The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is cautioning consumers about using flea and tick products with a statement posted on the EPA website (epa.gov, click on newsroom). The statement begins: "Due to a significant increase in adverse incidents, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is taking a series of actions to increase the safety of spot-on pesticide products for flea and tick control for cats and dogs."

I think the precautions the EPA outlines are fine, but the agency neglected to mention the most important preventative measure.

I'll outline the EPA suggested precautions, but first let me reveal what I believe to be true.

While adverse events certainly do occur as a result of using flea and tick products, confirmed problems are rare. I don't argue; the rarity of a problem means nothing if it's your pet that's suffering. Skin problems have been reported, as well as neurological complaints, which range from "being depressed" to seizures, and even death.

The EPA reports more complaints have surfaced over the past year or two, and that's why they've responded. Yet, the products themselves haven't fundamentally changed in the same period. So, what's going on? Could pets simply be more susceptible to the flea and tick products today than they were two years ago? I suppose, but experts concur that this is unlikely.

I think I might know what the problem is. Because there are more ticks in more places spreading more disease, sales of tick-control products are rising. So, in part, the problem is a matter of math: The more products sold, the more adverse events.

However, I believe, the story is more complex. Over the past few years, sales have begun a shift from veterinary clinics to online and over-the-counter. Consumers who purchase flea and tick products at their desks or in a store don't have the benefit of a veterinarian or veterinary technician to advise them on how and when to apply the products, or for that matter, what to buy in the first place.

Indeed, many people mistakenly buy the wrong product. For example, using a product meant for large dogs on small dogs, or one meant for dogs-only on a cat can be deadly. Such mistakes are less likely to occur with expert veterinary advice.

Over the past few days, I've received lots of mail on this topic, some readers expressing general concern about flea and tick products, and others 'coming out of the closet' to tell me of their bad experiences. Your complaints are obviously being heeded by the EPA. Here's the EPA response. Actions the agency is perusing, according to the EPA site, include:

--Requiring manufacturers of spot-on pesticide products to improve labeling, making instructions clearer to prevent product misuse.

--Requiring more precise label instructions to ensure proper dosage per pet weight.

--Requiring clear markings to differentiate between dog and cat products, and disallowing similar brand names for dog and cat products. Similar names may have led to misuse.

--Requiring additional changes for specific products, as needed, based on product-specific evaluations.

--When new products are registered, granting only conditional, time-limited registrations to allow for post-marketing product surveillance. If there are incidents of concern associated with the product, the EPA will take appropriate regulatory action.

--Restricting the use of certain inert ingredients that the EPA finds may contribute to the incidents.

--Launching a consumer information campaign to explain new label directions and to help users avoid making medication errors.

--In addition, to improve the regulatory oversight of pet products, the EPA will require more standardized post-market surveillance reporting on adverse effects, require submission of more sales information so the agency can better evaluate incident rates, and bring up-to-date the scientific data requirements on pre- and post-market testing so they're more in line with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requirements.

I applaud the EPA for taking consumer complaints seriously. And the recommendations noted here are prudent.

However, my hope is that the EPA will add one more suggestion -- whether a product is purchased at the vet clinic or elsewhere -- that consumers contact a veterinarian to make sure they're buying the product that best suits their needs and their pet's needs, and that they understand exactly how and when to use the product.

While there may be no data currently available to verify that my recommendation would be as helpful as I believe, I don't see a downside to consumers seeking veterinary input before buying flea and tick products.

 

 

Available at Amazon.com:

For the Love of a Dog: Understanding Emotion in You and Your Best Friend

 

For more Pet Stories and Articles, Click Here to Visit our Pets Section

 

Steve Dale welcomes questions/comments from readers. Although he can't answer all of them individually, he'll answer those of general interest in his column. Write to Steve at Tribune Media Services, 2225 Kenmore Ave., Suite 114, Buffalo, NY 14207. Send e-mail to PETWORLD(at)STEVE DALE.TV. Include your name, city and state. Steve's website is www.stevedalepetworld.com; he can be heard Sundays on WGN Radio, 8 to 10 p.m. CST (www.wgnradio.com to listen live), and hosts the nationally syndicated "Steve Dale's Pet World" and "The Pet Minute." He's also a contributing editor to USA Weekend

(c) 2010 DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.