tick treatment was applied and within a couple two days went from being lethargic to barely being able to walk. We took my baby to the vet and after doing several blood tests and Xrays (to the tune of over $500 dollars) she was able to determine for certain that the leg itself was fine but that my cat had a serious liver infection and there seemed to be some neurological problem that was causing him to be unable to use his leg properly. Saint Alphonso is a small cat only about 5 pounds) and always has been - he was the runt of his litter. Applying that "medication" to the back of his neck was essentially the equivelant of sticking poison into his spinal cord and letting it travel all through his system at breakneck speed. He got a very yellow tinge to him and walking was next to impossible for him. The vet initially told me that he had a serious liver problem and that he would probably only live another few days, if that. I almost had him put down right then and there until I mentioned to the vet that I had recently used the poison Zodiac passes off as medicine. Her eyes widened and she told me the ONLY vet approved flea and tick treatment by vets is Advantage and that the rest of the treatments are loaded with outrageous levels of toxins. Of course, she wouldn't go so far as to say that the treatment was the cause of the problems since I'm sure she didn't want to end up involved in a lawsuit against Zodiac but her eyes gave her away. I brought my baby home with some painkillers - he only ended up needing about one and a half doses the first two days and hasn't needed any since. He is now acting more like himself and walking and playing normally but it was a narrow miss and it has caused me great distress knowing that I almost unknowingly killed my cat. These people who make these products should be brought up on charges of Animal Cruelty and selling an unsafe product without any type of warning label. I don't know how or where to begin but those of us who have lived through these horrors should file a class action lawsuit against these bastards who put our beloved pet's lives in danger. I intend to at least contact my local TV station with the information I have and ask them to do a piece on the dangers of these products. I also plan on contacting Zodiac and doing everything in my power to get back the money spent for vet care due to their negligence and pain and addition compensation for my (and my cat's) pain and suffering.
Thanks for putting up and maintaining this site... there are a lot of people out there with pets who need to know about this!
Massive blessings of Peace upon you and yours!
Brian 5/1/10
***************************************************************************************
May 5, 2010 I applied Bio Sport to my two yorkie-malteses. I figured it was safe because
it was for puppies 6 mos & older. Both my dogs started behaving oddly, not wanting to move, sometimes moving somewhat spastic like something was attacking them and I could tell acting itchy. I have given them both 2 baths with ivory soap and shampoo, but it still seems
to be effecting them. I would like to know if an antihistamine would work to calm down the attacks. It does look like this is effecting their nerves and I hope this isn't going to do permanent damage since it does go into their blood stream. Wish I would have never used this product. I had my vet check one of my dogs who it effected first and he could not figure out what was wrong but now I know, thanks to this website and I will warn my vet about this discovery so he can pass it on. I will also notify the EPA and Farnam. Our area in Bartlett IL seem to have quite an outbreak of ticks otherwise I would not even think of using something. Any suggestions of what is safe to use would be greatly appreciated.
Rita 5/5/10
***************************************************************************************
New Alarm Bells About Chemicals and Cancer
Excerpt:
"The cancer panel is releasing a landmark 200-page report on Thursday, warning that our lackadaisical approach to regulation may have far-reaching consequences for our health."
"In particular, the report warns about exposures to chemicals during pregnancy, when risk of damage seems to be greatest. Noting that 300 contaminants have been detected in umbilical cord blood of newborn babies, the study warns that: “to a disturbing extent, babies are born ‘pre-polluted.’ ”
"It’s striking that this report emerges not from the fringe but from the mission control of mainstream scientific and medical thinking, the President’s Cancer Panel."
"The report blames weak laws, lax enforcement and fragmented authority, as well as the existing regulatory presumption that chemicals are safe unless strong evidence emerges to the contrary."
"One reason for concern is that some cancers are becoming more common, particularly in children. We don’t know why that is, but the proliferation of chemicals in water, foods, air and household products is widely suspected as a factor. I’m hoping the President’s Cancer Panel report will shine a stronger spotlight on environmental causes of health problems — not only cancer, but perhaps also diabetes, obesity and autism."
Environmental Cancer Risk 'Grossly Underestimated'?
Excerpts:
"Grievous harm" from carcinogens in the environment has been "grossly underestimated" by the U.S. National Cancer Program, a presidential panel charges.
"The grievous harm from this group of carcinogens has not been addressed adequately by the National Cancer Program."
"The Panel urges you most strongly to use the power of your office to remove the carcinogens and other toxins from our food, water, and air that needlessly increase health care costs, cripple our nation's productivity, and devastate American lives."
"Presidential Panel's Advice for You"
"In addition to recommending sweeping changes in federal legislation and regulation, the panel also made a number of recommendations for how individuals can reduce their risk of cancer from environmental exposures in several areas."
"Parents should realize that children may be particularly sensitive to environmental carcinogens. Parents and child care providers should choose foods, house and garden products, play spaces, toys, medicines, and medical tests that will minimize
a child's exposure to toxins."
"Both parents should avoid exposure to chemicals prior to a child's conception and throughout pregnancy."
To read the report from the President's Cancer Panel, go to:
***************************************************************************************
Our rescue puppy, a beagle and German Shepherd mix, was given Frontline Plus. She
had spent her first few months on the street and we suppose she needed it. In a short time, patches of black hair along her spine were turning white. As the weeks went on, we realized that the hairs were black at the front end, white in the middle and then black with the new growth. The white areas appeared to be moving "out" at the same rate. Now, at nearly a year of age, her hairs are white-tipped with all black undergrowth.
We have children with LDs and have not used chemical pesticides or harsh chemicals in
the house for over 20 years. We are vigilant as we walk to avoid treated lawns and the connecting sidewalks. It seems this loss of hair pigmentation is connected to the Frontline Plus along the spine. We have fought hard to discontinue mosquito fogging as a first-line defense in our neighborhood, instead focusing on larvacides in standing water (creeks & drainage ditches, etc.) and monitoring the number of mosquitos and testing them for carried diseases. We have asked the EPA to review the use of flea and tick chemicals as well as permethrin & PBO. Thank you for organizing this effort.
STB 5/9/10
***************************************************************************************
(Below is email that the EPA sent to Jan on 5/10/10 in response to her questions)
Thank you for your participation in the recent webcast meeting regarding
EPA action to change how we regulate pet spot-on pesticides for fleas and
ticks. We understand that your pet has experienced adverse effects and that
you have particular interest in our actions. Please see our responses to
your specific questions below.
1. My pet required four blood transfusions and three years of treatment
on steroids and $10,000 in vet bills to stabilize severe anemia caused by
Frontline Plus spot on applied in a vet's office. When contacted, Merial
denied any responsibility. I requested the veterinary hospital (VHUP) in
which he was being treated to reach out to various labs to identify one
that would perform a gas chromatography test to indeed determine the
compound fipronil in my pets bloodstream. (The manufacturer states that
the chemical does not infiltrate the bloodstream but remains on the
sebaceous glands, (top layer of skin.) There was not one lab in the US
who responded with the set-up to perform this test as no gas chromatography
series had been established for the chemical fipronil. How then does the
manufacturer show a good faith effort of accountability in product safety
when `proof positive' of the chemicals' infiltration and toxicity is never
quantitatively determined?
The spot-on pesticides registered by EPA are effective against fleas and
ticks and are reported to act on the skin surface, rather than internally after
being absorbed by the body. The safety of the pesticide is demonstrated
by toxicity studies that measure adverse effects, which include the companion
animal safety studies in dogs and cats and a battery of toxicity studies in
laboratory animals. Metabolism and pharmacokinetic studies are also
conducted which measure the time course of the chemical in the body.
Please note that the safety of the chemical in animals is determined by
looking for toxicity rather determining concentrations in the body. A
diagnosis by a veterinarian of pesticide-caused toxicity in a pet would be
made by a history of exposure and clinical signs of toxicity similar to the
typical signs caused by that pesticide. Pesticide registrants are not required
to develop analytical methods to detect exposure to the spot-on pet pesticides
because that would only indicate exposure to the product which should have
been determined by the history.
2. Is the EPA going to pronounce the statement `most incidents were minor'
as a general statement? If so, this is a terrible travesty to all of the pets who
were D-B. (Major results).
It is true that most incidents are classified "minor." However, EPA is
concerned about the number of those minor incidents as well as the incidents
of greater severity. This is why we are taking action to increase the
restrictions to the registrations we give for spot-on pet pesticides and to
review these products more closely.
3. How can the EPA approve such minimal clinical trial testing via the
registrants to beagles who are designated not sensitive to spot ons?
Beagles are the standard breed of dogs used in toxicity testing so until
this analysis was conducted, it was not clear that this breed did not show
the diverse responses manifested by various breeds of dogs for the products
analyzed. EPA is therefore planning to implement new testing requirements
for these products, such as clinical trials. These new requirements will
allow the Agency to better consider variation between breeds and individual
when making registration decisions.
Kimberly Nesci, Special Assistant
Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
(Below is email that Jan sent to the EPA on 5/10/10 in response to the above email)
Please consider organizing a task force of consumer advocates, as previously
suggested. Responding to consumers questions when they have number of
follow-ups does not clearly define very important issues. Here are a few of my
thoughts in response to your recent reply of one of my webinar questions.
Please note that the safety of the chemical in animals is determined by
looking for toxicity rather determining concentrations in the body.
Forgive me, but I am confused. How can toxicity be quantitatively
determined if there is not a more compete study in place to determine
exactly the chemicals impact reflecting invasiveness of the pets' system?
Currently the product manufacturers minimize the effects of the adverse
impact of toxic pesticides infiltrating the pet's system. Where exactly is
the report of the pharmacokenetic process you mention? (measurement of the
time course of the chemical in the body). Where are the results of these
processes as related to clinical study trials? Are these trials performed on
domestic animals as reflects varied breed types and weights?
You stated on question 3.... EPA is therefore planning to implement new
testing requirements for these products, such as clinical trials. These new
requirements will allow the Agency to better consider variation between
breeds and individual when making registration decisions. Therefore, it is
deduced that indeed clinical study trials require improvement as pertains
to absorption of the chemicals used in spot-on products. Until that time
where studies are completed and verified, the products should be
recalled/removed from the shelves of veterinary practices as as well
as retail outlets.
Pesticide registrants are not required to develop analytical methods to
detect exposure to the spot-on pet pesticides because that would only indicate
exposure to the product which should have been determined by the history.
Well then, isn't it time for the EPA to define methods for the pesticide
registrants so that analytical methods ARE developed? The product
registrants boldly send the message to the consumer to `prove' that
the chemical infiltrates the pets' system. That dynamic won't happen.
The `history' of the pesticide is still being captured. Isn't it terribly
convenient (for the manufacturer) that exposure studies are minimally
required at best? Also, I am quite concerned (as you should be) that
these `battery of toxicity studies in laboratory animals' you mention
are not synchronistic when compared to the systemic infiltration of the
pesticide(s) used in spot-on products as chemically absorbed by the
majority of domestic pets.
Sincerely,
Jan
***************************************************************************************
(Below is email that I sent to the EPA on 5/10/10)
Dear Ms. Nesci,
I would like to bring to your attention a statement on Sergeant's website concerning Sergeant's Gold Squeeze-On for Dogs:
Excerpt:
"Q. Can I pet my dog after I have applied the product? Can my children play with our dog?"
"A. Both you and your children are safe to pet and play with your dog after the squeeze-on has been applied. It will take about 24 hours for the product to spread and dry on your dog, so if you pet and/or play with your dog within this time frame, you can simply wash your hands with soap and water once you are finished."
Can you please let me know if the EPA agrees with that statement? Also, is that statement, which is a safety claim, lawful under FIFRA? Thank you.
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
***************************************************************************************
(Below is email that I sent to the EPA on 5/12/10)
Dear Ms. Nesci,
Could you please provide me with the number of spot-on related adverse incidents that were reported in 2009 (broken down into the number of deaths/major/moderate/minor/unspecified incidents)?
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
(Below is a response that I received from the EPA on 5/12/10)
James,
For that information, you'll need to submit a Freedom of Information Act
request. Please see the online webform at the URL below:
Best regards,
Kimberly
Kimberly Nesci, Special Assistant
Registration Division (Mail Code: 7505P)
Office of Pesticide Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(703) 308-8059
***************************************************************************************
(Below is email that I sent to the EPA on 5/12/10)
Dear Ms. Nesci,
I would like to bring to your attention a miscalculation in the residential risk assessment that was used to support the Reregistration Eligibility Decision for phenothrin in 2008. The error concerns the application rate that was used for pet spot-on products:
The spot-on application rate that was used for the assessment was "2.6 mL per 31 lb. dog based on the label," which was the maximum application rate that was provided by the registrant. HED always considers the maximum application rates allowed by labels in its risk assessments in order to be able to consider what is legally possible based on the label.
However, the above application rate was for Hartz Advanced Care brand of flea and tick drops for dogs and puppies, EPA Reg. No. 2596-150, which have a labeled dosage of 2.6 mL for dogs 31-45 lbs. The EPA's Health Effects Division should have based the application rate on Hartz UltraGuard brand of flea and tick drops for dogs and puppies, EPA Reg. Nos. 2596-150 and 2596-151, which have a labeled dosage of 4.1 mL for dogs 31-60 lbs., and which were registered on 9/6/07.
As mentioned in the above EPA memorandum, this pet use scenario was omitted from the original assessment due to a calculation error. When the EPA finally did a risk assessment for phenothrin-based spot-on products in May 2008, the deterministic risk assessment indicated significant risks of concern for toddlers. A subsequent probabilistic risk assessment was done in July 2008, and also found risks of concern for toddlers. EPA "refined" the risk assessment yet again in August 2008, using a Benchmark Dose Analysis that was provided by registrants. The further refined assessment indicated no risks of concern.
Given the fact that Hartz UltraGuard spot-on products contain 85.7% phenothrin (the highest concentration of any spot-on product on the market), and that the toxicological database for phenothrin is incomplete, and that EPA recently determined that developmental neurotoxicity studies for pyrethroids do not provide sufficient information related to the susceptibility of infants and children, and that EPA recently determined that pyrethroid pesticides share a common mechanism of toxicity and need a cumulative risk assessment, and that the residential risk assessment for phenothrin was based on a calculation error which significantly underestimated the maximum application rate for spot-on products, and that despite the error, the spot-on scenario was still determined to pose significant risks of concern to toddlers, and that these concerns were not able to be resolved by a probabilistic risk assessment and could only be resolved by using a Benchmark Dose Analysis, it is evident that pregnant women and toddlers who are exposed to these spot-on products are at significant risk.
Does the EPA intend to perform a new residential risk assessment for phenothrin, based on a pet spot-on application rate of 4.1 mL for dogs 31-60 lbs.? If so, when can we expect this risk to be mitigated?
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
***************************************************************************************
On April 27 I applied Bio Spot to my 6 month basset hound as directed on the packaging. Over the next seven days, my puppy turned into a lethargic, depressed dog with little interest in playing or eating/drinking. He began to shed and flake profusely only on the back where the Bio Spot was applied. No shedding occurred on his underside. On evaluation by my veterinarian, he was found to be significantly anemic.
As a pediatrician, I see children who are exposed to environmental and accidental exposures on a frequent basis. The most reliable piece of information for identifying and treating these children is the temporal relationship to exposure and symptoms. Such is the case with my basset hound. Immediately following application of Bio Spot, he began showing symptoms of poisoning consistent with numerous other consumer accounts.
It is my opinion that Bio Spot is a potentially harmful product that should not be sold for general public use. Significant injury to other pets is possible if continued public use is allowed.
Sincerely,
Eric 5/12/10
Staff Pediatrician
***************************************************************************************
I have a 11 month old Standard poodle, which I breed and delivered and was totally
healthy, is now fighting for his life after taking Comfortis. He has elevated enzyme levels
and blood levels and his kidney has stopped functioning properly. He is now in his third
day at the vets on IV and still has red around the eyes which indicates high blood pressure associated with the kidneys. The mother had diminished appetite, diarrhea with nervous
chewing and scratching till she was given an IV to flush the system. I am currently awaiting
the blood work on her. The father is not showing any signs as of yet.
This product is not safe and there are many people that have lost their pets to this dangerous product. I will not let this company get away with this and I believe I will contact an attorney, I am careful with even the food I give them and now, at the hands of myself, have poisoned my own dogs because my vet "recommended" this junk for fleas instead of my usual product.
Please post this if you want, I will update you if you would like.
Nancy 5/15/10
Naples, Florida
Hi Nancy,
Thank you for taking the time to write. I am very sorry to hear about your dogs' reaction to Comfortis.
Here is the website for Comfortis:
Excerpts:
"The most common adverse reaction reported is vomiting."
"Other adverse reactions reported in decreasing order of frequency are: depression/lethargy, decreased appetite, incoordination, diarrhea, itching, trembling, excessive salivation and seizures."
Here are additional warnings:
If you have not already done so, please contact the manufacturer and let them know what happened. They will probably try to tell you that Comfortis would not be expected to cause your dog's symptoms, but they say the same thing to everyone (even if those symptoms are listed on their product label). I would ask them to reimburse your vet expenses, and if they are not willing to do that, ask your vet to contact them on your behalf (your vet should be willing to do that, since you purchased the drug from them). If these types of reactions are allegedly rare, why should the manufacturer refuse to accept responsibility for their product and reimburse your vet expenses if your dog's symptoms match those listed as possible reactions on their product label?
Also, please report it to the FDA (which regulates the sale of veterinary drugs). Here is information on how to report it:
I hope that your dogs will make a quickly recover. It may take time for the poison to be completely eliminated from their system. Please keep me updated on their condition and whether the manufacturer is willing to help you.
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
Thanks James
I am doing alot of research and blogging as much as possible. I have a very
expensive dog that I chose the parents very carefully. They are my babies
and all three sleep with me! I am very careful of what I use on them and
around them but this one escape my attention.
My vet, Dr Oliver, in Naples Florida has contacted the company and is being
extremely helpful and supportive in this matter. I do believe he has taken
this medication of of his shelves and not selling anymore. The company vet,
Dr Julia Brannan said the company will pay for test but not treatments. Dr Oliver
insisted I be very addament on all cost and he will help. She is currently ordering
test which I believe she is trying to blame genetics. Today I am contacting the
breeders of both parents and getting paperwork from them. Both have had the
grandparents gentic mapping done and have no signs of any problems. This is
why I choose my male and female. My puppy is still in his care and my mother
had IV treatment and blood work done with no signs such as those that the puppy,
Walter had in his blood work. Her constant scratchng and itching has supsided
as of today. I read in a post somewhere that a comment was made "Someday
these companies will cross the wrong pet owner in regards to these problems"
unquote. I do believe they have found that person!
Thanks for your reply and I will update you. Currently, Please keep blogging about
this dangerous drug and help stop the manufacturing of it! I will contact the FDA
as you suggest.
Nancy 5/15/10
Naples Florida
P.S. If anyone would like to share or ask questions, please give them my email
with the subject heading "Walter"
***************************************************************************************
Just wanted to post my case of a bad reaction from one of my two Japanese
Chins. This is the second application of First Shield Trio, and now I know what
happened during the first application. After the first dose, the larger female
acted as if a splinter or something had gotten stuck in her paw, jumping
irratically and biting/licking her paw. Upon inspection it didn't look like
anything was wrong with her paw. This lasted about 3 days and went away.
Applied the second dose of First Shield Trio (first dose was last Fall
sometime) yesterday, and wouldn't you know it, she acts like she has a
splinter in the paw again, as well as mildly having the same issue with the
other leg. She will sit down, and her legs will start twitching, as if they
itch, but somewhat uncontrollably, which made me do some research on the
net. After finding the information on your site, I immediately scrubbed the
application site with Dawn dish soap several times, as well as her affected
paws to be sure. This is an outrage, that this poison is allowed to be sold
without exhaustive research. How many kids touch their pets after this
deadly stuff is applied, with parents unknowing? I will be telling everyone
I can about the dangers, and will definitely be going back to Advantage.....
not to mention the fact that Petsmart is who recommended First Shield
because they no longer carried Advantage. Now it all makes sense.
Hope this helps anyone avoid similar problems.
Justin 5/16/10
***************************************************************************************
Organophosphate Pesticides Linked to ADHD
Excerpts:
In a representative sample of US children, those with higher levels of organophosphate pesticide metabolites in their urine were more likely to have attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) than children with lower levels, indicating less exposure to these compounds, researchers report in the June issue of Pediatrics, published online May 17.
Previous similar investigations, Dr. Bouchard noted, have focused on "special groups
with high levels of exposure, such as children from agricultural communities, and reported pesticides-related cognitive deficits (involving memory and attention), and behavioral problems. The present study is the first investigation on children's neurodevelopment to
be conducted in a group with no particular pesticide exposure."
Michael L. Goldstein, MD, who was not involved in the study, said the study results are "very interesting findings from a very well-done study from a good database." The report, he said, "certainly got my attention when I read it; I was really impressed by it. I think it is a groundbreaking study, added Dr. Goldstein, a specialist in child neurology with Western Neurological Associates in Salt Lake City, Utah, and a faculty member of the American Academy of Neurology.
"It is very well established that organophosphates disrupt brain neurochemical activity. Indeed, their efficacy as pesticides result from their toxic effect on the central nervous
system of insects," Dr. Bouchard noted.
In a written statement to Medscape Psychiatry, CropLife America, an industry group representing the developers, manufacturers, formulators, and distributors of plant science solutions for agriculture and pest management in the United States, said their review of
the study "leads us to believe much more research is needed to ascertain if there is a direct link between exposure to organophosphate pesticides and the development of ADHD in children.
"All crop protection products are extensively reviewed by regulatory agencies before
approval for market use. Many scientific factors are examined by government pesticide regulators, based on extensive laboratory testing, all of which are intended to guarantee safety for the environment and people, including children," the statement reads. "The
class of crop protection compound that is the subject of this study has been approved
and registered by the US EPA, and when used according to the label, the EPA has determined it to be safe."
***************************************************************************************
(Below is email that I sent to the EPA on 5/17/10)
Dear Ms. Nesci,
Here's an interesting article that was published today concerning a possible link between pesticides and ADHD:
Excerpts:
In a representative sample of US children, those with higher levels of organophosphate pesticide metabolites in their urine were more likely to have attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) than children with lower levels, indicating less exposure to these compounds, researchers report in the June issue of Pediatrics, published online May 17.
Previous similar investigations, Dr. Bouchard noted, have focused on "special groups with high levels of exposure, such as children from agricultural communities, and reported pesticides-related cognitive deficits (involving memory and attention), and behavioral problems. The present study is the first investigation on children's neurodevelopment to be conducted in a group with no particular pesticide exposure."
Michael L. Goldstein, MD, who was not involved in the study, said the study results are "very interesting findings from a very well-done study from a good database." The report, he said, "certainly got my attention when I read it; I was really impressed by it. I think it is a groundbreaking study, added Dr. Goldstein, a specialist in child neurology with Western Neurological Associates in Salt Lake City, Utah, and a faculty member of the American Academy of Neurology.
"It is very well established that organophosphates disrupt brain neurochemical activity. Indeed, their efficacy as pesticides result from their toxic effect on the central nervous system of insects," Dr. Bouchard noted.
In a written statement to Medscape Psychiatry, CropLife America, an industry group representing the developers, manufacturers, formulators, and distributors of plant science solutions for agriculture and pest management in the United States, said their review of the study "leads us to believe much more research is needed to ascertain if there is a direct link between exposure to organophosphate pesticides and the development of ADHD in children.
"All crop protection products are extensively reviewed by regulatory agencies before approval for market use. Many scientific factors are examined by government pesticide regulators, based on extensive laboratory testing, all of which are intended to guarantee safety for the environment and people, including children," the statement reads. "The class of crop protection compound that is the subject of this study has been approved and registered by the US EPA, and when used according to the label, the EPA has determined it to be safe."
Since the EPA recently determined that developmental neurotoxicity studies for pyrethroids do not provide sufficient information related to the susceptibility of infants and children, does that mean that pyrethroid-based spot-on products may have the potential to cause ADHD or other developmental disorders in children, or in children who may have greater susceptibility to developmental disorders, such as autism? If so, does the EPA believe that mitigation is warranted out of an abundance of caution? Does the EPA have any advice concerning this matter for parents of young children who use spot-on products?
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
***************************************************************************************
Hi... came across your blog.
I'm putting together a story on adverse effects of flea & tick 'spot-on' treatments. And I'd like
to know if you know of any pet owners in the Tucson, AZ (or Southern Arizona) area who've encountered these problems. I'd like to get up with them for an interview.
Thank you for any help you might offer.
Regards,
Tom McNamara
News Anchor/Investigative Reporter
Click here for the latest News and Weather
KVOA-TV
520 624-2477
Posted 5/17/10
***************************************************************************************
I recently purchased the bio spot for my dog because it was a lot cheaper then the
Frontline. A few hours after applying my dogs tail curled up and you could see she was
in a lot of pain. I will never use this product again and don't recommend it to anyone.
After almost a week her tail still hasn't gone down.
Kris 5/18/10
***************************************************************************************
(Below is an outstanding comment that was submitted to the EPA concerning its recent evaluation of pet spot-on incidents and risk mitigation plan)
Thank you for this opportunity to participate in the public comment period of the EPA’s recent proposals for spot on flea and tick products. It shows improvement in many ways to past administrations and their dealings with these toxic and devastating products. It gives one hope. Sadly, however, the proposals by the EPA fall severely short of what is needed. Labeling changes using pictograms, changes in weight class, branding changes for species all fail to address the fact that the incidents of death and damage are on the rise. If these were products used on people, they would have been banned a long time ago. Simply because they are used on pets should not change the stance of the EPA.
These ingredients, primarily pyrethrins, permethrin and their derivatives, have been known and stated by the EPA to be carcinogenic to animals and humans. There are numerous studies, not funded by industry, that indicate they are more highly toxic than previously banned substances. It is time for the EPA to take a strong stance against these products and ingredients. By keeping them on the market, manufacturers knowingly are keeping toxic products that maim and kill pets on the market for profit instead of seeking safer non-toxic alternatives.
I understand our system is somewhat broken when it comes to protecting the public and that the EPA has a difficult job. I understand that changes need to be made at very fundamental levels in order to truly give the EPA the authority and opportunity to protect the public and their pets in a nimble and quick manner in cases where public health (and now pet health) are in question.
Pyrethrins, permethrin, pyrethrenoids and their derivatives came to market as a “safer alternative” to organophosphates (O.P.s). However, currently the incidents of death and damage from these pyrethrenoid products are higher than OPs at their apex. Action needs to be taken and it needs to be swift.
Since pyrethrin is derived from the chrysanthemum plant, many formularies claim that the products containing them are “organic” or “all natural”. This is true, however it gives the public a false sense of security. Radon gas, arsenic and strychnine are all natural, but also known to be highly toxic.
I propose that these products be banned for use on pets and in the home. That instead of registrants providing the EPA with scientific studies they control by their funding, that the same dollar amount spent on these studies goes into a fund that the EPA controls to hire truly independent toxicology studies and that long term health effects are also required to be studied. I propose that the EPA set up guidelines that must be followed to the letter for these studies and that it is no longer acceptable to make specious claims with the way science has been practiced in order to continue to have toxic products on the market. Also, entire formularies, including inert ingredients need to be tested instead of individual active ingredients. The EPA should have access to ALL ingredients, even if they are claimed to be trade secrets, for the purpose of evaluating registrant proposals and products. It is well known that chemicals react with each other and it is important not to ignore this fact. It is also known that often ingredients listed as inert are actually hidden lethal combinations, sometimes containing ingredients previously banned or that would be listed as an active ingredient in another pesticide. The public has a right to make educated decisions about their health care and that of their pet. I propose that the EPA regulate a national reporting system directly to the EPA rather than have the reporting be controlled by manufacturers who have a vested interest in under reporting, not reporting or minimizing incidents. As you know, Hartz alone has been fined several times for such practices and they are in a sweet heart deal with the ASPCA toxicology poison control hotline to take all Hartz calls. This gives them an unfair advantage over other registrants. I propose that 1% of corporate profits from manufacturers and registrants go into a fund, controlled either by the EPA or a body of truly independent researchers, to find non-toxic alternatives to dealing fleas and ticks on pets and inside the home and in the yard. In exchange, manufacturers should have the ability to use this information for the purposes of bringing these alternatives to market. I propose that pyrethrins, pyrethrenoids and permethrin are regulated under the same EPA department, instead of different ones as is currently the practice. I propose rather than hiding that ingredients are a derivative (or structurally the same as a chemical that has been getting bad publicity) that they should be required to state the name of the ingredient and what it is derived from. These steps would go a long way toward protecting public and pet health.
Currently, these registrants prey on our fears and cash in on brand recognition, although many of the companies no longer resemble the trusted family run companies ingrained into our families as pet care partners for generations. The public innocently assumes that if something is on a grocery store shelf or other retail environment that there is some assurance of its safety. Sadly, the truth is this is a billion dollar industry and currently profits are outweighing the public health and our pets health. Subsequently in 2008 alone over 120 incidences PER DAY of death and damage were reported to the EPA from manufacturers. The actual numbers are much higher due to the structure of current reporting. This is an epidemic.
It has been established that incidents from these products have been on an alarming increase year after year. This cannot only be explained by “more public awareness” and “more computer use”, particularly when most incidences are reported via phone, not the internet. This can be explained by several studies that show these products are toxic and stored in the central nervous system, where necropsy does not look for toxic build up. It can be explained by the fact that our pets are unable to metabolize these products and so the incidents often occur after months or years of use. It can be explained by toxic ingredients often disguised as “inert”. It can be explained by the fact that these products are working less and less, so formula need to be stronger and stronger, usually with a combination of ingredients which in turn create a more highly toxic product to our pets.
Human health is also at risk with these products. When the EPA bans the indoor use of certain ingredients found on retail shelves, yet allows them into the home via use on pets it nullifies the effort to protect human health. It has been shown, for instance, that flea collars containing propoxur leaves residue in the home at ten times the adult EPA suggested “safe” amount and one hundred times the “safe” level for children. Obviously this is an issue, however it also begs a question as to how the “safe” level for pets was agreed upon who are often smaller, lack the same enzymes to metabolize toxins and absorb much more quickly through their skin those things put upon their bodies.
I understand the job of the EPA in regulating these products is complex and vast, but swift action needs to be taken. The EPA has requested hundreds of these products over the past five years be voluntarily recalled, however this has not accomplished removing them from the market, often times resulting a re-branding effort instead.
The time for action is now and it is my hope that with the current administration these incidences, this phenomenal amount of death and damage and suffering, will soon be at an end.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
To read other comments that were submitted to the EPA concerning pet spot-on incidents, please go to the link below and click on the box for "Public Submissions" :
***************************************************************************************
On Monday May 17th I had to put my beloved male sealpoint himalayan of 10 years to sleep. One week before that I had administered Bio Spot for fleas that I had purchased on Pet-Meds, always before I had purchased Frontline Plus, but because of my finances being low I decided to try Bio-Spot. Within 3 hours he went into seizures and breathing heavily with his mouth open, also his back legs were not working. I waited till 2:30pm until his breathing got a little bit better praying a lot and I went to sleep...(I should say that as soon as I noticed this happening I washed the spot where I had applied Bio Spot to the best of my abilities. A few days went by and he still would not eat or drink and his back legs still did not work. I took him to the vet and I was told that his heart had been affected and a blood clot dislodged in his lower spine, he was put on medication for his heart, I continued to feed him through a syringe and given him water also, but on Monday his breathing got very labored and around 6:00 pm I took him to the vet and the diagnosis was not good, so I had to put him to sleep, it hurt so much because he was alert...I have been grieving since then, this product should be taken off the market to prevent more pets from having to suffer and die.
In his love,
Ivonne 5/19/10
p.s. please find attached picture of my beloved Amaretto
***************************************************************************************
Below are some of the comments that I submitted to the EPA in regards to its recent evaluation of pet spot-on products and risk mitigation plan:
James TerBush
Website Administrator
***************************************************************************************
Phoenix was the most beautiful cat. My 9 and 11 year-old sons called him a
"walla-meis-ger" because he had very big back feet like a wallaby; gorgeous
pointy features like a Siamese; and stripes like a tiger. Phoenix means
unsurpassed beauty and excellence, and he fit the name.
I usually use Advantix for flea control, but money was scarce, so I went with a
friend's recommendation and purchased BioSpot. I put the drops on Phoenix
on Saturday evening. Being an indoor/outdoor cat, it was not unusual that I
didn't see him again until morning. What I saw was so horrifying. Our beautiful
Phoenix was drooling profusely and walking around in dazed confusion, his
eyes dilated completely. I was able to reach our vet immediately even though
it was Sunday morning. He said to bring him in right away, but there was
probably nothing he could do. Dr. Elliot told me right from the beginning that
he was angry about these products, and he was not likely to survive.
After an overnight stay at the vet, we brought Phoenix home. He spent a
miserable week in our darkened home, as the light seemed to trigger
seizures. Even with the lights dimmed, he still had seizures, walking
around in endless circles, bumping into things, and involuntarily rolling
across the floor.
Finally, after 8 days of this, we left the house, not knowing that he had
sneaked outside. At this time, he seizures had begun to diminish, so I
thought we might be on the way to recovery. All of hearts were shattered
when we returned home and discovered him missing. We found him outside,
his life gone.
This was almost 2 years ago. I still have images of myself squeezing that
poison on Phoenix's neck every time I see BioSpot on a store shelf.
Renee 5/21/10
P.S. Please add that while I was trying to save money by using BioSpot
on Phoenix, I had to pay about $300 in vet bills, and most importantly, we
lost our beloved kitty.
Here is a picture of Phoenix.
***************************************************************************************
I used Biospot for the first time on my pet on May 3 and she started having seizures. I took
her to the vet on May 17 and had blood and urine tests done and they found nothing that should have caused her problems. Are assuming it is epilepsy or a brain tumor. She was
in fine health before this.
Anonymous 5/22/10
***************************************************************************************
(The following message was posted on HartzVictims.org on 5/22/10)
A little background: I have always been a dog lover. Unfortunately my boyfriend is severely allergic to dogs, and after 6 years of searching for the perfect hypoallergenic addition to our family we found Napoleon.
Last week, after finding a tick on Napoleon (age 8 months) I purchased Hartz Ultra Guard. I was sure to purchase the correct product (with regard to pet weight) and determined that Napoleon is old enough for product use. My sister has used this product in the past and I assumed it was safe. After applying the product on Saturday, and being careful to follow the directions, Napoleon began to refuse food. Sunday he began vomiting, which is not unusual due to his sensitive stomach. Monday the vomiting continued and I made an appointment with our vet (Doctor #1 at our clinic). At out Tuesday appointment, our vet decided to take x-rays to rule out that he had swallowed a foreign body. At this time I mentioned that I had applied this product, but no one seemed to think this was the cause of his illness. The x-rays appeared to show a “material like” foreign body that would have to be removed surgically. After several hours of IV fluids, Napoleon was sent home and scheduled for a return visit the next day. On Wednesday, a second round of x-rays (same clinic, different doctor) showed that there was a suspicious area of the stomach, that may or may not be a foreign body. I was given the option to go ahead with the surgery, or wait for a mobile ultrasound company to confirm the presence of a foreign body. I certainly wasn’t about to allow them to cut into Napoleon without being positive it was necessary. 7 hours later, the ultrasound team found no evidence of a foreign body. What they found was substantially worse. Napoleon’s stomach lining, intestines and colon were severely inflamed. This inflammation was so severe, it mimicked a foreign body on the x-ray. At this point the vet (doctor #3) suggested that this could be due to chemical exposure or a viral illness. I reiterated that the only chemical exposure that he had had was the Hartz product. The clinic suggested I treat the symptoms with previously prescribed antibiotics, and anti-naseua medication. He was sent home with the IV catheter in his arm for a second night, incase he required further IV fluids the following day. Upon arriving home, Napoleon was lethargic and seemed to be wilting before my eyes. My previously rambunctious yorkie-poo puppy had turned into a sad shadow of himself. He began drooling, and repeatedly shaking his head. Having no experience with severely ill dogs, I did not recognize this as seizure activity. Early Thursday morning I attempted to administer an anti-naseua pill. Napoleon became stressed and began violently shaking his head, drooling, and smacking his lips. Thankfully this time I realized what was happening and did my best to calm him while gathering our things to rush to the vet. Upon arrival at the clinic we met with Doctor #2 who asked if he had been exposed to any chemicals. I reiterated that the only chemicals he had come in contact with were in the Hartz product. She suggested we run blood tests for Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever (“tick fever”) and Valley Fever (a common illness in Arizona). Both of these illnesses can cause seizure activity in dogs. She also agreed to do some research on the Veterinary Internet Network regarding this product. Napoleon remained at the clinic on IV for 12 hours on Thursday. Again he returned home that evening with the IV catheter still attached. Today (Friday) I took him back for a check up. He was lifting his head more, and showed more interest in the car ride, but was nowhere near his bouncy, energetic self. Doctor #2 met with us again and stated that she is confident that this is the result of exposure to the Hartz medication. She also stated that she was shocked at the number of incidences reported regarding this and similar medications. Further, she stated that she was unaware of the dangers of this product, or the EPA review. Bloodwork for Tick Fever and Valley Fever came back negative, solidifying her diagnosis. Since Napoleon appeared a bit better, the IV catheter was removed and he was allowed to spend the day at home. Unfortunately as the day progresses, he has become more lethargic and is still refusing to eat, bringing the total to 6 days without oral nutrition. He has had another seizure (milder than yesterday’s) and continues to drool excessively. Tomorrow will be day 5 at the vet, for another round of IVs and monitoring. If he continues refusing food, he will have gone an entire week without eating.
The current total of our vet bills is $865.32 and we expect that to increase tomorrow with the replacement of the IV line and the several hours he will be required to “rest” at the vet. This, in addition to the gasoline expense, recommended prescription diet, and time spent at the vet has added up to a very expensive tick treatment. However, the worst expense is the physical pain this ordeal has caused our little guy. I am horrified at the idea that we could have agreed to an unnecessary surgery only to find this terrible inflammation. I am shocked that this product is still on the market. Until consumers are successful in getting this product pulled from store shelves, it is imperative that Veterinarians are made aware of the signs/symptoms of phenothrin toxicity and learn to treat it quickly and appropriately.
Hopefully our story has a happy ending. We are praying that Napoleon makes a full recovery and is able to live a long and happy life. Regardless of the result of his fight with this illness, I will certainly beginning a fight of my own to have these products banned.
Thank you for allowing me to share my story. My prayers are with other families struggling with the illness or loss of a pet due to this horrible product.
Chelsea 5/22/10
***************************************************************************************
I have a 12 year old cat that I just took into my home from a relative.
On Saturday 5-22-10 I purchased BioSpot at the farm supply store here
in town. Twenty minutes after I applied it to my cat, she began panting
really hard and running through the house frantically. Luckily I called my
vet right away and she told me to bathe her in Dawn soap and bring
her in immediately. I did bathe her in the Dawn soap and she began to
calm down and stopped panting after about 30 minutes.
When I took her to the vet, they checked her out thoroughly and told me
that I saved her life by calling right away. Most people wait until their cat
is having a seizure before they call. I was a lucky one and my cat pulled
through.
They also informed me that she would have died if I had not acted so
quickly. They informed me that they have had a significant number of
cats die or have serious problems due to BioSpot being used.
I can't believe that BioSpot does not have more warnings on their
packaging and how they are still selling this potentially lethal products
for cats and dogs.
Debbie 5/24/10
***************************************************************************************
Came across your website looking for some answers as to why our one year
old cat was acting weird this past week. Loss of appetite, eyes sensitive to
sunlight. Sad...listless. He had a Revolution treatment last week....???? Now
I'm thinking it may be a reaction to the treatment after reading all the comments.
Our cat is and indoor kitty. Although he's escaped a few times, only to walk
(lunched) close along side the foundation of the house a few feet till I caught
him. Not sure he needs flea treatment if he doesn't go outside..????
Since your article have you gotten any feedback to natural flea treatments
that work..???
Thank you...thank you for your article.
Marion 5/28/10
***************************************************************************************
I thought I would share my experience with Advantage flea medication. I
applied Advantage flea medication on my 5 year old Bedlington Terrier as
directed early Monday evening for the first time this summer season.
That night she didn't sleep at all. She normally sleeps with us on our
bed but that night she constantly jumped off the bed and barked like
crazy out the window. I would put her back up on the bed and try to
calm her down by petting her but she was so hyper she would just jump
right back off again and start barking. If she did stay on the bed for
a few minutes it was in a very alert standing position staring into the
darkness of the room. I finally decided to take her outside thinking
she had to go to the bathroom but once we got outside all she did was
bark and look frightened - (she is normally not afraid of anything).
This was at 2:00am and I was so worried of waking everyone up on our
block. None of us got any sleep that night to say the least. The exact
same thing happened both Tuesday and Wednesday nights. What's
interesting is that she has done this every summer in the past too. I
always thought it was because she didn't like the warm weather and it
was hard for her to get comfortable and fall asleep. However, I finally
put two and two together and realized her hyperactive behaviour may be
caused from the Advantage flea medication. (It took me 5 years for this
to dawn on me). I called our vet yesterday morning and discussed the
situation with her and she said she never heard of this kind of reaction
from a flea medication before so she wasn't convinced. However, she did
tell me to give Callie a real good soapy bath to try to wash off the
medicine just to see if this helps. So when I came home from work
yesterday that's exactly what I did. I did a bit of research and
discovered Dawn dishwashing liquid is a good soap to use in this
instance. I bought a bottle of Dawn hypo-allergenic soap and gave her a
good bath and rinsed her completely off with cool water. Guess what?
We all slept soundly through the entire night. This has convinced me
that Advantage was causing Callie's hyperactive reaction. I can't
believe we've suffered 5 summers with this but I'm so glad I finally
figured it out. My vet said we can try a different brand, like
Frontline, but I'm too weary of any chemical flea control product now.
Instead, I'm going to figure out a natural and holistic flea control
program for her starting with the good old flea comb method and build
from there. After reading stories of other people's dogs I feel very
fortunate that her reaction to Advantage wasn't nearly as bad as some
others reported but it has been difficult living on virtually no sleep
for the past 5 years. My heart goes out to everyone that had to endure
adverse side effects of these flea poison's.
Chris 5/28/10
***************************************************************************************
I have two dogs, One Poodle seven years and one Shih Tzu ten months.
I purchased Bio Spot at Pet Smart. The Clerk assured me the product was safe, in fact he had used it on his dog as well. I only wished I had checked this product out online before applying it to my dogs.
I put the product on my dogs as directed, and within ten to fifteen minutes they both started scratching their necks. I then became very concerned when they both became very anxious, jumping up and down from the couch whining, and rubbing up against me for reassurance, I could tell something terribly was wrong.
I then got on the internet and viewed the side affects of this product, I was sick. I immediately gave them both a bath in Dawn dish soap and scrubbed them for about five minutes then rinsing them well. The symptoms seemed to subside somewhat but it has now been 18 hours and they are still scratching the area that I applied the Bio Spot to, their neck and the base of their tails.
I want people to know about this product, it is not safe. How does this company get away with selling this poison? How many near death incidents of our pets is it going to take to get them to make changes?
I will never buy any of their products again.
Thank you for doing such a good job by having your site to get the word out about Bio Spot.
Jan 5/28/10
Copyright © 2002-2010 BioSpotVictims.org All rights reserved.
DISCLAIMER: Below are messages that I have received from others whose dogs and cats experienced adverse reactions after using flea control products. I have no way of knowing if the information in these messages is factual, or if the products they used were the actual cause of the adverse reactions.
Search
