New incident report
Incident Report Number: 2010-5676
Registrant Reference Number: PROSAR Case # 1-23897261
Registrant Name (Full Legal Name no abbreviations): The Hartz Mountain Corporation
Address: 400 Plaza Drive
City: Secaucus
Prov / State: New Jersey
Country: USA
Postal Code: 07094-3688
Domestic Animal
Country: UNITED STATES
Prov / State: ALABAMA
PMRA Registration No. PMRA Submission No. EPA Registration No. 2596-140
Product Name: UltraGuard Plus Flea Tick Spray for Cats
Liquid
Yes
Unknown
Site: Animal / Usage sur un animal domestique
Unknown
Animal's Owner
Cat / Chat
Domestic shorthair
1
Male
0.6
5
lbs
Skin
Unknown / Inconnu
>8 hrs <=24 hrs / > 8 h < = 24 h
System
Persisted until death
No
No
Died
Treatment / Traitement
(eg. description of the frequency and severity of the symptoms
1-23897261- The reporter, a pet owner, indicates exposure of her animal to an insecticide containing the active ingredient tetrachlorvinphos and methoprene. The caller reported she applied the product (a topical flea and tick spray for cats) to her eight month five pound male domestic shorthair cat every one to two weeks and most recently the night prior to the initial contact with the registrant. The caller indicated at the time of the call the animal was vocalizing ¿¿¿like it was in pain?, seemed lethargic, seemed unable to use the liter box, and had urinated on himself. The caller was advised the signs seen were not expected following routine use of the product according to the label. The caller was advised to wash the animal in a noninsecticidal shampoo and seek veterinary assistance. The caller was further advised the animals signs were consistent with a very common urinary disorder in young male cats that could be potentially life threatening. The reporter spontaneously called back two hours later to indicate the animal had now developed incoordination, weakness, drooling, muscle fasciculations, dilated pupils, and difficulty walking. The animal had not yet seen the veterinarian. The caller was advised to bring the animal to the veterinarian. On routine follow-up one day later the reporter informed he registrant the animal had died. The animal had presented to the veterinarian ¿¿¿too late? to offer effective treatment. The caller added the signs seen in the animal of hiding and limp listless behavior prior to its death. The caller was advised of registrant supported necropsy, but had buried the animal. The registrant was advised a family member would exhume the animal, but no further contact was initiated by the reporter regarding the details of the program. No further information is available.
Death