New incident report
Incident Report Number: 2010-2680
Registrant Reference Number: PROSAR Case #1-22404494
Registrant Name (Full Legal Name no abbreviations): Syngenta Crop Protection
Address: 410 Swing Road
City: Greensboro
Prov / State: North Carolina
Country: USA
Postal Code: 27419
Domestic Animal
Country: UNITED STATES
Prov / State: VIRGINIA
PMRA Registration No. PMRA Submission No. EPA Registration No. 100-1240
Product Name: Demand G Insecticide
Dust
Yes
Unknown
Site: Res. - Out Home / Rés - à l'ext.maison
Unknown
Animal's Owner
Dog / Chien
Cocker Spaniel
1
Male
10
35
lbs
Unknown
Unknown / Inconnu
Unknown / Inconnu
System
Persisted until death
Yes
Yes
Unknown
Died
Contact treat.area/Contact surf. traitée
(eg. description of the frequency and severity of the symptoms
1-22404494- The reporter, a pet owner, called to report the exposure of her dog to an insecticide containing the active ingredient Lambda-Cyhalothrin. The caller indicated she had applied the product to the ground outside of her residential garage an estimated 4-5 days prior to her first contact with the registrant (04/27/10). She did not indicate an application rate, but did state her dog frequented the area and may have walked through application areas. No exposure was observed, but the caller assumed both dermal contact and potential ingestion via grooming of the feet. The animal, a 10 year male 35 pound Cocker Spaniel dog, had developed abdominal distension, excessive thirst, and heavy breathing 24 hours before the initial contact. The caller asked if the signs observed could be related to the exposure described. The caller was told small ingestions as described would not be expected to elicit the signs seen. She was encouraged to seek prompt veterinary care for her animal. On routine call back the reporter indicated her dog was found by the veterinarian to have anemia and was receiving blood replacement and corticosteroids. The caller revealed the dog had one prior episode of this type associated with the administration of an unnamed medication. It was reiterated to the caller that this was not expected to be associated with exposure to the product. The reporter spontaneously called back on two occasions. On the first, she indicated her animal was still at the veterinary hospital, was weak on one side, had difficulty with urinary continence, and was unable to walk unassisted. The animal was reported to have gone to rehabilitation. On the final spontaneous call back the reporter indicated that the dog had died. She indicated on this call she had applied the product originally to the lawn, the dog walked through the area, licked its paws, and three days later ¿¿¿had a stroke¿¿¿. Leading up to its death the dog was undergoing rehabilitation at the veterinarian¿¿¿s clinic and had a ¿¿¿bleeding attack¿¿¿. The veterinarian recommended euthanasia but the animal died before that could be done. The caller revealed the animal had a history of immune mediated thrombocytopenia historically triggered by administration of an unnamed antibiotic. The veterinarian told the owner the animal suffered a splenic hemorrhage. It was once again reiterated that this was not expected to be associated with exposure to this product.
Death
The symptoms, as described, are not consistent with exposure to the active ingredient involved.