Loading ...
Spot-On’ Flea & Tick Products Alleged by Ark Naturals CEO to Cause Serious Harm to Dogs and Cats
Ark Naturals Suggests Pet Owners Consider Natural Botanical Alternative to Chemical Pesticides to Control Fleas & Ticks
My friend sent this to me to post – I thought I would give it a good old college-try argument on ThoughtsFurPaws as there are clearly two sides here… she would like to – as I would – undercover an oft-misunderstood myth… and also remind you guys that pets need winter protection from fleas and ticks.
But there’s a right and wrong way to do so — and to advertise your new product…
What do you think?
“Today I walked barefoot in 20 degree temperatures on a sidewalk with laden with residue from this weekend’s first official winter storm in the northeast. Returning home, I didn’t wipe my feet off but proceeded to jump on your bed and walk around the house. I watched as my roommate put a pair of rubber gloves on her hands. Gasp, I shuddered to myself, why the gloves? She put a funny smelling solution in between my shoulders and said it would help protect me against pests. She said the package of mystery liquid told her avoid contact with skin, eyes or clothing and wash thoroughly with soap and water after handling.”
Signed, The Family DogThink about it: Our dogs spend their time walking where we take them, eating what we feed them, and hoping that fleas and ticks take the winter months off (they don’t). With paw to pen, Fido would indeed scrawl that across the family memo board…
Contrary to popular belief, fleas and ticks don’t take the winter months off. Fleas and ticks are a way of life for dogs and cats but controlling them is a matter of choice.
Anyhow, a new report suggests that pet owners might consider a natural botanical alternative to chemical pesticides to control fleas and ticks.
A December, 2011 press release issued by the law firm Green & Associates announced that class-action lawsuits against makers of pesticide-based “spot-on” (aka topical) flea and tick products has prompted Ark Naturals CEO Susan Weiss to recommend that pet owners use a natural botanical alternative to effectively control fleas and ticks. (Just Google “lawsuits against flea and tick products” and you’ll see at least five different brands facing lawsuits, some include Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Merial and Sergeant’s.)
“The Green Associates’ press release was alarming and frightening at the same time,” said Ms. Weiss, whose Ark Naturals company has been marketing natural pet products for 16 years, including Flea Flicker! Tick Kicker!, a formula developed recently as a natural, botanical alternative to chemical pesticides in controlling fleas and ticks.
Fleas and ticks are a way of life for dogs and cats but controlling them is a matter of choice, and the “pesticide solution” – their words, not mine, “seems to be wrought with serious problems,” Ms. Weiss noted in the release.
Reports of dangerous side effects associated with spot-on flea and tick products date back far; the Natural Resources Defense Council released a report in 2000 called “Poisons on Pets: Health Hazards from Flea and Tick Products.”
The report revealed a link between chemicals commonly used in flea and tick products and serious health problems in both people and pets.
More recently, a 2008 study by The Center for Public Integrity reported at least 1,600 pet deaths (about one pet a day) related to spot-on treatments with pyrethroids to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over a five-year period, according to an analysis of EPA pesticide incident exposure data by the center. The report continued, saying pyrethroid-based flea and tick treatments — from Hartz, Sergeant’s, Farnam, and Bayer — are approved for sale by the EPA, and they are readily available at grocery stores, specialty pet retailers, and hardware stores. But they “have stirred the ire of pet owners…”
Moreover, the Center reported that pyrethroid spot-ons also account “for more than half of ‘major’ pesticide pet reactions reported to EPA over the last five years—that is, those incidents involving serious medical reactions such as brain damage, heart attacks, and violent seizures. In contrast, non-pyrethroid spot on treatments accounted for only about six percent of all major incidents.”
Ms. Weiss said that New Jersey class-action suits claim the EPA has done nothing to change the advertising, marketing or labeling of pesticide-based flea and tick products to alert pet-owners of the possible serious side-effects, which could include shivering, salivating, dilated pupils, vomiting, tremors and skin irritation.
The release goes on to say: “Nancy Scanlan, DVM, Executive Director of theAmerican Holistic Veterinary Medical Association and past president of theVeterinary Botanical Medical Association, said she has long been aware of theproblems associated with the chemical and pesticide-based flea and tickproducts. “I prefer natural botanicals over pesticidesfor 
treating fleas and ticks and there are a number of good natural productsthat work without harsh side effects,” said Dr. Scanlan. “Herbal flea and tickproducts tend to be safer than pharmaceutical or pesticide flea and tickproducts, but all products that are formulated to rid pets of fleas and tickspose some percentage of risk.”
As a way of doing business Ark Naturalsprovides a full disclosure of its Flea Flicker! Tick Kicker! product and is oneof the few, if not the only company, that includes a “cautionary statement” onits website www.arknaturals.com.
Is this just a nice way of this CEO saying that she believes the lawsuits have done nothing – a safe way of her putting her opinion out there…? What do you think?
Now, I am going to take a second to tell you why I believe the EPA has “done nothing…”
As far as my research would take me, this is what I found:
As an honest media representative/blogger/writer/product reviewer, I am noting that in a 2009 report, the EPA, according to a Channel 5 News Report in Cleveland, blamed the vast majority of these unlikely incidents on misuse of the product – i.e., people putting on too much in one spot, the product dripping into an animal’s eyes/ears/mouth – which is specifically mentioned as a hazard on labels, plus, not letting the product set in or not rubbing it in thoroughly as advised on label, etc.
This means human/operator error — not product error.
Ark Naturals’ “natural botanical Flea Flicker! Tick Kicker! is labeled as GRAS (Generally Regarded as Safe) by the EPA and FDA.
Generally?
Is that supposed to make us feel better about it???
It doesn’t make me feel better…
Anyhow, apparently, all you do to use Ark Naturals is spray on a light application, massage it into the animal’s coat, and it starts working immediately. As a way of doing business, Ark Naturals provides a disclosure of its product and includes a “cautionary statement” on its website.
Currently, nine class-action lawsuits are pending against makers of topical flea & tick products in the wake of an EPA investigation into safety of the pesticides used on dogs & cats.
Hartz, for example, is one of the most well-respected pet product companies in the world; mud-slinging campaigns aplenty have been waged against them online over the years because of the lawsuit against them.
I talked with a representative today from Hartz; this is what they say:
1. The Hartz Mountain Corporation believes that all pets deserve the best care possible; safety is our #1 priority.
2. We are confident in the quality of our topical flea and tick products, including Hartz® UltraGuard® and Hartz® InControl® brands for dogs and cats, all of which are held to the same safety and efficacy testing standards and labeling direction as all EPA-registered flea and tick products.
3. 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 prevention products sold through retail channels or veterinarian offices.
4. We are confident in the quality and safety of our products, and will continue to work with the EPA on labeling and other matters to make sure our consumers better understand the proper use of these products and use them with confidence. Hartz agrees with the EPA on the importance of carefully following label directions when applying topical flea and tick control products to pets.
5. Hartz flea and tick drops accounted for only 4.6 percent of all adverse effects reported to the EPA in 2010 for topical dog and cat flea and tick treatments. In addition, from 2008 to 2010, Hartz reduced the amount of adverse effects reported per total Hartz doses sold by over 38 percent.
6. Per the EPA, most reported incidents were classified as minor, meaning effects were minimally bothersome and rapidly resolved.
My position on this?
(If you care or know the ThoughtsFurPaws writers… here it is…!)
*** Kudos to a company for hopping on the “natural” bandwagon and making a product like this. ***
*** However; don’t EVER use the misfortune of those people who have lost animals or had pet injuries (due to the other products) to announce/promote/sell your own product – that’s just wrong… and it’s a fear-based PR tactic. ***
It’s bad public perception and (PR) manners to blast (however imperceptible) another company to get YOURS ahead…
I believe:
“Blowing out someone else’s candle does not make yours shine any brighter…”So to all you pet owners who HAVE had a pet injured or lost due to flea/tick topical applications: I am SO sorry for your loss or strife.
I cannot take a side as I am a professional and FAIR journalist… I’m simply reporting the pet world news!
Hi and thanks for sharing this with us. As a user of the a natural product to prevent fleas and ticks, this looks like a good one for me to try. We live in pretty mild weather all year so I am glad you shared this. My St. Bernard was seriously hurt by side effects from a chemical flea application and I will never use them again. When I took him to the university vet I met others who had the same problem. Thank you for the information.
I am the one who wrote the letter about my dog. I often try to think like my dog and what he would want me to do for him. All of my words are true. He walks with no booties or shoes (so I use protective balms), he does get exposed to elements (so I try to protect him appropriately) and he will never use a chemical-based flea or tick product. As a journalist myself I applaud your reporting but wanted to take ownership of the letter I wrote on behalf of my pooch. Thanks also for the kudos you shared for natural products. Wags!
Thanks Carol. I appreciate your opinion and comment. It was my understanding from the press release that the CEO was perhaps using the law firm to speak her mind…. interesting to me so I switched up the story a bit to see if others thought the same.
Apparently NOT!!!
Thanks:)
JL SMITH
i’ve used this product for the last couple of years. i use only natural products on all of my pets. i can attest to you and others this has been an effective product for my pets and there have been no problems as I’ve experienced with the chemical products.
I work for a veterinary office and I get so sad every time big box companies get their products out the door. I use non-chemical flea preventions on my dogs year round and I have two coonhounds and one Schnauzer. I see the harm they do and have done so for the past 10 years as a vet tech. What the big companies don’t tell you is what should be feared.
I am glad to read about this law suit and more power to the people who are suing whose dogs were hurt. These huge companies have much to lose if the public finds out their products are hurting inocent animals. I am glad to know more people are sharing the truth and companies will be made to pay for their harming pets. I am feeding my dogs natural treats and making a home fed diet. I also switched to safer pest repellents in the past year. Now I am glad when I read these horror stories.
I’m a huge fan of natural products and have always been concerned with the safety of ingested and topical pesticides so I read this article with great interest. One thing I noted was that it seems the headline is untrue. The headline states: Spot-On’ Flea & Tick Products Alleged by Ark Naturals CEO to Cause Serious Harm to Dogs and Cats. Ark Naturals CEO did not say that anywhere in this press release. It looks like her words were manipulated to make the headline more sensational. I read that she recommended we consider natural products as a safer alternative.
Laura-
Please keep in mind the word “alleged” was used in this post…
I ask that you please do not come to a blog & accuse a well-known writer of manipulating someone’s words.
I am not a sensationalist or anything like that in terms of journalism… I am simply an animal welfare advocate and blogger if you read through any other posts. Most people who commented here did not read the whole post — I am on the side of the ANIMALS and people who LOST ANIMALS or had HURT ANIMALS from the products.
However, I do believe that the CEO is using a law firm to speak her mind. Give me a minute here:
The full headline of the press release read as follows:
“‘Spot-On’ Flea & Tick Products –Alleged to Cause Serious Harm to Dogs and Cats – Prompts Ark Naturals CEO to Suggest Pet Owners Consider Natural Botanical Alternative to ChemicalPesticides to Control Fleas & Ticks”
The company and CEO were alleging things – if anyone manipulated anything – it was the East Brunswick, N.J. law firm Green & Associates. They wrote and syndicated the press release. The way that it reads — it was not published in entirety in this post — did in fact make it seem as though the CEO was mildly bashing other product-makers.
As a PR professional, it’s my understanding that that is not an acceptable way (at least morally) to market a product and it’s used in the market as a way to get ahead when your company:
a. has a new product to enter into a overly saturated market
b. is not doing well financially as a company
c. is trying to “jump on a bandwagon” created by other companies in the same vertical
Anyhow, this what the CEO ALSO said in the release:
“Fleas and ticks are a way of life for dogs and cats but controlling them is… … the pesticide solution seems to be wrought with serious problems, said Ms. Weiss”
Second part of that is a shot at other companies IN MY OPINION.
“Ms. Weiss said that the recent New Jersey class action suits claim the EPA has done nothing to change the advertising,marketing or labeling of pesticide-based flea and tick products to alert petowners of the possible serious side-effects, which could include shivering, salivating,dilated pupils, vomiting, tremors and skin irritation.”
Is this press release essentially bashing products that, for the most part, have spent a fortune on re-testing and trying to better the problem?? Is Ms Weiss using a law firm to speak HER thoughts?
Thanks to your blog post I did a little more reading and talked to my dog’s holistic vet. I showed her a bottle of Ark Naturals flea protection and she said to give it a try. I feel very comfortable with this and the more smaller companies that speak out to tell us this news the better. I appreciate learning this, so thank you.
JL, thanks for your note. I’m sorry my post was offensive. I will assume that you just misunderstood the article.
Ms. Weiss is not using a law firm. She responded to a press release she read, which was written by someone else, about the dangers of using pesticides on your pet. I think a lot of people don’t know about the serious risks associated with pesticides or or that there are natural alternatives. I don’t understand how anyone could take issue with that.
I will assume you are good person and a reputable blogger who like all of us, makes an occasional mistake.
Laura,
I TOTALLY misunderstood and that is my fault – I thought it was weird that my pal had sent me this release and wanted me to post a comment perhaps because i immediately read it to be that she was using a law firm.
Anyhow, I did misunderstand her to be speaking THRU the law firm…..
My apologies; thanks for your patience, kindness and returning to leave another comment.
And don’t forget — I am on the ANIMALS’ side ALWAYS!!!
JL Smith
PR professionals are famous for twisting words.
I agree.
However, my comment was not meant to be twisting words – I misunderstood the comments of the CEO entirely from the get-go.
Thanks Raquel
JL Smith