Flea and tick products under fire from pet owners, vets say the pesticides are safe

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Fleas and ticks are a big problem, and manufacturers spend big money to get you to buy their product to prevent the insects. But pet owners across the country said they're spending thousands of dollars to save their pets after applying some flea and tick products.

9 News looked at what the Environmental Protection Agency is doing about these incident reports, and what's being done to keep your pet safe from an adverse reaction.

"I wondered every day if he was going to make it," Jan Jaffe said.

Jan Jaffe said her dog, Choe, became sick 48 hours after her vet applied a second dose of FRONTLINE Plus.

"Vomiting. I knew he was quite ill," Jaffe said.

Jaffe said he required four blood transfusions and expensive drugs to keep him alive. Jaffe said her dog was never sick until after the flea and tick product was applied.

"It just never stopped. Never stopped," Jaffe said pointing to a stack of vet bills.

Jaffe spent $10,000 to save Choe, and she's not alone. In Texas, it took $5,000 to save Sassy the cat.

EPA investigating flea and tick products

Manufacturers reported adverse reactions to the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA said from 2007 to 2008, incidents increased by 53 percent.

The EPA said pet owners reported symptoms of vomiting, diarrhea, salivation, itching, hair loss, skin ulcerations, lethargy, nervousness and seizure.

That prompted an EPA investigation in 2009 and a warning in 2010.

The EPA's investigation and warning focused only on spot-on products. These are the drops you apply to your pet's back. It includes products like K9 Advantix and FRONTLINE Plus, but they're not the only products on the market for flea and tick control. There are also shampoos and powders from companies like Hartz and Sergeant's.

Despite all the choices, the EPA is only focusing on spot-on products because it said that's where it saw the increase in complaints. The EPA said it hasn't noticed a trend for the other formulas; although, there are complaints.

An investigation was then conducted on what's been done to protect pets since the EPA first launched its investigation. 9 News looked at hundreds of EPA documents, government databases and class action lawsuits.

Complaints are down, but the investigation of the latest data still found 34,849 incidents were reported in a 16-month period. There were 26,977 reported in the calendar year 2010 and 7,871 more reported from January 2011 to April 2011. When the EPA evaluated the data in 2008, it found approximately 44,00 incidents.

Vet thinks spot-on products are safe

"When you take into account the billions and billions of doses that are used, how big a percentage is 34,000 compared to billions?" Veterinarian David Koncal, DVM asked.

Koncal is vice president of the Ohio Veterinary Medical Association (OVMA). He also has a practice, Northfield Veterinary Clinic. Koncal said he believes spot-on products are safe.

"I'd be willing to bet that 99 percent of the adverse reactions that are reported, there is something else going on in that animal that created that demise. It's just a coincidence the flea product was used on them," Koncal said.

Pet owners are seeing pushback from other vets, too, and product manufacturers.

In a letter, FRONTLINE's parent company, Merial, told Choe and Sassy's owners that the symptoms of their pet were not consistent with the use of FRONTLINE.

Merial said that more than a billion doses of FRONTLINE have been sold. In a statement, the company said, "The EPA's analysis also shows that the overall numbers of adverse events reported for FRONTLINE products are extremely low and the vast majority are minor, for example skin irritation at the application site."

"It seems like our problems, even though our problems are in the thousands and growing, are sort of minimized," Jaffe said.

Humane Society of the United States is pushing the EPA to do more

Consumers continue to fight with letter writing campaigns, websites and class action lawsuits. It's not just consumers. The Humane Society of the United States wants change.

"I think we are only scratching the surface as far as the actual injuries or deaths that occur as a result of these products," Adam Golfarb of the Humane Society said.

In a letter, the Humane Society told the EPA it wants a National Poison Control Hotline so complaints are processed in a central location. The Humane Society wants that number added to the labels of flea and tick products.

The EPA's own investigation found it needs standardized reporting, and more detail about the reported incidents. The reports the EPA gets now detail the number of incidents per product and the severity is classified into a category. There are not details about what the pet owner says happened.

While the EPA wants a better system, reporting has not been improved yet. The data the EPA sent for our investigation was gathered the way it was in 2008 when the investigation started.

Some consumers who've reported problems wonder if their complaint

ever made it to the EPA.

"Why would the EPA allow the manufacturer to police themselves?" Jaffe asked.

We asked the EPA for an interview, but our request was denied.

The EPA is also focusing on labeling changes, but groups like the Humane Society said the agency is not going far enough.

EPA looking at labeling changes

The Humane Society wants consumers to see all the ingredients in the product, but some are not disclosed because they are considered confidential business information.

"We believe the proprietary nature of inert ingredients could be retained by revealing their identities, but not their exact amounts or proportions, in product formulations," the Humane Society wrote the EPA. "How can pet owners be informed consumers of these products if all ingredients are not disclosed?"

The EPA said its review of the data doesn't suggest concern for any inert / non-active ingredients; however, it said there will be continued studies to see how they might contribute to toxicity or adverse effects.

The EPA admitted the warning labels are hard to read, buried in text or not specific. Still, the EPA said it believes many of the adverse reactions are caused by misuse. The EPA said pet owners use dog products on cats and mis-dose the product.

But, remember Jaffe and her dog Choe? Jaffe said she went out of her way to make sure her dog got the right does.

"I went to the vet," Jaffe said.

Jaffe said her dog still reacted poorly.

"Who is there to protect us? We are looking for the EPA to protect us," Jaffe said.

The EPA said it's currently reviewing new labels from manufacturers. The federal agency said it's looking at narrowing pet weight ranges for each vial size, improvements to avoid confusion so the right product is used on the right animal, and larger fonts and pictures will be used on warning statements. The warnings will also be direct and include specific language about side effects.

Pet owners tell EPA they're having problems with all flea and tick products

While the EPA is focused on spot-on products, our review of public comments to the EPA show consumers are reporting problems with all flea and tick products.

It's also what Claudia Tietze is hearing from the pet owners who have contacted her through her website, Tiny Timmy. It's a site dedicated to her cat.

She said Sergeant's flea spray was used on her cat. Tietze wasn't sure Tiny Timmy would survive, but he's thriving after spending thousands and thousands of dollars.

Tietze shared the journey with her cat to help other pet owners.

"He will probably always have a wobble when he walks and be different than other cats. He's never going to be the cat that he was born to be," Tietze said.

Sergeant's did not respond to our request for a statement.

Tietze is fighting hard for consumers who use all products. She met with the EPA to give them insight into the stories she hears.

"I think they get very isolated listening to industry and regulations and dealing with all those things. Sometimes it's difficult to get a good pulse of what's happening in reality," Tietze said.

In reality, there are stories all over the country for all sorts of products.

Back in Cleveland, Bryan Ginley, said his cat had a reaction to a non-spot on treatment. Ginely said he used Hartz flea and tick powder.

"That's the worst part, knowing I went to the store and bought that stuff," Ginley said, choking back tears.

Ginley said vets told him over the phone there would be testing to figure out what why his cat suddenly became ill. Ginley said he bought the powder because it was cheap and didn't have the money to go to the vet and pay for the testing.

"I had to literally put Artie in a coffin and pound the nails in. Something I certainly didn't want to do," Ginley added.

Veterinarian, David Koncal, DVM, once again said he believes there was probably something else wrong with the cat, but still cautions consumers.

"There's just no reason to use those old products. They are just not safe anymore," Koncal said.

Koncal said there are limited uses for shampoos, collars and powders, but he prefers spot-on treatments.

"The flea collars, they are obsolete. Flea powder does have an effect, but it's an old product and does have some toxicity associated with it. There's no reason to use these basically obsolete products," Koncal said.

While Koncal admitted there is some toxicity with some of these other products, the EPA continues its investigation only into spot-on products. The EPA said it hasn't seen an increase in complaints with the other products like it did with spot-on products.

Hartz Mountain Corporation defended its products, adding, "Because safety is our number-one priority, we undertake rigorous clinical tests on all our products. All EPA-approved topical flea and tick products sold through retail channels are held to the same safety and efficacy testing standards as those brands purchased from veterinarians. Labeling direction mandated by the EPA is also consistent for all flea and tick