New incident report
Incident Report Number: 2015-5369
Registrant Reference Number: 1669706
Registrant Name (Full Legal Name no abbreviations): S.C. Johnson and Son, Limited
Address: 1 Webster Street
City: Brantford
Prov / State: ON
Country: Canada
Postal Code: N3T 5R1
Human
Country: CANADA
Prov / State: QUEBEC
PMRA Registration No. 28648 PMRA Submission No. EPA Registration No.
Product Name: OFF! familycare Insect Repellant I smooth and dry 113g - Canada
Yes
Unknown
Site: Personal use / Usage personnel
No
Other
Sex: Male
Age: >6 <=12 yrs / > 6 < = 12 ans
System
Unknown / Inconnu
Unknown
No
Unknown
Non-occupational
Application
What was the activity? Please refer to field 13 on Subform II or field 17 of subform III for a detailed description regarding the activity
None
Skin
<=15 min / <=15 min
Unknown / Inconnu
8/19/2015 Caller sprayed product on her son's skin approximately 2 weeks ago. Shortly after doing so, the child developed issues with breathing. She indicates that the child is being treated for pneumonia, however, she did not describe what type of treatment the child was receiving. The caller abruptly disconnected before further information could be obtained. On 8/20/2015 an attempt was made to contact the original caller. A message was left on voice mail requesting follow up information. 8/21/2015 Attempted call back to the original caller. A message was left requesting follow up information. The consumer has not since followed up to provide more information pertaining to her child's illness.
Moderate
The information contained in this report is based on self-reported statements provided to the registrant during telephone Interview(s). These self-reported descriptions of an incident have not been independently verified to be factually correct or complete descriptions of the incident. For that reason, information contained in this report does not and can not form the basis for a determination of whether the reported clinical effects are causally related to exposure to the product identified in the telephone interviews. This product appears to be implicated in this case simply based on a temporal but coincidental product use scenario. The information made available by the reporter of this incident is sparse, thus eliminating the ability to develop any potential casual assessment. This was a misuse of the product since usage directions state DO NOT USE ON CHILDREN UNDER 12 YEARS OF AGE