Message Board
August 2011
CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
On 3/2/10, a lawsuit seeking class action status was filed on behalf of pet owners against Hartz, Sergeant's, and Summit VetPharm (maker of Vectra and Vectra 3D, which are sold by Banfield Pet Hospital's under the name FirstShield and FirstShield Trio).
On 8/25/10, a lawsuit seeking class action status was filed on behalf of pet owners against Central Garden and Pet - the parent company of Farnam (maker of Adams and Bio Spot flea and tick products) and Wellmark International (maker of Zodiac flea and tick products).
The lawsuits seek 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 made by one of the above mentioned companies, and you would like to participate in this class action, please contact:
Jacqueline Mottek
Positive Legal Group
415.302.5371 (cell)
***************************************************************************************
Beware Dog Caregivers, Big Pharma has a new drug on the market you
definitely want to avoid!
The new drug is called Trifexis -- a monthly chewable tablet that kills fleas, protects against heartworms, and controls adult hookworm, roundworm, and whipworm infections. It contains spinosad and milbemycin oxime as the active ingredients.
Here is the FDA's Cumulative Adverse Drug Experience (ADE) Report (1987 to June 11, 2011), which includes Trifexis (see spinosad, milbemycin):
For a drug that has been on the market for only six months, that sure looks like a lot of
adverse experiences!
***************************************************************************************
Oh, What a Tangled Web They Weave
On August 5, 2011, it was announced in the Federal Register that Fipronex [sic] Solutions
was voluntarily requesting the cancellation of its fipronil technical (the main active ingredient
in Frontline) registration, which had been granted to them on January 5, 2011:
The EPA had restricted the above registration "for use only in the manufacturing of companion animal spot-on insecticide/miticide products."
On January 10, 2011, the EPA registered several generic Frontline products, which are marketed under the name PetArmor. However, before the PetArmor products could be registered, its source of fipronil technical also had to be registered. Velcera (the company that markets PetArmor) had made arrangements with a company in India (Cipla Ltd.) to manufacture its PetArmor products, but it couldn't reveal that Cipla Ltd., was its source of fipronil technical because Cipla Ltd., was under a 2008 court order barring it from selling
(or cause to be sold) any product that infringed the patents for Frontline Plus.
To get around that obstacle, Velcera entered into a relationship with Fipronext Solutions, Inc., to make it appear as if they would be the source of its fipronil technical. Velcera also named Raymat Materials, Inc., as an alternate source (EPA registered its fipronil technical product
on January 3, 2011).
According to EPA documents, Fipronext Solutions, inc., is located at 3259 Harvey Court, in Pleasanton, CA:
However, according to blockshopper.com, that address is a residential home -- owned by Jibing Lin and Linghua Zhang:
According to corporationwiki.com, Linghua Zhang is the president of Fipronext Solutions, Inc.:
Interestingly, Jibing Lin is listed as the president of Raymat Materials, Inc.:
According to EPA documents, Linghua Zhang also serves as vice president of Raymat Materials, Inc.:
and Jibing Lin also serves as Chief Executive Officer of Fipronext Solutions, Inc.:
On June 21, 2011, a U.S. District Court ruled that the sales of PetArmor Plus infringed on the patents covering Frontline Plus, and ordered PetArmor be removed from the market (which was stayed 60 days pending appeal).
The Court stated:
"The final obstacle was devising a set of relationships and arrangements to use Cipla as its manufacturer and final producer without running afoul of the Court's March 6, 2008 Order. Notwithstanding the multiple layers of arrangements that were constructed to get the product to the United States, the substance of the various transactions is clear. Cipla played the critical and essential roles of manufacturing, packaging, and assisting in the development of the PetArmor Plus product for Velcera to sell in the United States. Cipla knew the product was to be sold in the United States, even though the product traveled from its facility in final consumer-ready condition through various other layers before it actually ended up on U.S. soil."
Was the EPA aware that Velcera had arranged for Cipla Ltd., to manufacture its
PetArmor products, and that Fipronext Solutions, Inc., – a company with no employees,
no manufacturing facility, and no previous pesticide registration – would not be its source
of fipronil technical? If so, this elaborate scheme to circumvent the law was aided and
abetted by the EPA.
Incredibly, here is a letter that was recently submitted to the EPA on behalf of
the above mentioned companies, seeking a waiver from new data requirements concerning ecological and human exposure risk assessments:
***************************************************************************************
Attention Pet Owners : We need your help!
Thank you, TinyTimmy.org, for creating another outstanding video!
TinyTimmy.org will be traveling to Washington, DC in September
to meet with the EPA, politicians, and big box retailers to
raise awareness and help get harmful flea and tick products
removed from the market.
Please help them represent YOU by making a contribution:
Anything helps - even if it is only a few dollars. Thank you!
***************************************************************************************
Perry to Republicans: Time to cut government
Excerpts:
BIRMINGHAM -- Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Friday delivered a conservative message to Alabama Republicans on the eve of his expected presidential announcement, stressing the need to defeat President Barack Obama and reduce the size of government to make the country friendlier to job-creating businesses.
Speaking at a fundraising dinner for the Alabama GOP, Perry didn't refer directly to his presidential plans, but he did ask audience members to send him a text message so that he could get their phone numbers in his databank.
Perry called the federal government a "sprawling mess" that needs to be returned to the limited sized envisioned by the nation's founders in the Constitution.
"There is still a whole world of work to be done in Washington, D.C., and we need to send truly fiscal conservatives to Washington to get it done," said Perry, whose address was repeatedly interrupted by applause and cheers.
He said the "arrogance and audacity" of the Obama administration "poses a threat to just about every private sector job out there." He singled out the Environmental Protection Agency as an example of the way government regulation can hurt business and scare off jobs.
***************************************************************************************
(Below is a Freedom of Information Act request that I sent to the EPA on 8/18/11)
Please send me a transcript of OPP Director Steven Bradbury's presentation at the Chemical Producers & Distributors Association (CPDA) Annual Meeting on July 19, 2011.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
(Below is a response that I received from the EPA on 8/26/11)
(Below is email that I sent to the EPA on 8/28/11)
Dear Mr. Ingram,
Thank you for the response to my Freedom of Information Act request for a transcript of
OPP Director Steven Bradbury's presentation at the Chemical Producers and Distributors Association's 2011 Annual Meeting on July 19, 2011.
You stated that EPA does not have a transcript of Mr. Bradbury's speech, but it certainly has access to it. EPA simply has to ask Mr. Bradbury for a copy of it. Mr. Bradbury should be willing to provide it, especially if his lodging and transportation to/from the Don CeSar Beach Resort in St. Pete Beach, Florida, was at the public's expense, and if the speech occurred during the EPA's normal business hours.
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
(Below is a response that I received from the EPA on 8/29/11)
Hello Mr. TerBush,
Mr. Bradbury works for the EPA therefore, we would have provided you an
transcript if he had one. You were provided information on how to file
an appeal to your FOIA request in my letter if you wish to appeal my no
records determination.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions.
Earl Ingram
Team Leader
Public Information & Records Integrity Branch
Information Technology & Resources Management Division
Office of Pesticide Programs
US Environmental Protection Agency
(703) 305-5456 - Office # 703-305-5480 - Fax #
Email: ingram.earl@epa.gov
***************************************************************************************
(Below is email that I sent to Wade Britton at the EPA on 8/19/11)
Dear Wade,
In January, the EPA registered a fipronil + cyphenothrin spot-on product for dogs (EPA Reg. # 2517-140) from Sergeant's Pet Care Products, Inc.:
The EPA-approved label contains several precautionary statements not found on other registered spot-on products, including:
"Weigh your dog to be sure you are applying the right dose formulated for the weight of your dog. Do not treat your dog with more than one pesticide product at a time. Over dosing your dog can result in serious illness and even death....Seperate the treated dog from all other dogs and cats for 24 hours after treatment has been applied. Cats and dogs that actively groom or engage in close physical contact with treated dog may be at risk of serious harmful effects. The most common signs of ingestion are excessive salivation and foaming at the mouth. If these symptoms occur immediately feed your dog and continue to monitor your dog for the next 24 hours. If symptoms persist call 1-800-781-4738 to talk to a veterinarian. Cats exhibiting these same symptoms from ingestion should be taken to the veterinarian immediately."
Were those statements recommended or required by the EPA? Does the EPA intend to recommend or require those statements on all currently registered spot-on products for dogs?
Thank you in advance for your reply.
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
***************************************************************************************
Toby, our bullet proof 4 year old stray had been using Biospot for some
time. JoAnn put it on him and our two other dogs yesterday morning, came
home that afternoon and he was very lethargic (usually chases our Long Horn
cow for a few min). He got worse through out the night and by morning was
confused, had severe sclera edema, drooling, had not eaten or drank for 24 hr.
We found the BioSpot victim web site and immediately gave him a bath. He
has been at the vet all day, steroids and fluids, looks a little better but not out
of the woods. Time will tell. Will repost in the Am.
Our vet called BioSpot and they said, "There is no way our product caused
these symptoms." No other help. We are both in medicine. Even Aspirin can
kill you. How about a little help instead of denial!
Please think of our Toby. And Thank You for the bath recommendation.
Mike & JoAnn 8/19/11
Our Toby passed last night and of course we are heart broken.
However perhaps some good can come of this.
As I said we had used BS for some time, but noted with this incident the
catalog stated a " new improved version" that has a couple of new chemicals
in it. If people continue to use the product my recommendations are.
1. Apply 1/2 the recommended dose 1 day and the other half the next.
2. Apply at a time when you can check on the animals every 15 min x
1hr.Then every hour for the rest of the day.
3. Of course, as you state in your web site, bath if you think your dog is
having a reaction.
Thank you for caring and if we can be of any service in the future let us
know.
Mike & JoAnn 8/20/11
(Below is email that I sent to Wade Britton at the EPA on 8/20/11 concerning
the above posts)
Hi Wade,
Below is email that I received this morning concerning Bio Spot Defense spot-on flea
and tick for dogs (EPA Reg. No. 2724-796-270).
Several pet owners have mentioned to me that when they contacted the manufacturer of
Bio Spot (Farnam - a division of Central Garden & Pet) to report an adverse incident, they were told that Bio Spot would not have caused it. A few years ago, I contacted Farnam and asked if it was possible for Bio Spot to cause seizures in dogs. They transferred me to a veterinarian at the ASPCA's Animal Poison Control Center (which manages Farnam's adverse incident cases), who advised me that Bio Spot was not capable of causing seizures in dogs, and that they had never received any reports of Bio Spot causing seizures in dogs. I advised the ASPCA's veterinarian that Bio Spot caused seizures in my dog and it almost killed him.
Isn't it a violation of federal law for pesticide product registrants to underreport adverse incidents? Can't EPA do anything to enforce it?
Sincerely,
James TerBush
Website Administrator
***************************************************************************************
It's been five years since my pet had a severe adverse reaction and almost died from a spot-on product, (Frontline). I see very little in the way of regulatory improvements. The reporting of adverse incidents as it is permitted, remains an absolute travesty. The OPP/EPA has not moved forward in all of these years making certain that their investigative/auditing processes were improved with results sanctioning the manufacturer. An absolute cease and desist should have been implemented regarding the outright mis-information provided to customers via call center associates when reporting adverse spot-on reactions. Five years since I heard the same mantra (as the recent letter written on this comment page from a couple who lost their beloved pet) from the product manufacturer, from both the call center associates and their house veterinarian..`Oh no, we have NEVER before received a call such as yours' (reporting illness/ severe anemia from the spot-on product). `Your pet must be ill from something else.' And still, there has been no change. Why not? Who at the EPA/OPP can answer this question and not feel the responsibility of thousands of animal companions' suffering from the effects of spot-on products... deaths and illnesses that need not have happened!
Jan 8/21/11
***************************************************************************************
Court Ordered Seizure of Existing PetArmor™ Plus Products Inventory
in the U.S. Went into Effect August 21, 2011
Excerpts:
Merial announced today that the Court-ordered seizure of Velcera’s PetArmor™ Plus products inventory in the U.S. went into effect on August 21, 2011.
On June 21, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia ruled that Merial's U.S. patent covering FRONTLINE Plus® is valid and that the PetArmor™ Plus products infringe the patent.
In its June 21 Order, the District Court also held Cipla Limited (“Cipla”), Velcera Inc. and Fidopharm Inc. (collectively “Velcera”), the makers and marketers of PetArmor™ Plus, in contempt of a previous injunction that prohibited the selling or importation of Cipla-manufactured products that infringed Merial’s patent. As part of its ruling, the district court enjoined Cipla and Velcera from further selling PetArmor™ Plus in the United States. The District Court also ordered the seizure of any existing inventory of PetArmor™ Plus in the United States. The District Court, however, stayed its Order until August 20, 2011 to permit Velcera and Cipla the opportunity to seek an expedited appeal.
On August 17, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Cipla’s and Velcera’s Motion requesting an extension of the stay beyond the August 20 deadline. Based on an assessment of Velcera and Cipla’s chances of succeeding on their appeal and weighing the equities, the Court of Appeals held that Cipla and Velcera had not established that a further stay was warranted. Accordingly, the injunction and seizure remedies in the District Court’s June 21 Order went into effect as scheduled, on August 21, 2011.
“We are pleased with the Courts’ decisions, and we expect, in light of those rulings, that Cipla, Velcera, and Fidopharm will take all necessary steps to promptly seize any existing inventory in the United States of the infringing PetArmor™ Plus products and deliver them to Merial,” said Merial’s Global Head of Intellectual Property, Dr. Judy Jarecki-Black, Esq.
***************************************************************************************
PetArmor® Plus Remains on Retail Shelves
Excerpts:
In the ongoing patent battle over the availability of FidoPharm's PetArmor Plus (fipronil & S-methoprene) product, a generic version of Frontline® Plus, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia has confirmed that PetArmor Plus can remain on retailer shelves while retailer supplies last. (emphasis added)
The sale and availability of FidoPharm's PetArmor (fipronil) product remains unaffected by this litigation.
Both PetArmor and PetArmor Plus are equally effective at killing adult fleas and ticks because both contain fipronil, the No. 1 vet-recommended active ingredient for flea and tick protection. PetArmor, which contains the same active ingredient in the same concentration as Frontline Top Spot®, is available at Walmart, Target, Walgreen's, H-E-B, Walmart.com, PetCareRx.com, Target.com, Walgreens.com and select farm-and-garden supply stores. Pet owners can rest assured that any previously-purchased PetArmor Plus can be used safely on their pets as these legal issues are unrelated to product safety or performance.
The Georgia court's order marks another chapter in Merial Limited's and Merial SAS's continued fight to block competitors from entering into the fipronil-based, flea-and-tick treatment market. The validity of Merial's patent has not been fully considered by any court, and Velcera and FidoPharm maintain that they do not infringe any valid claim of the Merial patent in question. FidoPharm will continue its vigorous defense against Merial, so it can provide pets and pet owners even more options for effective, affordable and convenient flea and tick treatment.
"Merial has aggressively litigated its fipronil-related patents to stop perceived competitors from bringing to market, or even attempting to develop, products that could potentially compete with Frontline and Frontline Plus," said Alex M. Kaufman, president and chief executive officer, FidoPharm, Inc. "We believe greater consumer access to top quality, affordable animal health products is fundamental to good pet health, and we will continue to develop best-in-class pet health products that contain the same active ingredients and effectiveness as branded products but at a significantly lower price to pet owners."
***************************************************************************************
GOP attacks on EPA ignore the probem
Excerpts:
Dutifully following their Tea Party scripts, most of the Republican presidential candidates have declared war on the Environmental Protection Agency. They claim that the economy is being smothered by regulations designed to keep our air and water safe.
No iota of evidence is being offered, and in fact the record profits of big energy companies indicate a spectacular lack of suffering.
But listen to Rep. Michele Bachmann’s promise to an Iowa crowd about one of her first presidential priorities: “I guarantee you the EPA will have doors locked and lights turned off, and they will only be about conservation. It will be a new day and a new sheriff in Washington, D.C.”
Granted, Bachmann is a witless parrot who has no chance — absolutely zero — of being elected to the White House. But her hatred of the EPA is shared by Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, who is considered a GOP frontrunner.
Like Bachmann, Perry refuses to accept that global warming is real. He launched a lawsuit to stop the EPA from enacting rules to limit greenhouse gasses from oil refineries, power plants and other industrial sources.
Perry likes to whine that “EPA regulations are killing jobs all across America,” a statement that draws more cheers in his native state than in the rest of the country. In fact, polls show that a large majority of Americans are worried about air and water pollution, and hold a positive view of the EPA.
Nothing kills jobs like an environmental catastrophe, as the Gulf Coast gravely experienced during (and after) the BP oil spill last year. The true cost of that accident to the economies of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida is probably incalculable, although surely many billions of dollars were lost.
The cleanup wasn’t perfect, but it’s absurd to think that BP would have worked faster or more efficiently if the Obama administration and the EPA hadn’t been leaning on the company, both publicly and behind closed doors.
Forty-one years ago the agency was formed, and for good reason: Toxins by the ton were being flagrantly pumped into this country’s rivers, bays and oceans, and blown through smokestacks into the air. People were getting sick and dying only because some companies were too greedy to spend money cleaning up their own mess.
The corporate mentality toward pollution has changed because the alternatives are heavy fines, criminal penalties and savage publicity. A reminder of why we still need the EPA was last month’s oil spill on the Yellowstone River, which affected ranchers, farmers, fishing guides and rafting companies. It also occurred seven months after Exxon Mobil insisted that its pipeline would never rupture because it was buried too deep.
Of all the reasons government exists, none is more crucial than trying to keep its citizens safe, whether from a terrorist attack, Wall Street’s recklessness or industrial poisoning.
Not surprisingly, surveys show that most Americans want their children to grow up drinking clean water and breathing clean air. How, then, to explain the radical hostility of Bachmann, Perry, Newt Gingrich and some of the other Republican candidates?
First, it’s about raising money. The petroleum and coal conglomerates are huge GOP donors, and they’d love to have a president who would gut the EPA.
Second, it’s about politics. To win Republican primaries — the theory goes — a candidate must fire up the Wingnut Right. The easiest way to do that is to brainlessly bash whatever government does.
***************************************************************************************
Boulder dog owners sue Pfizer over death of golden retriever
Owners of a Boulder dog, who died after surgery, are suing a drug maker for alleged negligence.
Shelley Smith and Christopher Cooper have filed a civil lawsuit against Pfizer Inc., the maker of the of the drug Rimadyl, according to the lawsuit filing.
The suit, filed by the Animal Law Center, centers on the July 2009 death of a golden retriever named Sophie.
In May of 2009, a Longmont veterinarian performed surgery for a ruptured cranial cruciate ligament on Sophie.
"Following the surgery, the veterinarian prescribed several medications including Rimadyl, which is an anti-inflammatory drug," the filing said.
Eleven days later, the dog began "experiencing symptoms described by two Pfizer veterinarians
Sophie with her owner, Shelley Smith. (Animal Law Center | handout)
as Rimadyl toxicity."
Sophie was hospitalized for 13 days and released but she continued to suffer, the lawsuit said.
On July 26, 2009, Sophie died from severe liver degradation.
The suit accuses Pfizer of negligence for its lack of properly informing pet owners of the risks associated with the use of Rimadyl.
Lawyers representing Sophie's owners said they want Pfizer to conduct more research on Rimadyl to "determine its wide-ranging effects on all breeds."
***************************************************************************************
Smoking Gun' Documents Show Science Ignored in Approval of
Cancer-Causing Strawberry Pesticide
Excerpts:
Newly released documents show that a Schwarzenegger political appointee within the state agency that approved the cancer-causing strawberry pesticide methyl iodide favored the input of the chemical’s manufacturer, Arysta LifeScience, over the recommendations of its own scientists. The new documents—released in accordance with a court order in the California-based litigation challenging methyl iodide—show that top scientists in the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) warned of the dangers of methyl iodide and strongly criticized the methods by which the “acceptable” levels of exposure were set by DPR management.
“These smoking gun memos show that state officials cherry-picked calculations to support their preferred outcome of approving methyl iodide instead of letting science guide their decision-making,” said Susan Kegley, PhD, Consulting Scientist with Pesticide Action Network North America. “Ignoring the science and prioritizing the needs of the manufacturer has put the health and safety of Californians at great risk.”
The documents show that DPR management selected the desired buffer zones first and then mixed and matched methods of risk assessment to obtain an “acceptable” level of exposure. Current approved buffer zones are 200 feet for a broadcast fumigation of a 10-acre field. Had the scientists’ risk assessment methods been followed, this application would have required a buffer zone of at least a mile.
One document from DPR’s own scientists suggests that DPR management misused data to justify their conclusions, stating that numbers “appear to have been extracted from different MeI [methyl iodide] risk assessment methodologies that are not interchangeable… It is not scientifically credible to select a value or assumption from one and combine it with a value or assumption from another.”
***************************************************************************************
Some fear that EPA is going too far in regulating pesticides
Excerpts:
Many farmers across the nation want to make sure that federal regulators don't make it more difficult to spread chemicals on their land.
On Capitol Hill, those farmers have found allies in Republicans and some Democrats who are working to ease the regulations and strip some power from the Environmental Protection Agency, which oversees the use of pesticides to control insects, diseases and weeds. Earlier this year, the House of Representatives passed legislation that would negate the need for additional permits when spraying for pests near bodies of water.
The back and forth speaks to broader tension between some Republicans and the Obama administration over environmental policy.
Environmental policy experts say the GOP opposition stems from concerns that the Democratic administration is enforcing regulations more strictly than the George W. Bush administration did. The pushback against the EPA also can be seen in the ongoing fight by lawmakers over greenhouse gas emissions. In April, the GOP-controlled House passed a measure that would bar the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases, a day after the Senate defeated the measure.
Efforts to rein in the EPA have run into serious opposition from environmentalists, who say that farmers and the lawmakers who represent them are trying to find ways around complying with the Clean Water Act.
The agency is getting heat from all sides. Some environmentalists say it's has been far too lax in regulating pesticides and protecting the health of humans and animals.
***************************************************************************************
(The following message was posted on HartzVictims.org on 8/31/11)
Hello,
My name is Carl Monday. I am the investigative reporter for the CBS affiliate in Cleveland, Ohio. We are looking for pet owners in the Cleveland area who have witnessed their pets becoming ill, or die from the Hartz Flea Powder or other product.
If you have a story to share, and you live in the general Cleveland area, please e-mail me directly so we can include your experience in our investigation. Thanks in advance.
Carl Monday
Copyright © 2002-2011 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
