Nouvelle déclaration d'incident
No de la demande: 2010-6008
Numéro de référence du titulaire d'homologation: PROSAR Case # 1-24614220
Nom du titulaire (nom légal complet, aucune abbréviation): Syngenta Crop Protection Canada, Inc.
Adresse: 140 Research Lane, Research Park
Ville: Guelph
État: Ontario
Pays: Canada
Code postal /Zip: N1G4Z3
Incident chez un animal domestique
Pays: UNITED STATES
État: TENNESSEE
Inconnu
ARLA No d'homologation ARLA No de la demande d'homologation EPA No d'homologation. 100-1321
Nom du produit: Avicta Duo Cotton
ARLA No d'homologation ARLA No de la demande d'homologation EPA No d'homologation. 100-1177
Nom du produit: Dynasty CST
Autre (préciser)
treated seedNon
Inconnu
Propriétaire de l'animal
Cow / Vache
Angus
1
Femme
Inconnu
Inconnu
Inconnu
Unknown / Inconnu
Unknown / Inconnu
Système
Persisted until death
Non
Non
Mort
Accidental ingestion/Ingestion accident.
(p.ex. description des symptômes tels que la fréquence et la gravité
1-24614220- The reporter, a veterinarian, indicates exposure of four patients to cotton seed treated with the active ingredients abamectin, thiamethoxam, azoxystrobin, fludioxonil and mefenoxam. The caller reports three Angus cattle (Subform III, #2) have presented to him with the primary complaint of ataxia. He indicated the animals had possibly eaten an unknown amount of the product within the past 24-48 hours. He reported that one (or more) animal was dead on the farm (Subform III, #1). It was unknown when or how the animal died. No exposure was observed. On presentation the veterinarian had incomplete product identification information, it was impossible for the registrant to determine the active ingredient or product involved with the information provided. It was recommended the veterinarian obtain a more thorough history and product identification information and contact the registrant back for specific recommendations. The veterinarian was advised generally treated seed has a low potential for harm when ingested by livestock. It is quite often the grain or seed itself rather than the treatments that can be problematic. The veterinarian did not further contact the registrant. In this circumstance cottonseed has the potential to impart gossypol toxicity irrespective of any seed treatment. On routine follow up the veterinarian indicated two of the three animals had spontaneously resolved and one remained ataxic. He did not provide further information. At a later date it was discovered the producer/farmer had also contacted the registrant in a different department. He had indicated a bag of the product had been unwittingly dropped in the field while being transported. It was accessible to the animals, but no ingestion was observed. One animal had died but it was dead for several days at the point at which it had been discovered, cause of death is unknown. The owner indicated the dead animal may not have ingested the product. Three animals were observed staggering and brought to the veterinarian. The veterinarian emptied their stomachs and did find cotton seed in the contents. The producer had contacted the registrant the day following their treatment with the veterinarian and he reported they were eating and seemed OK?. No further information is available
Mort
Professionnel de la santé
Cow / Vache
angus
3
Femme
Inconnu
Inconnu
Orale
Unknown / Inconnu
Unknown / Inconnu
Système
Unknown / Inconnu
Oui
Inconnu
Fully Recovered / Complètement rétabli
Accidental ingestion/Ingestion accident.
(p.ex. description des symptômes tels que la fréquence et la gravité
1-24614220- The reporter, a veterinarian, indicates exposure of four patients to cotton seed treated with the active ingredients abamectin, thiamethoxam, azoxystrobin, fludioxonil and mefenoxam. The caller reports three Angus cattle (Subform III, #2) have presented to him with the primary complaint of ataxia. He indicated the animals had possibly eaten an unknown amount of the product within the past 24-48 hours. He reported that one (or more) animal was dead on the farm (Subform III, #1). It was unknown when or how the animal died. No exposure was observed. On presentation the veterinarian had incomplete product identification information, it was impossible for the registrant to determine the active ingredient or product involved with the information provided. It was recommended the veterinarian obtain a more thorough history and product identification information and contact the registrant back for specific recommendations. The veterinarian was advised generally treated seed has a low potential for harm when ingested by livestock. It is quite often the grain or seed itself rather than the treatments that can be problematic. The veterinarian did not further contact the registrant. In this circumstance cottonseed has the potential to impart gossypol toxicity irrespective of any seed treatment. On routine follow up the veterinarian indicated two of the three animals had spontaneously resolved and one remained ataxic. He did not provide further information. At a later date it was discovered the producer/farmer had also contacted the registrant in a different department. He had indicated a bag of the product had been unwittingly dropped in the field while being transported. It was accessible to the animals, but no ingestion was observed. One animal had died but it was dead for several days at the point at which it had been discovered, cause of death is unknown. The owner indicated the dead animal may not have ingested the product. Three animals were observed staggering and brought to the veterinarian. The veterinarian emptied their stomachs and did find cotton seed in the contents. The producer had contacted the registrant the day following their treatment with the veterinarian and he reported they were eating and seemed OK. No further information is available
Modérée