New incident report
Incident Report Number: 2013-0122
Registrant Reference Number: 120100278
Registrant Name (Full Legal Name no abbreviations): Wellmark International
Address: 100 Stone Road West, Suite 111
City: Guelph
Prov / State: Ontario
Country: Canada
Postal Code: N1G5L3
Domestic Animal
Country: CANADA
Prov / State: ONTARIO
Unknown
PMRA Registration No. 21744 PMRA Submission No. EPA Registration No.
Product Name: Zodiac Fleatrol Flea and Tick Spray For Dogs and Cats
Yes
Unknown
Site: Animal / Usage sur un animal domestique
Unknown
Animal's Owner
Cat / Chat
Ragdoll
1
Female
3.0
10.0
lbs
Skin
Unknown / Inconnu
<=30 min / <=30 min
System
>1 wk <=1 mo / > 1 sem < = 1 mois
Yes
Unknown
Fully Recovered / Complètement rétabli
Treatment / Traitement
(eg. description of the frequency and severity of the symptoms
Between July 1 and July 5, 2012 the owner noticed that the cat was vomiting. Between July 8 and July 12, 2012, just after the second exposure to the spray product, the owner noticed that the cat was anorexic and grooming excessively as well. On July 14, 2012 the owner took the cat to the veterinarian and the cat was given an antibiotic. It is unknown if any other treatments were given while the cat was at the clinic. On July 17, 2012 the owner observed that the cat had made a full recovery. On July 20, 2012 the owner contacted the Animal Product Safety Service (APSS) to obtain help. The APSS veterinarian stated that some cats are sensitive to the odors of sprays or when they groom themselves and that they might have mild or intermittent hypersalivation and possibly nausea. The APSS veterinarian also stated that if the product is used per label, significant gastrointestinal (GI) signs should not be expected. The APSS assistant recommended that the owner monitor the cat at home, have her veterinarian call to discuss the case further, and call back with questions.
Moderate
Later on the morning of July 20, 2012 the owner called back to ask if it was necessary for her veterinarian to call the APSS because her veterinarian does not make outgoing calls regarding patients. The APSS technician stated that as long as the cat remained asymptomatic the clinic did not necessarily need to call back, but that if any additional information about treatments performed at the clinic was available, the owner could call back. The APSS technician affirmed that the other recommendations given earlier that morning still applied. A follow up was not performed, because any signs that developed were expected to be mild and self-limiting. On July 26, 2012 the owner called the APSS to request the company's phone number to discuss reimbursement for the cat's treatment; the owner also stated that her veterinarian would not contact the APSS. The APSS veterinarian provided the owner the phone number for the company.