New incident report
Incident Report Number: 2009-2716
Registrant Reference Number: Prosar 1-18788941
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: OKLAHOMA
PMRA Registration No. PMRA Submission No. EPA Registration No. 2596-147
Product Name: UltraGuard One Spot Flea Egg/Larvae Treatment for Cats/Kittens
Liquid
Yes
Unknown
Site: Animal / Usage sur un animal domestique
Unknown
Animal's Owner
Cat / Chat
Domestic Shorthair
1
Female
0.29
3
lbs
Skin
Unknown / Inconnu
>24 hrs <=3 days / >24 h <=3 jours
System
Persisted until death
No
No
Died
Treatment / Traitement
(eg. description of the frequency and severity of the symptoms
1-18788941: A reporter (kitten owner) called on 06/011/2009 to report the exposure of 2 kittens to a flea egg and larvae product containing the active ingredient Methoprene. According to the reporter, a non-company flea shampoo was used to bathe the kittens on 06/09/2009. The product was then applied to both kittens. On 06/10/2009, both kittens were very lethargic, not eating, and "trying to use the litter box but nothing is coming out." The reporter was advised that the product is an insect growth regulator and is not designed to affect adult fleas. Because the product has very little to no mammalian toxicity, it is not expected to result in reactions. A recommendation was made to bathe the kittens in a non-insecticidal shampoo. A recommendation was also made to have a veterinarian evaluate the kittens and consider other causes for their signs. Finally, it was recommended to contact the maker of the non-company shampoo to determine that product's toxic profile. On follow up on 06/12/2009, the reporter stated that both kittens had been bathed following the initial report. Cat #1 (1st Subform III) died overnight. Cat #2 (2nd Subform III) was taken to the veterinarian on 06/12/2009 who advised bathing the kitten a second time. At the time of the report, Cat #2 had been bathed again in Dawn dish soap. She was still lethargic but had eaten some. The reporter was advised again that the product has a very wide margin of safety and adverse effects are not anticipated. A recommendation was made to get information on the non-company shampoo and have Cat #2 re-evaluated in case hydration, appetite stimulants, or force feeding is needed. A recommendation was also made to consider necropsy to determine the cause of death for Cat #1. No further information was obtained.
Death
Animal's Owner
Cat / Chat
Domestic Shorthair
1
Female
0.29
3
lbs
Skin
Unknown / Inconnu
>24 hrs <=3 days / >24 h <=3 jours
System
Unknown / Inconnu
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown/Inconnu
Treatment / Traitement
(eg. description of the frequency and severity of the symptoms
1-18788941: A reporter (kitten owner) called on 06/011/2009 to report the exposure of 2 kittens to a flea egg and larvae product containing the active ingredient Methoprene. According to the reporter, a non-company flea shampoo was used to bathe the kittens on 06/09/2009. The product was then applied to both kittens. On 06/10/2009, both kittens were very lethargic, not eating, and "trying to use the litter box but nothing is coming out." The reporter was advised that the product is an insect growth regulator and is not designed to affect adult fleas. Because the product has very little to no mammalian toxicity, it is not expected to result in reactions. A recommendation was made to bathe the kittens in a non-insecticidal shampoo. A recommendation was also made to have a veterinarian evaluate the kittens and consider other causes for their signs. Finally, it was recommended to contact the maker of the non-company shampoo to determine that product's toxic profile. On follow up on 06/12/2009, the reporter stated that both kittens had been bathed following the initial report. Cat #1 (1st Subform III) died overnight. Cat #2 (2nd Subform III) was taken to the veterinarian on 06/12/2009 who advised bathing the kitten a second time. At the time of the report, Cat #2 had been bathed again in Dawn dish soap. She was still lethargic but had eaten some. The reporter was advised again that the product has a very wide margin of safety and adverse effects are not anticipated. A recommendation was made to get information on the non-company shampoo and have Cat #2 re-evaluated in case hydration, appetite stimulants, or force feeding is needed. A recommendation was also made to consider necropsy to determine the cause of death for Cat #1. No further information was obtained.
Moderate