Pet food labeling is regulated at two levels. The Federal regulations, enforced by the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM), establish standards applicable for all animal feeds: proper identification of product, net quantity statement, manufacturer's address, and proper listing of ingredients. Some States also enforce their own labeling regulations. Many of these have adopted the model pet food regulations established by the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). These regulations are more specific in nature, covering aspects of labeling such as the product name, the guaranteed analysis, the nutritional adequacy statement, feeding directions, and calorie statements.
The net quantity statement tells you how much product is in the container. There are many FDA regulations dictating the format, size and placement of the net quantity statement. None of these do any good if the consumer does not check the quantity statements, especially when comparing the cost of products. For example, a 14-ounce can of food may look identical to the one-pound can of food right next to it. Also, dry products may differ greatly in density, especially some of the "lite" products. Thus, a bag that may typically hold 40 pounds of food may only hold 35 pounds of a food that is "puffed up." A cost-per-ounce or per-pound comparison between products is always prudent. Manufacturer's Name and Address The "manufactured by..." statement identifies the party responsible for the quality and safety of the product and its location. If the label says "manufactured for..." or "distributed by...," the food was manufactured by an outside manufacturer, but the name on the label still designates the responsible party. Not all labels include a street address along with the city, State, and zip code, but by law, it should be listed in either a city directory or a telephone directory. Many manufacturers also include a toll-free number on the label for consumer inquiries. If a consumer has a question or complaint about the product, he or she should not hesitate to use this information to contact the responsible party. Ingredient List All ingredients are required to be listed in order of predominance by weight. The weights of ingredients are determined as they are added in the formulation, including their inherent water content. This latter fact is important when evaluating relative quantity claims, especially when ingredients of different moisture contents are compared.
For example, one pet food may list "meat" as its first ingredient, and "corn" as its second. The manufacturer doesn't hesitate to point out that its competitor lists "corn" first ("meat meal" is second), suggesting the competitor's product has less animal-source protein than its own. However, meat is very high in moisture (approximately 75% water). On the other hand, water and fat are removed from meat meal, so it is only 10% moisture (what's left is mostly protein and minerals). If we could compare both products on a dry matter basis (mathematically "remove" the water from both ingredients), one could see that the second product had more animal-source protein from meat meal than the first product had from meat, even though the ingredient list suggests otherwise.
That is not to say that the second product has more "meat" than the first, or in fact, any meat at all. Meat meal is not meat per se, since most of the fat and water have been removed by rendering. Ingredients must be listed by their "common or usual" name. Most ingredients on pet food labels have a corresponding definition in the AAFCO Official Publication. For example, "meat" is defined as the "clean flesh of slaughtered mammals and is limited to...the striate muscle...with or without the accompanying and overlying fat and the portions of the skin, sinew, nerve and blood vessels which normally accompany the flesh." On the other hand, "meat meal" is "the rendered product from mammal tissues, exclusive of any added blood, hair, horn, hide trimmings, manure, stomach and rumen contents." Thus, in addition to the processing, it could also contain parts of animals one would not think of as "meat." Meat meal may not be very pleasing to think about eating yourself, even though it's probably more nutritious. Animals do not share in people's aesthetic concerns about the source and composition of their food. Regardless, the distinction must be made in the ingredient list (and in the product name). For this reason, a product containing "lamb meal" cannot be named a "Lamb Dinner."
Further down the ingredient list, the "common or usual" names become less common or usual to most consumers. The majority of ingredients with chemical-sounding names are, in fact, vitamins, minerals, or other nutrients. Other possible ingredients may include artificial colors, stabilizers, and preservatives. All should be either "Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS)" or approved food additives for their intended uses.
If scientific data are presented that show a health risk to animals of an ingredient or additive, CVM can act to prohibit or modify its use in pet food. For example, propylene glycol was used as a humectant in soft-moist pet foods, which helps retain water and gives these products their unique texture and taste. It was affirmed Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) for use in human and animal food before the advent of soft-moist foods. It was known for some time that propylene glycol caused Heinz Body formation in the red blood cells of cats (small clumps of proteins seen in the cells when viewed under the microscope), but it could not be shown to cause overt anemia or other clinical effects. However, recent reports in the veterinary literature of scientifically sound studies have shown that propylene glycol reduces the red blood cell survival time, renders red blood cells more susceptible to oxidative damage, and has other adverse effects in cats consuming the substance at levels found in soft-moist food. In light of this new data, CVM amended the regulations to expressly prohibit the use of propylene glycol in cat foods.
Another pet food additive of some controversy is ethoxyquin, which was approved as a food additive over thirty-five years ago for use as an antioxidant chemical preservative in animal feeds. Approximately ten years ago, CVM began receiving reports from dog owners attributing the presence of ethoxyquin in the dog food with a myriad of adverse effects, such as allergic reactions, skin problems, major organ failure, behavior problems, and cancer. However, there was a paucity of available scientific data to support these contentions, or to show other adverse effects in dogs at levels approved for use in dog foods. More recent studies by the manufacturer of ethoxyquin showed a dose-dependent accumulation of a hemoglobin-related pigment in the liver, as well as increases in the levels of liver-related enzymes in the blood. Although these changes are due to ethoxyquin in the diet, the pigment is not made from ethoxyquin itself, and the health significance of these findings is unknown. More information on the utility of ethoxyquin is still needed in order for CVM to amend the maximum allowable level to below that which would cause these effects, but which still would be useful in preserving the food. While studies are being conducted to ascertain a more accurate minimum effective level of ethoxyquin in dog foods, CVM has asked the pet food industry to voluntarily lower the maximum level of use of ethoxyquin in dog foods from 150 ppm (0.015%) to 75 ppm. Regardless, most pet foods that contained ethoxyquin never exceeded the lower amount, even before this recommended change.
Pet owners and veterinary professionals have a right to know what they are feeding their animals. The pet food label contains a wealth of information, if one knows how to read it. Do not be swayed by the many marketing gimmicks or eye catching claims. If there is a question about the product, contact the manufacturer or ask an appropriate regulatory agency.
Source: FDA Animal & Veterinary Resources Pet Food Labels - General Consumer information provided by David A. Dzanis, DVM, Ph.D., DACVN.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Hot Spots, Rashes & Infections: Holistic skin and coat care
One of the most common medical complaint in dogs is the notorious “Hot Spot,” also called “acute moist dermatitis.” There are dozens of causes of hot spots, including allergies, parasites, or just licking and chewing, but the common factor is infection, whether bacterial or fungal or yeast. And hot spots can appear anywhere on the body: Hind leg, feet, rump area, neck, etc. The bottom line for your dog is that there is an infection and intense itching, regardless of how it got that way. Sometimes hot spots seem to appear out of thin air. For example, many dogs are very sensitive to simple lawn grasses. These animals are physically and nutritionally normal, but show signs of inflamed skin and hair loss. Or, a skin lesion can occur as a result of moisture on the skin surface from rain, pond or lake water. Minute scratches on the skin from, for example, a clipper blade, may trigger other cases. Moist eczema is one example of a hot spot type. If the coat is dense or allowed to become matted, moisture on the skin may remain long enough to allow superficial bacteria to reproduce and create an infection. Some cases of moist eczema will spread very rapidly and require rather aggressive therapy to correct.
Rashes and Skin Infections (Infectious Dermatitis)
Bacterial, fungal and yeast organisms are notoriously obnoxious skin and coat pathogens. They can cause skin infections, rashes and other problems in otherwise healthy dogs. Bacterial dermatitis rarely occurs spontaneously. Normal healthy skin has tremendous numbers of a variety of bacteria present all the time. If something upsets the normal balance, such as antibiotics eliminating one or two types, the remaining types proliferate. Any contact with grass, plastic, an abrasion or moisture, or parasitic invasion can bring down the skin’s defensive barriers and opportunistic bacteria then have their way. Fungal infections first appear as one or more small areas of hair loss that may be reddened or inflamed. As infection progresses, crusts may form on the area of hair loss, the patches increase in number and size, and large portions of skin may become involved. Yeast, a type of fungus, can irritate an already diseased skin surface. Yeast infections typically create greasy, odorous and inflamed skin in affected dogs. Symptoms may include blackening of the skin, dry flaky skin or greasy type grit on the skin. As the condition worsens, a bad yeasty smell or odor may accompany this, and the dog will experience severe itching, leading to endless biting, chewing and hair loss.
Parasites and Mange
Skin Problems Caused by Parasites (Fleas, Ticks, Mange Mites and More) A parasite is an organism (a flea, for example) that spends a significant portion of its life in or on the living tissue of a host organism (your pet) and which causes harm to the host without immediately killing it. Some parasites are relatively innocuous, some are not, and some can cause serious skin problems. Fleas, Flies, Chiggers, Ticks, and Gnats When a pet parent sees her dog scratching and biting at itself, the first thing she thinks is “Oh no! Fleas!” Chiggers, deer flies, and gnats (sometimes called No-See-Ums) can be considered nuisances and generally do not create remarkable systemic skin problems. But repeated exposure to fleas can trigger a hypersensitivity to the bite of even a single flea, leading to an allergic response, and ultimately to hot spots or worse. Tick bites seldom trigger an allergic reaction, but can leave a slow-healing lesion.
Mighty Mites and MangeMites are microscopic creatures resembling tiny spiders. Among the species that attack animals are members of the Sarcoptic mange mites (family Sarcoptidae), which burrow under the skin. Demodex mites (family Demodicidae) are parasites that live in or near the hair follicles of mammals, including humans. Cheyletiella mites look like tiny spiders under a magnifying glass and are often called “Walking Dandruff” because upon close inspection it seems like little flakes of dry skin are actually moving about. Sarcoptic mites are very nasty critters. Called scabies or red mange, infestations of these mites are highly contagious and produce intense itching, reddening of the skin, thinning of the hair (alopecia) and development of crusts and scabs. Bacterial skin infections commonly occur in the inflamed, irritated skin. Sarcoptic mite infestation, or mange, is frequently misdiagnosed as allergic dermatitis by even very competent and experienced veterinarians. The mites burrow right down into the skin where they are virtually undetectable by skin scrapings. Sarcoptic mites prefer skin with little hair, so they are most numerous on the ears, elbows, abdomen and hocks. As the disease spreads, hair is lost and eventually the mites occupy large areas of skin. Sadly, many dogs are treated with cortisone or prednisone for a supposed allergic dermatitis when in fact these Sarcoptic mites are the cause of the pruritic or inflamed skin, and the unnecessary cortisone eventually makes the condition worse.Then there are Demodectic (or Demodex) mites, which cause another kind of mange. These mites are found in small numbers in the hair follicles of normal pets. In stressful situations, however, they proliferate, and large numbers inhabit the skin and hair follicles. The good news is that Demodex mites can easily be seen on a skin scraping viewed under the microscope. The less good news is that generalized demodicosis is serious and often difficult to treat. Large areas of the body may be affected, and often the affected areas are also infected by bacteria. In these cases, the skin is red, crusty and warm, and has many pustules. It may bleed easily and has a strong, rancid odor.
Why Not Steroids?
Corticosteroid drugs, called "steroids" for short, are potent chemical substances that can reduce swelling and inflammation quickly. Common corticosteroid drugs used to treat skin issues in dogs include cortisone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone and prednisone. These compounds reduce itching by reducing inflammation. In other words, these drugs treat the symptom of itching, but can do nothing about the underlying cause of the itch. Unfortunately, they also affect every organ in the body. Prednisone is the most potent anti - inflammatory and anti-itch steroid and is often used for treating allergies in dogs. It is usually reserved for dogs with moderate to severe skin allergies, or skin diseases that are difficult to diagnose. These medications are often over prescribed without a positive diagnosis and without careful monitoring, and the pet owner can be unaware of the potential seriousness of the side-effects.
Whether a dog has hot spots or mange or allergies, often it’s the secondary infections that cause the worst itching. If steroids are given to treat the symptoms of itching, the bacterial or fungal secondary infections will be given a boost, and will get much worse very quickly. The reason for this is that cortisones depress lymphocytes, a type of white blood cell, making it easier for bacterial infections to occur and then to proliferate unchecked. In other words, steroids can compromise, or crash, your pet’s natural immune system. When this happens, your dog will lose hair and his skin will become black with a terrible odor and insane itching. Traditional medicine can no longer help him when the disease reaches this stage, and your vet is likely to recommend euthanasia. Even holistic, naturopathic veterinarians may recommend treatment with small amounts of corticosteroids to give some affected pets relief during the flea season. However, these treatments may be dangerous to your pet if prolonged and only offer temporary relief of symptoms at best.
These treatments may include topical medications, soothing baths, ointments and sprays, oral antihistamines, or steroids. Caution: If you are sent home with a prescription for cortisone, or your dog has been given “a cortisone shot to stop the itching”, your dog may ultimately be worse off than before if the true diagnosis happens to be an unrecognized case of Sarcoptic mites!
We carry at our on-line store a holistic series of products coming from a company called DER Magic. I have tried their products and experienced success with both, our cats as well as our dogs, this stuff really works. You know I don’t like to advertise the products we carry at the on-line store. But sometimes I just can’t help it and feel, if in general it really helps your companions, why not passing on a recommendation. Other stores do it too, even vets make their very specific recommendations when it comes to food, treats and remedies and illness cure. Coming back to DER Magic Skin & Coat Care: This company, as so many within the holistic circle of pet food, treat and supplement suppliers, was started because it’s founder, Dr. Adelie Ritchie, also proud owner of a couple Shih Tzus, tried to figure out how she could help her pups, who often were in need of a quick fix for bug bites, rashes, hot spots or other dermal boo-boos. The doctor’s original prototype product was formulated many years ago, back when Dr. Ritchie was breeding and showing Yorkshire Terriers and teaching organic chemistry at a community college in Florida. At the time, her prize show dog developed a serious skin disease and then progressively got worse under standard veterinary treatments, to the point where her vet suggested euthanasia to put the dog out of her misery. Shenanigan was her name and she had thick black skin by this time, smelled horrible and cried constantly. Back then, as is still the case today, there just weren't any good choices out there for veterinary treatments that weren't loaded with cortisone, steroids, antibiotics or strong chemicals, and even those treatments were not effective enough to save Shenanigan's life. This is when Dr. Ritchie got to work on formulating an effective topical treatment with natural, herbal and organic ingredients. Shenanigan got dunked, slathered, gooped, and drenched in potions, all somewhat effective, but not quite enough. Finally, after a few trials, the prototype DERMagic Hot Spot Lotion was born, and Shenanigan's relief was visible and immediate. She stopped crying and scratching, and her hair was sprouting again within 48 hours of the first treatment. Within six months, she was again in full coat and was parading herself proudly around the show ring. Over the years, Dr. Ritchie used her formulations to treat dogs and cats and horses belonging to family members, friends, and her colleagues in the dog show business, but it was not until much later that a good friend challenged her to make her great products available to every pet owner facing skin problems with their beloved companion animals.
Today, Dr. Ritchie offers a well rounded program of just a few, but extremely effective holistic skin and coat care products. All of them constantly receive very positive recognition in the pet oriented and related media including for example Animal Wellness Magazine to name just one. The line includes a complete 4 step skin care system, a hot spot salve, lotions, soap bars, Dead Sea aromatherapy bath salts and of course shampoos and conditioners.
Besides the very powerful fact that they simply work, what I like the most about Dr. Ritchie’s products is that she enables me to offer yet another effective solution within a well rounded holistic program, from food and treats to supplements and skin & coat care, all together designed to successfully help our customers in their efforts to get rid of their pet’s allergy problems.
Related to today’s comment, here is how Dr. Ritchie (who also by large contributed today’s comment) addresses the task on hand: DER Magic products stop infections associated with parasitic infestations, and kill certain parasites outright. They kill bacteria, yeast and most types of fungus, fast, and are the first line of defense against hot spots. Aside from being immediately effective at relieving itch, fighting fungal and bacterial infestations and promoting healing of affected areas, these products are safe and free from corticosteroids.
Rashes and Skin Infections (Infectious Dermatitis)
Bacterial, fungal and yeast organisms are notoriously obnoxious skin and coat pathogens. They can cause skin infections, rashes and other problems in otherwise healthy dogs. Bacterial dermatitis rarely occurs spontaneously. Normal healthy skin has tremendous numbers of a variety of bacteria present all the time. If something upsets the normal balance, such as antibiotics eliminating one or two types, the remaining types proliferate. Any contact with grass, plastic, an abrasion or moisture, or parasitic invasion can bring down the skin’s defensive barriers and opportunistic bacteria then have their way. Fungal infections first appear as one or more small areas of hair loss that may be reddened or inflamed. As infection progresses, crusts may form on the area of hair loss, the patches increase in number and size, and large portions of skin may become involved. Yeast, a type of fungus, can irritate an already diseased skin surface. Yeast infections typically create greasy, odorous and inflamed skin in affected dogs. Symptoms may include blackening of the skin, dry flaky skin or greasy type grit on the skin. As the condition worsens, a bad yeasty smell or odor may accompany this, and the dog will experience severe itching, leading to endless biting, chewing and hair loss.
Parasites and Mange
Skin Problems Caused by Parasites (Fleas, Ticks, Mange Mites and More) A parasite is an organism (a flea, for example) that spends a significant portion of its life in or on the living tissue of a host organism (your pet) and which causes harm to the host without immediately killing it. Some parasites are relatively innocuous, some are not, and some can cause serious skin problems. Fleas, Flies, Chiggers, Ticks, and Gnats When a pet parent sees her dog scratching and biting at itself, the first thing she thinks is “Oh no! Fleas!” Chiggers, deer flies, and gnats (sometimes called No-See-Ums) can be considered nuisances and generally do not create remarkable systemic skin problems. But repeated exposure to fleas can trigger a hypersensitivity to the bite of even a single flea, leading to an allergic response, and ultimately to hot spots or worse. Tick bites seldom trigger an allergic reaction, but can leave a slow-healing lesion.
Mighty Mites and MangeMites are microscopic creatures resembling tiny spiders. Among the species that attack animals are members of the Sarcoptic mange mites (family Sarcoptidae), which burrow under the skin. Demodex mites (family Demodicidae) are parasites that live in or near the hair follicles of mammals, including humans. Cheyletiella mites look like tiny spiders under a magnifying glass and are often called “Walking Dandruff” because upon close inspection it seems like little flakes of dry skin are actually moving about. Sarcoptic mites are very nasty critters. Called scabies or red mange, infestations of these mites are highly contagious and produce intense itching, reddening of the skin, thinning of the hair (alopecia) and development of crusts and scabs. Bacterial skin infections commonly occur in the inflamed, irritated skin. Sarcoptic mite infestation, or mange, is frequently misdiagnosed as allergic dermatitis by even very competent and experienced veterinarians. The mites burrow right down into the skin where they are virtually undetectable by skin scrapings. Sarcoptic mites prefer skin with little hair, so they are most numerous on the ears, elbows, abdomen and hocks. As the disease spreads, hair is lost and eventually the mites occupy large areas of skin. Sadly, many dogs are treated with cortisone or prednisone for a supposed allergic dermatitis when in fact these Sarcoptic mites are the cause of the pruritic or inflamed skin, and the unnecessary cortisone eventually makes the condition worse.Then there are Demodectic (or Demodex) mites, which cause another kind of mange. These mites are found in small numbers in the hair follicles of normal pets. In stressful situations, however, they proliferate, and large numbers inhabit the skin and hair follicles. The good news is that Demodex mites can easily be seen on a skin scraping viewed under the microscope. The less good news is that generalized demodicosis is serious and often difficult to treat. Large areas of the body may be affected, and often the affected areas are also infected by bacteria. In these cases, the skin is red, crusty and warm, and has many pustules. It may bleed easily and has a strong, rancid odor.
Why Not Steroids?
Corticosteroid drugs, called "steroids" for short, are potent chemical substances that can reduce swelling and inflammation quickly. Common corticosteroid drugs used to treat skin issues in dogs include cortisone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone and prednisone. These compounds reduce itching by reducing inflammation. In other words, these drugs treat the symptom of itching, but can do nothing about the underlying cause of the itch. Unfortunately, they also affect every organ in the body. Prednisone is the most potent anti - inflammatory and anti-itch steroid and is often used for treating allergies in dogs. It is usually reserved for dogs with moderate to severe skin allergies, or skin diseases that are difficult to diagnose. These medications are often over prescribed without a positive diagnosis and without careful monitoring, and the pet owner can be unaware of the potential seriousness of the side-effects.
Whether a dog has hot spots or mange or allergies, often it’s the secondary infections that cause the worst itching. If steroids are given to treat the symptoms of itching, the bacterial or fungal secondary infections will be given a boost, and will get much worse very quickly. The reason for this is that cortisones depress lymphocytes, a type of white blood cell, making it easier for bacterial infections to occur and then to proliferate unchecked. In other words, steroids can compromise, or crash, your pet’s natural immune system. When this happens, your dog will lose hair and his skin will become black with a terrible odor and insane itching. Traditional medicine can no longer help him when the disease reaches this stage, and your vet is likely to recommend euthanasia. Even holistic, naturopathic veterinarians may recommend treatment with small amounts of corticosteroids to give some affected pets relief during the flea season. However, these treatments may be dangerous to your pet if prolonged and only offer temporary relief of symptoms at best.
These treatments may include topical medications, soothing baths, ointments and sprays, oral antihistamines, or steroids. Caution: If you are sent home with a prescription for cortisone, or your dog has been given “a cortisone shot to stop the itching”, your dog may ultimately be worse off than before if the true diagnosis happens to be an unrecognized case of Sarcoptic mites!
We carry at our on-line store a holistic series of products coming from a company called DER Magic. I have tried their products and experienced success with both, our cats as well as our dogs, this stuff really works. You know I don’t like to advertise the products we carry at the on-line store. But sometimes I just can’t help it and feel, if in general it really helps your companions, why not passing on a recommendation. Other stores do it too, even vets make their very specific recommendations when it comes to food, treats and remedies and illness cure. Coming back to DER Magic Skin & Coat Care: This company, as so many within the holistic circle of pet food, treat and supplement suppliers, was started because it’s founder, Dr. Adelie Ritchie, also proud owner of a couple Shih Tzus, tried to figure out how she could help her pups, who often were in need of a quick fix for bug bites, rashes, hot spots or other dermal boo-boos. The doctor’s original prototype product was formulated many years ago, back when Dr. Ritchie was breeding and showing Yorkshire Terriers and teaching organic chemistry at a community college in Florida. At the time, her prize show dog developed a serious skin disease and then progressively got worse under standard veterinary treatments, to the point where her vet suggested euthanasia to put the dog out of her misery. Shenanigan was her name and she had thick black skin by this time, smelled horrible and cried constantly. Back then, as is still the case today, there just weren't any good choices out there for veterinary treatments that weren't loaded with cortisone, steroids, antibiotics or strong chemicals, and even those treatments were not effective enough to save Shenanigan's life. This is when Dr. Ritchie got to work on formulating an effective topical treatment with natural, herbal and organic ingredients. Shenanigan got dunked, slathered, gooped, and drenched in potions, all somewhat effective, but not quite enough. Finally, after a few trials, the prototype DERMagic Hot Spot Lotion was born, and Shenanigan's relief was visible and immediate. She stopped crying and scratching, and her hair was sprouting again within 48 hours of the first treatment. Within six months, she was again in full coat and was parading herself proudly around the show ring. Over the years, Dr. Ritchie used her formulations to treat dogs and cats and horses belonging to family members, friends, and her colleagues in the dog show business, but it was not until much later that a good friend challenged her to make her great products available to every pet owner facing skin problems with their beloved companion animals.
Today, Dr. Ritchie offers a well rounded program of just a few, but extremely effective holistic skin and coat care products. All of them constantly receive very positive recognition in the pet oriented and related media including for example Animal Wellness Magazine to name just one. The line includes a complete 4 step skin care system, a hot spot salve, lotions, soap bars, Dead Sea aromatherapy bath salts and of course shampoos and conditioners.
Besides the very powerful fact that they simply work, what I like the most about Dr. Ritchie’s products is that she enables me to offer yet another effective solution within a well rounded holistic program, from food and treats to supplements and skin & coat care, all together designed to successfully help our customers in their efforts to get rid of their pet’s allergy problems.
Related to today’s comment, here is how Dr. Ritchie (who also by large contributed today’s comment) addresses the task on hand: DER Magic products stop infections associated with parasitic infestations, and kill certain parasites outright. They kill bacteria, yeast and most types of fungus, fast, and are the first line of defense against hot spots. Aside from being immediately effective at relieving itch, fighting fungal and bacterial infestations and promoting healing of affected areas, these products are safe and free from corticosteroids.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Travelling and nutritional needs
With the summer having arrived, the number of activities involving our pets, one of them being travelling, has increased as well. Dogs typically enjoy travelling to the highest degree.
With new sights and smells, travel can be both exciting and overwhelming for us pets. Going into “foreign territories” is stressful at times even for well adjusted pets and can lead to drastic appetite changes. Animals are instinctively cautious about eating in unfamiliar surroundings and this lack of appetite cannot only affect bowel movements and energy levels, but even a pet’s overall health. For your peace of mind and your pet’s comfort, preparation is the key in traveling.
In times of high stress, hormones produced by the body can give animals poor appetites. So eating for calories is often the main nutritional focus. Make every bite count and travel armed with a tasty diet of foods that are just too good for a pet to pass up. Ideally this would be the pet’s normal diet to minimize any other stressful changes. But if that doesn’t work, the following suggestions might come in handy:
Foods that are higher in protein and fat are generally more palatable than foods higher in carbohydrates. Therefore, selecting a high protein and low carbohydrate food is a simple solution. For many brands, carbohydrate levels are not typically listed on packaging, but they can be easily calculated by adding all the percentages for protein, fat, moisture, crude fiber and (if available) ash and subtracting the total from 100%. The remainder is an approximation of the percent of carbohydrate in the food. Dry foods with less than 18% carbohydrates for dogs and 12% for cats would be considered low in carbohydrates. Canned dog and cat food with less than 2% carbohydrates would be considered lower in carbohydrates. Increasing fat and protein also allows us pets to get more calories per bite of food and helps boost our immune systems.
Hydration is also imperative for travelling pets to avoid overheating. One way to keep a pet hydrated is to provide frequent access to fresh, cool water. Another convenient way to help with hydration is to feed canned food. The greater water content in canned food, up to seven times as much as in dry food, can help to meet our water needs. In addition, canned wet food to some of us is just more tempting than dry foods.
Providing treats at different points on a trip is another great way to reassure pets and letting them know that travelling is fun. Selecting treats that are easily stored and that come in a variety of shapes and flavors can make giving treats both easy for you and enjoyable for your pets.
In the end, the more comfortable and satisfied we pets are during a trip, the more enjoyable the entire experience will be for everybody.
With new sights and smells, travel can be both exciting and overwhelming for us pets. Going into “foreign territories” is stressful at times even for well adjusted pets and can lead to drastic appetite changes. Animals are instinctively cautious about eating in unfamiliar surroundings and this lack of appetite cannot only affect bowel movements and energy levels, but even a pet’s overall health. For your peace of mind and your pet’s comfort, preparation is the key in traveling.
In times of high stress, hormones produced by the body can give animals poor appetites. So eating for calories is often the main nutritional focus. Make every bite count and travel armed with a tasty diet of foods that are just too good for a pet to pass up. Ideally this would be the pet’s normal diet to minimize any other stressful changes. But if that doesn’t work, the following suggestions might come in handy:
Foods that are higher in protein and fat are generally more palatable than foods higher in carbohydrates. Therefore, selecting a high protein and low carbohydrate food is a simple solution. For many brands, carbohydrate levels are not typically listed on packaging, but they can be easily calculated by adding all the percentages for protein, fat, moisture, crude fiber and (if available) ash and subtracting the total from 100%. The remainder is an approximation of the percent of carbohydrate in the food. Dry foods with less than 18% carbohydrates for dogs and 12% for cats would be considered low in carbohydrates. Canned dog and cat food with less than 2% carbohydrates would be considered lower in carbohydrates. Increasing fat and protein also allows us pets to get more calories per bite of food and helps boost our immune systems.
Hydration is also imperative for travelling pets to avoid overheating. One way to keep a pet hydrated is to provide frequent access to fresh, cool water. Another convenient way to help with hydration is to feed canned food. The greater water content in canned food, up to seven times as much as in dry food, can help to meet our water needs. In addition, canned wet food to some of us is just more tempting than dry foods.
Providing treats at different points on a trip is another great way to reassure pets and letting them know that travelling is fun. Selecting treats that are easily stored and that come in a variety of shapes and flavors can make giving treats both easy for you and enjoyable for your pets.
In the end, the more comfortable and satisfied we pets are during a trip, the more enjoyable the entire experience will be for everybody.
Monday, June 15, 2009
FDA 101: Animal Feed
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on 06/10/09 published its FDA 101 on Animal Feed. Sounds interesting I thought when I found the announcement in my inbox. However, knowing what we all know I was skeptical of what it really means and if it is going to change anything for us pet owners. Here’s the wording, note that because of our specific interest as pet owners I rearranged the paragraphs a little:
Introduction
As long as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been regulating food for people, it has also regulated food for animals, including animal feed for millions of chickens, turkeys, cows, pigs, sheep, and fish. In addition, FDA regulates pet food for America’s more than 177 million dogs, cats, and horses.
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requires animal feed, like human foods, to
-be pure and wholesome
-be produced under sanitary conditions
-contain no harmful substances
-be truthfully labeled
As is also the case for human foods, the act does not give FDA the authority to require approval of animal feed, including pet food, before it is marketed. But the agency has the authority to take action against feed products that are in violation of the law. And FDA approves the additives or drugs that are used in feed products.
Animal feed manufacturers are responsible for ensuring that
-feed is truthfully labeled
-feed does not contain unsafe additives or contaminants
-if the feed contains drugs, the drugs are approved by FDA for use in animal feeds
Federal and state regulatory agencies work cooperatively to provide the rules, guidance, and oversight to assist industry in producing and distributing safe animal feed and feed ingredients.
Pet Food
Pet food, including dry and canned food and pet treats, is considered to be animal feed. Like other animal feed, FDA regulates pet food and establishes standards for labeling.
Pet food labeling is regulated at two levels: federal and state. The federal regulations, enforced by FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, establish standards that apply to all animal feeds:
-proper identification of the product
-net quantity statement
-manufacturer’s address
-proper listing of ingredients
Some states also enforce their own labeling regulations. Many of these follow the model pet food regulations of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), a non-government advisory body with representative regulatory officials from all the states. These model regulations are more specific than federal regulations, covering aspects of labeling such as product name, nutritional adequacy statement, feeding directions, and calorie statements.
FDA carries out its animal feed regulatory responsibilities in cooperation with state and local partners, and works together with AAFCO on uniform feed ingredient definitions and proper labeling.”
These paragraphs deal with what we as pet owners are interested in: Pet food. However, as it states, “Pet food, including dry and canned food and pet treats, is considered to be animal feed”, I figured, I also share with you the paragraphs dealing more with other animals, like for example chicken or beef, i.e. the stuff what is being used in our pet foods. My desire of sharing the following paragraphs comes especially since it makes very clear what we may be faced with when we buy a bag or can of chicken formula for our cats and dogs, and what these chicken may have been fed before they found their final destination.
“Medicated Feed
Drugs may be added to some animal feeds to prevent or treat diseases, or to improve animal growth and productivity.
“The use of drugs in the food of animals is essential to keep animals healthy,” says Steven D. Vaughn, D.V.M., director of the Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation in FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine. “Administering drugs to animals takes into consideration the best methods for providing the needed medicine while minimizing the stress to the animals.”
For example, coccidiosis is a disease that commonly infects chickens and can cause death if untreated. The parasites responsible, coccidia, are passed in the droppings and can infect other chickens housed near the sick chickens.
“It’s not practical for the poultry farmer to isolate and individually dose chickens within a flock,” says Vaughn. “Catching, restraining, and handling chickens can be stressful and potentially harmful to the animals, particularly if they are already stressed due to disease. Providing medication through the feed or drinking water eliminates the stress to the animals. Medicated feed to treat all the chickens is necessary for good animal health, and ultimately to the health of humans who consume the chicken products.”
The types of drugs that may be used in feed include
-antimicrobials (such as antibacterial drugs) to fight infections
-anticoccidials to fight coccidial parasites
-hormonals to suppress estrus (the female “heat” cycle) in cattle
-anthelmintics to fight parasitic worms
-sulfonamidics to fight certain types of infections
-beta agonists to promote leanness in animals raised for meat
-anti-bloating drugs to prevent swelling of the stomach compartments or intestinal tract of cows caused by excessive gas.
Residues and Resistance
FDA is responsible for assuring that animal drugs and medicated feeds are not only safe and effective for animals, but that food products from treated animals are safe for humans to consume. This safety responsibility includes making sure that drugs used in medicated feed
do not leave hazardous residues in human foods, such as milk, meat, and eggs do not contribute to antimicrobial resistance—the ability of bacteria and other microbes to grow in the presence of a drug that would normally kill them or limit their growth Before a drug can be approved for a food-producing animal, FDA requires the drug sponsors to provide data to show how much drug remaining in the animal’s system (residue) would be safe for people to consume that the concentration of actual residue in the edible part of the animal would not result in a person consuming more than the safe level the potential for the drug, if it’s an antimicrobial drug, to contribute to antimicrobial resistance FDA has produced guidance to help drug makers provide these data. For example, FDA provides a scientific process for determining the likelihood that an antimicrobial drug used to treat an animal may cause an antimicrobial resistance problem in humans consuming products from that animal. This process can help prevent drugs with a high risk of causing such problems from being improperly used in food-producing animals, potentially leading to antimicrobial resistance in humans.
While recognizing that drugs in animal feed are essential, FDA encourages food-animal producers and veterinarians to apply good judgment and common sense in using animal drugs.
“The judicious use of all drugs in animals, particularly food-producing animals, is very important,” says Vaughn. “The use of medicated feeds in food-producing animals is evaluated and regulated to prevent harmful effects on both animal and human health.”
Manufacturers can do their part in providing safe and effective feed products by properly mixing the feed and complying with regulations that require current good manufacturing processes (cGMP) for medicated feeds. In addition to guidance, FDA provides brochures, videos, and other products on its Web site to encourage judicious drug use in animals.
The law requires feed manufacturers to be licensed if they use certain types of medication in manufacturing their feeds. FDA and the state inspect these licensed facilities routinely to make sure they are complying with cGMPs. During FY 2008 (Oct. 1, 2007, through Sept. 30, 2008), FDA conducted 453 inspections of licensed medicated feed manufacturers throughout the United States.”
I think at this point you may agree with me, it sure makes me think twice not just about what I feed my companion animals, but also what I feed my family and myself. And makes me also to reconsider possibly other food types like for example organic, or with ingredients from free range and pasture fed animals.
To me the bottom line is this: This all sounds good in theory. But unfortunately we also know that it still leaves a lot of lead way for pet food manufacturers. They still can stretch pretty far what they are doing with regards to manufacturing processes and ingredient composition and legally get away with it.
But, as always there is hope: The FDA also provides an outlook for the future and promises quite a few changes, which possibly could improve things in general:
“Improvements to Feed Safety
FDA is improving its Animal Feed Safety System, a program first established in 2003 to protect human and animal health by ensuring safe feeds. The system covers a broad range of agency activities from pre-approving additives for use in feed, to establishing limits on feed contaminants, providing education and training to federal and state feed regulatory personnel, conducting inspections, and taking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with agency regulations.
FDA is also taking action to improve the safety of pet food and ingredients used to make pet food, such as
-establishing ingredient standards and definitions, processing standards, and labeling standards for pet food
-establishing an early warning system to identify pet food in violation of regulations, to identify illness outbreaks, and to notify veterinarians and others of pet food recalls
-establishing a searchable database of recalled human and pet foods to ensure effective communications during a recall
-establishing a “reportable food registry” for animal feed as well as human food. Reportable food -is any food that carries a reasonable probability that its use or exposure to it will cause serious health consequences or death to humans or animals
-collaborating with state regulators and academic partners to set up a network for reporting and investigating unexpected and undesirable signs (adverse events) in pets”
It all sounds promising. My only questions are, how long will it take and how severe will the impact be on future pet food safety. As always I would like to say, let’s be optimistic. On the other side, I have been around long enough to already know today, the differences are not going to be revolutionary. Let’s keep chipping away, one little piece at a time. And keep in mind, not everything finding the FDA’s blessing is always in the best interest of our pets. Stay tuned for more on this hot topic.
Note: Visit the FDA site to read the article in its entirety.
Introduction
As long as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been regulating food for people, it has also regulated food for animals, including animal feed for millions of chickens, turkeys, cows, pigs, sheep, and fish. In addition, FDA regulates pet food for America’s more than 177 million dogs, cats, and horses.
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requires animal feed, like human foods, to
-be pure and wholesome
-be produced under sanitary conditions
-contain no harmful substances
-be truthfully labeled
As is also the case for human foods, the act does not give FDA the authority to require approval of animal feed, including pet food, before it is marketed. But the agency has the authority to take action against feed products that are in violation of the law. And FDA approves the additives or drugs that are used in feed products.
Animal feed manufacturers are responsible for ensuring that
-feed is truthfully labeled
-feed does not contain unsafe additives or contaminants
-if the feed contains drugs, the drugs are approved by FDA for use in animal feeds
Federal and state regulatory agencies work cooperatively to provide the rules, guidance, and oversight to assist industry in producing and distributing safe animal feed and feed ingredients.
Pet Food
Pet food, including dry and canned food and pet treats, is considered to be animal feed. Like other animal feed, FDA regulates pet food and establishes standards for labeling.
Pet food labeling is regulated at two levels: federal and state. The federal regulations, enforced by FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, establish standards that apply to all animal feeds:
-proper identification of the product
-net quantity statement
-manufacturer’s address
-proper listing of ingredients
Some states also enforce their own labeling regulations. Many of these follow the model pet food regulations of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), a non-government advisory body with representative regulatory officials from all the states. These model regulations are more specific than federal regulations, covering aspects of labeling such as product name, nutritional adequacy statement, feeding directions, and calorie statements.
FDA carries out its animal feed regulatory responsibilities in cooperation with state and local partners, and works together with AAFCO on uniform feed ingredient definitions and proper labeling.”
These paragraphs deal with what we as pet owners are interested in: Pet food. However, as it states, “Pet food, including dry and canned food and pet treats, is considered to be animal feed”, I figured, I also share with you the paragraphs dealing more with other animals, like for example chicken or beef, i.e. the stuff what is being used in our pet foods. My desire of sharing the following paragraphs comes especially since it makes very clear what we may be faced with when we buy a bag or can of chicken formula for our cats and dogs, and what these chicken may have been fed before they found their final destination.
“Medicated Feed
Drugs may be added to some animal feeds to prevent or treat diseases, or to improve animal growth and productivity.
“The use of drugs in the food of animals is essential to keep animals healthy,” says Steven D. Vaughn, D.V.M., director of the Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation in FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine. “Administering drugs to animals takes into consideration the best methods for providing the needed medicine while minimizing the stress to the animals.”
For example, coccidiosis is a disease that commonly infects chickens and can cause death if untreated. The parasites responsible, coccidia, are passed in the droppings and can infect other chickens housed near the sick chickens.
“It’s not practical for the poultry farmer to isolate and individually dose chickens within a flock,” says Vaughn. “Catching, restraining, and handling chickens can be stressful and potentially harmful to the animals, particularly if they are already stressed due to disease. Providing medication through the feed or drinking water eliminates the stress to the animals. Medicated feed to treat all the chickens is necessary for good animal health, and ultimately to the health of humans who consume the chicken products.”
The types of drugs that may be used in feed include
-antimicrobials (such as antibacterial drugs) to fight infections
-anticoccidials to fight coccidial parasites
-hormonals to suppress estrus (the female “heat” cycle) in cattle
-anthelmintics to fight parasitic worms
-sulfonamidics to fight certain types of infections
-beta agonists to promote leanness in animals raised for meat
-anti-bloating drugs to prevent swelling of the stomach compartments or intestinal tract of cows caused by excessive gas.
Residues and Resistance
FDA is responsible for assuring that animal drugs and medicated feeds are not only safe and effective for animals, but that food products from treated animals are safe for humans to consume. This safety responsibility includes making sure that drugs used in medicated feed
do not leave hazardous residues in human foods, such as milk, meat, and eggs do not contribute to antimicrobial resistance—the ability of bacteria and other microbes to grow in the presence of a drug that would normally kill them or limit their growth Before a drug can be approved for a food-producing animal, FDA requires the drug sponsors to provide data to show how much drug remaining in the animal’s system (residue) would be safe for people to consume that the concentration of actual residue in the edible part of the animal would not result in a person consuming more than the safe level the potential for the drug, if it’s an antimicrobial drug, to contribute to antimicrobial resistance FDA has produced guidance to help drug makers provide these data. For example, FDA provides a scientific process for determining the likelihood that an antimicrobial drug used to treat an animal may cause an antimicrobial resistance problem in humans consuming products from that animal. This process can help prevent drugs with a high risk of causing such problems from being improperly used in food-producing animals, potentially leading to antimicrobial resistance in humans.
While recognizing that drugs in animal feed are essential, FDA encourages food-animal producers and veterinarians to apply good judgment and common sense in using animal drugs.
“The judicious use of all drugs in animals, particularly food-producing animals, is very important,” says Vaughn. “The use of medicated feeds in food-producing animals is evaluated and regulated to prevent harmful effects on both animal and human health.”
Manufacturers can do their part in providing safe and effective feed products by properly mixing the feed and complying with regulations that require current good manufacturing processes (cGMP) for medicated feeds. In addition to guidance, FDA provides brochures, videos, and other products on its Web site to encourage judicious drug use in animals.
The law requires feed manufacturers to be licensed if they use certain types of medication in manufacturing their feeds. FDA and the state inspect these licensed facilities routinely to make sure they are complying with cGMPs. During FY 2008 (Oct. 1, 2007, through Sept. 30, 2008), FDA conducted 453 inspections of licensed medicated feed manufacturers throughout the United States.”
I think at this point you may agree with me, it sure makes me think twice not just about what I feed my companion animals, but also what I feed my family and myself. And makes me also to reconsider possibly other food types like for example organic, or with ingredients from free range and pasture fed animals.
To me the bottom line is this: This all sounds good in theory. But unfortunately we also know that it still leaves a lot of lead way for pet food manufacturers. They still can stretch pretty far what they are doing with regards to manufacturing processes and ingredient composition and legally get away with it.
But, as always there is hope: The FDA also provides an outlook for the future and promises quite a few changes, which possibly could improve things in general:
“Improvements to Feed Safety
FDA is improving its Animal Feed Safety System, a program first established in 2003 to protect human and animal health by ensuring safe feeds. The system covers a broad range of agency activities from pre-approving additives for use in feed, to establishing limits on feed contaminants, providing education and training to federal and state feed regulatory personnel, conducting inspections, and taking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with agency regulations.
FDA is also taking action to improve the safety of pet food and ingredients used to make pet food, such as
-establishing ingredient standards and definitions, processing standards, and labeling standards for pet food
-establishing an early warning system to identify pet food in violation of regulations, to identify illness outbreaks, and to notify veterinarians and others of pet food recalls
-establishing a searchable database of recalled human and pet foods to ensure effective communications during a recall
-establishing a “reportable food registry” for animal feed as well as human food. Reportable food -is any food that carries a reasonable probability that its use or exposure to it will cause serious health consequences or death to humans or animals
-collaborating with state regulators and academic partners to set up a network for reporting and investigating unexpected and undesirable signs (adverse events) in pets”
It all sounds promising. My only questions are, how long will it take and how severe will the impact be on future pet food safety. As always I would like to say, let’s be optimistic. On the other side, I have been around long enough to already know today, the differences are not going to be revolutionary. Let’s keep chipping away, one little piece at a time. And keep in mind, not everything finding the FDA’s blessing is always in the best interest of our pets. Stay tuned for more on this hot topic.
Note: Visit the FDA site to read the article in its entirety.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
FDA approved pet food
A statement made by a pet food company caught my eye the other day: “FDA Approved” it said – and made me wonder: I wasn’t aware there was such an approval, neither as a requirement nor as an option. But I have been wrong before in my life and so I decided to further investigate the matter. Here is what I found, related to pet food right at the place where people should know best: The Food & Drug Administration or FDA. Here I came to find out that they were confronted with that same issue before I came around. So much indeed that they figured it would be even worth for them to publish and dedicate an entire brochure on the subject matter. Like I said, I only want to address pet food related statements, for the entire article including a link to the publication visit “Is it really FDA approved?” In a narrative it looks like this:
“FDA approved": Maybe you saw the words on a company's Web site or in a commercial promoting a new product or treatment. Some marketers may say their products are "FDA approved," but how can you know for sure?
FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by regulating human and animal drugs, biologics (e.g. vaccines and cellular and gene therapies), medical devices, food and animal feed, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.
But not all of these products undergo premarket approval—a review of safety and effectiveness by FDA experts and agency approval before a product can be marketed. In some cases, FDA's enforcement efforts focus on products after they are already on the market. This is determined by law.
The following facts can shed light on when the term "FDA approved" is appropriate after such a determination is made by the agency.
FDA does not approve companies.
FDA does not "approve" health care facilities, laboratories, or manufacturers. FDA does inspect product manufacturers to verify that they comply with good manufacturing practices.
Owners and operators of domestic or foreign food, drug, …facilities are required to register with FDA.
FDA approves new drugs and biologics.
New drugs and biologics must be proven safe and effective to FDA's satisfaction before companies can market them. FDA does not develop or test products; FDA experts review the results of laboratory, animal, and human clinical testing done by manufacturers.
If FDA grants an approval, it means the agency has determined that the benefits of the product outweigh the risks for the intended use.
FDA approves drugs and additives in food for animals.
FDA is responsible for approving drugs and food additives given to, or used on, over one hundred million pets, plus millions of poultry, cattle, swine, and minor animal species. (Minor animal species include animals other than cattle, swine, chickens, turkeys, horses, dogs, and cats.)
FDA does not approve pet food, but rather approves the food additives that are used in pet food. FDA has the authority to take action against pet food products that are in violation of the law.
FDA approves color additives used in FDA-regulated products.
This includes those used in food, dietary supplements, drugs, cosmetics, and some medical devices. These color additives (except coal-tar hair dyes) are subject by law to approval by the agency, and each must be used only in compliance with its approved uses, specifications, and restrictions.
In the approval process, FDA evaluates safety data to ensure that a color additive is safe for its intended purposes.”
Up to here, this is pretty much what the FDA guys have to say related to an approval process. In one word: Negative.
I also think the following statements, though related to human applications, make further clear that the FDA does not have too much of an involvement related to any mysterious food approval:
“FDA does not approve medical foods.
A medical food is used for the dietary management of a disease or health condition that requires special nutrient needs. An example of a medical food is a food for use by persons with phenylketonuria, a genetic disorder. A person with this disorder may need medical foods that are formulated to be free of the amino acid phenylalanine. A medical food is intended for use under the supervision of a physician.
Medical foods do not have to undergo premarket approval by FDA. But medical food firms must comply with other requirements, such as good manufacturing practices and registration of food facilities. Medical foods do not have to include nutrition information on their labels, and any claims in their labeling must be truthful and non-misleading.
FDA does not approve infant formula.
FDA does not approve infant formulas before they can be marketed. However, manufacturers of infant formula are subject to FDA's regulatory oversight.
Manufacturers must ensure that infant formula complies with federal nutrient requirements. Manufacturers are required to register with FDA and provide the agency with a notification before marketing a new formula.
FDA does not approve dietary supplements.
Unlike new drugs, dietary supplements are not reviewed and approved by FDA based on their safety and effectiveness. Most dietary supplements that contain a new dietary ingredient (a dietary ingredient not marketed in the United States before October 15, 1994) require a notification to FDA 75 days before marketing.
The notification must include the information that was the manufacturer or distributor's basis for concluding that the dietary supplement will reasonably be expected to be safe. After dietary supplements are on the market, FDA evaluates their safety through research and adverse event monitoring.
FDA does not approve the food label, including Nutrition Facts.
FDA does not approve individual food labels before food products can be marketed. But FDA regulations require nutrition information to appear on most foods, including dietary supplements. Also, any claims on food products must be truthful and non-misleading, and must comply with any special requirements for the type of claim.
Manufacturers are required to provide the serving size of the food and information about the nutrient content of each serving on the "Nutrition Facts" panel of the food label (or on the "Supplement Facts" panel for dietary supplements.)
FDA does not approve structure-function claims on dietary supplements and other foods.
Structure-function claims describe the role of a food or food component (such as a nutrient) that is intended to affect the structure or function of the human body. One example is "calcium builds strong bones”.
Dietary supplement firms that make structure-function claims on labels or in labeling must submit a notification to FDA. This notification must be submitted no later than 30 days after marketing the dietary supplement with the structure/function claim. Additionally, the notification must include the text of the claim, as well as other information, such as the name and address of the notifier. FDA does not require conventional food manufacturers to notify FDA about their structure-function claims.
Structure-function claims on dietary supplements carry a disclaimer stating that the claim has not been reviewed by FDA, and that the product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Conventional foods are not required to carry such a disclaimer.”
This lets me conclude that they don’t approve any animal prescription food, puppy or kitten food or dietary supplements for pets either.
Therefore my advice to you is this: The next time you see any pet food manufacturer making such a claim, think again. They may have some marketing gurus who are in a very bold fashion testing how long they can cash in on not better knowing consumers before they get caught. They also may be extremely profit driven and simply greedy if they are willing to take such a risk. But what risk am I talking about? The FDA states on this very same page only that “Misuse of FDA's logo may violate federal law. FDA's logo should not be used to misrepresent the agency nor to suggest that FDA endorses any private organization, product, or service.” So, it looks to me, making such bold statements doesn’t bear too much of a risk of prison time or heavy penalties.
As usual, it is all up to you, the educated consumer, to make the right decision. The pet owner who is smart enough to look beyond such misleading statements in order to figure out what else may be wrong with the actual product. Manufacturers offering quality products don’t need to rely on distracting the consumer with wrongful information. Their product, even in an overcrowded market as the pet food playing field, speaks for itself.
“FDA approved": Maybe you saw the words on a company's Web site or in a commercial promoting a new product or treatment. Some marketers may say their products are "FDA approved," but how can you know for sure?
FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by regulating human and animal drugs, biologics (e.g. vaccines and cellular and gene therapies), medical devices, food and animal feed, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.
But not all of these products undergo premarket approval—a review of safety and effectiveness by FDA experts and agency approval before a product can be marketed. In some cases, FDA's enforcement efforts focus on products after they are already on the market. This is determined by law.
The following facts can shed light on when the term "FDA approved" is appropriate after such a determination is made by the agency.
FDA does not approve companies.
FDA does not "approve" health care facilities, laboratories, or manufacturers. FDA does inspect product manufacturers to verify that they comply with good manufacturing practices.
Owners and operators of domestic or foreign food, drug, …facilities are required to register with FDA.
FDA approves new drugs and biologics.
New drugs and biologics must be proven safe and effective to FDA's satisfaction before companies can market them. FDA does not develop or test products; FDA experts review the results of laboratory, animal, and human clinical testing done by manufacturers.
If FDA grants an approval, it means the agency has determined that the benefits of the product outweigh the risks for the intended use.
FDA approves drugs and additives in food for animals.
FDA is responsible for approving drugs and food additives given to, or used on, over one hundred million pets, plus millions of poultry, cattle, swine, and minor animal species. (Minor animal species include animals other than cattle, swine, chickens, turkeys, horses, dogs, and cats.)
FDA does not approve pet food, but rather approves the food additives that are used in pet food. FDA has the authority to take action against pet food products that are in violation of the law.
FDA approves color additives used in FDA-regulated products.
This includes those used in food, dietary supplements, drugs, cosmetics, and some medical devices. These color additives (except coal-tar hair dyes) are subject by law to approval by the agency, and each must be used only in compliance with its approved uses, specifications, and restrictions.
In the approval process, FDA evaluates safety data to ensure that a color additive is safe for its intended purposes.”
Up to here, this is pretty much what the FDA guys have to say related to an approval process. In one word: Negative.
I also think the following statements, though related to human applications, make further clear that the FDA does not have too much of an involvement related to any mysterious food approval:
“FDA does not approve medical foods.
A medical food is used for the dietary management of a disease or health condition that requires special nutrient needs. An example of a medical food is a food for use by persons with phenylketonuria, a genetic disorder. A person with this disorder may need medical foods that are formulated to be free of the amino acid phenylalanine. A medical food is intended for use under the supervision of a physician.
Medical foods do not have to undergo premarket approval by FDA. But medical food firms must comply with other requirements, such as good manufacturing practices and registration of food facilities. Medical foods do not have to include nutrition information on their labels, and any claims in their labeling must be truthful and non-misleading.
FDA does not approve infant formula.
FDA does not approve infant formulas before they can be marketed. However, manufacturers of infant formula are subject to FDA's regulatory oversight.
Manufacturers must ensure that infant formula complies with federal nutrient requirements. Manufacturers are required to register with FDA and provide the agency with a notification before marketing a new formula.
FDA does not approve dietary supplements.
Unlike new drugs, dietary supplements are not reviewed and approved by FDA based on their safety and effectiveness. Most dietary supplements that contain a new dietary ingredient (a dietary ingredient not marketed in the United States before October 15, 1994) require a notification to FDA 75 days before marketing.
The notification must include the information that was the manufacturer or distributor's basis for concluding that the dietary supplement will reasonably be expected to be safe. After dietary supplements are on the market, FDA evaluates their safety through research and adverse event monitoring.
FDA does not approve the food label, including Nutrition Facts.
FDA does not approve individual food labels before food products can be marketed. But FDA regulations require nutrition information to appear on most foods, including dietary supplements. Also, any claims on food products must be truthful and non-misleading, and must comply with any special requirements for the type of claim.
Manufacturers are required to provide the serving size of the food and information about the nutrient content of each serving on the "Nutrition Facts" panel of the food label (or on the "Supplement Facts" panel for dietary supplements.)
FDA does not approve structure-function claims on dietary supplements and other foods.
Structure-function claims describe the role of a food or food component (such as a nutrient) that is intended to affect the structure or function of the human body. One example is "calcium builds strong bones”.
Dietary supplement firms that make structure-function claims on labels or in labeling must submit a notification to FDA. This notification must be submitted no later than 30 days after marketing the dietary supplement with the structure/function claim. Additionally, the notification must include the text of the claim, as well as other information, such as the name and address of the notifier. FDA does not require conventional food manufacturers to notify FDA about their structure-function claims.
Structure-function claims on dietary supplements carry a disclaimer stating that the claim has not been reviewed by FDA, and that the product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Conventional foods are not required to carry such a disclaimer.”
This lets me conclude that they don’t approve any animal prescription food, puppy or kitten food or dietary supplements for pets either.
Therefore my advice to you is this: The next time you see any pet food manufacturer making such a claim, think again. They may have some marketing gurus who are in a very bold fashion testing how long they can cash in on not better knowing consumers before they get caught. They also may be extremely profit driven and simply greedy if they are willing to take such a risk. But what risk am I talking about? The FDA states on this very same page only that “Misuse of FDA's logo may violate federal law. FDA's logo should not be used to misrepresent the agency nor to suggest that FDA endorses any private organization, product, or service.” So, it looks to me, making such bold statements doesn’t bear too much of a risk of prison time or heavy penalties.
As usual, it is all up to you, the educated consumer, to make the right decision. The pet owner who is smart enough to look beyond such misleading statements in order to figure out what else may be wrong with the actual product. Manufacturers offering quality products don’t need to rely on distracting the consumer with wrongful information. Their product, even in an overcrowded market as the pet food playing field, speaks for itself.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Behavior Problems in Pets: Fear of Fireworks
Another already very hot summer has arrived and with it come the holidays with fireworks. While they are awesome to watch for us pet owners the affect on our companions are quite different. Today’s comment deals with this problem and provides some background info as well as some suggestion as to how to make things better for our pets.
That a dog (or person) can be startled when surprised by a sudden loud noise is quite normal, as is an immediate fear response such as increased alertness and rapid heart rate. A show of fear when startled is a normal adaptive response that prepares a dog (or any species) to escape from a possible threat to its safety. In the natural state, this is a useful and possibly life-saving reflex. However in pets, the feeling and display of fear is usually not needed and can sometimes become harmful.
A dog’s excessive fear, or phobia, is damaging to its welfare. The behaviors that result from the fear, such as trembling, whimpering, panting, constantly seeking the owners attention (or protection), and attempting to escape from the noise, can cause injury to the dog and are stressful to the owner. This can be particularly frustrating when a pet over-reacts to fireworks even though it is clear that the stimulus that caused the problem is temporary and clearly of no threat.
A fear of fireworks and of loud noises generally is common in dogs and other pets and in many cases is accompanied by other anxieties, such as thunderstorm phobia or separation anxiety. Dogs with multiple anxieties appear be predisposed to such fears.
For many dogs, the age at which such a phobia develops is not known. Sometimes, even with older dogs, it can originate from being exposed to a sudden loud noise that is particularly disturbing. Some pets may have been exposed to stressful or loud noises when still very young, leaving a lasting bad memory. For fireworks, it may not be just the noise causing the problem, it may be the flash of light that accompanies the loud noise, or the strong sulfur smell that comes after the explosion, or it may be the suddenness or the frequency of the noise (e.g. an explosion or a screeching rocket).
An unfortunate difference between people and dogs who suffer from phobias is that in people we can ask questions and discuss and identify the root of the problem. This can be important in getting to a solution. Usually in dogs we cannot know how or when the phobia started, and so must work with the tools we have to help find a solution.
The most important aspect of solving a dog phobia problem is to manage and de-condition the behavior. Veterinarians and clinic staff to whom the owner turns for advice need to be able to advise the owner on what should and should not be done. In educating the owner it is important to remember that the goal is to change the pet’s association with the fireworks from negative and frightening to neutral, through a process of gradual desensitization.
What owners should do to help their dog is not as clear as what they should not do. The first step is to avoid doing anything that reinforces the behavior. For instance, if the dog runs away and escapes the noise, that behavior is reinforced. Similarly, the fear response will be reinforced if an owner rewards the behavior with extra attention to the dog through stroking it, or trying to reassure it in any other way. The opposite approach of becoming angry or reproaching the dog will also be counterproductive. One tactic that may be useful is playing a game with the dog to distract it from the fireworks, or having it play with another dog (as long as the other dog does not have the same fear).
Because it is beyond most owners to make the commitment to change what are usually strongly established canine behaviors, a veterinarian can dispense various products to help alleviate these phobias. Regrettably, the treatments that are available for dog phobias are very limited, none have been proven to work completely, and there are no drugs registered to treat fireworks phobias in dogs. Treatments for fear of fireworks fall into two broad categories: Drugs and alternative therapies such as dog appeasing pheromone and homeopathic treatments.
The drugs most commonly discussed in treating fear of fireworks include benzodiazepines, the alpha-adrenergic propanolol (generally administered with phenobarbitone), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). All of these have possible side effects, such as lethargy and sedation, some may cause vomiting and none have really been proven to work in relieving the fear of fireworks. In the case of SSRIs and TCAs, treatment needs to be started weeks ahead of the stimulus that causes the phobia. In many cases, this is just not practical. Acepromazine is not recommended because of the sedation it can produce, and it can also sensitize the dog to sound, potentially making the problem worse. In contrast, natural homeopathic remedies do not cause side effects and have received promising reports.
Homeopathy is a traditional area of medicine that has become established over centuries of use, and now appears to be making a resurgence in veterinary medicine. The leader in veterinary homeopathic remedies is HomeoPet, and reports suggest that its product TFLN (Alternative Remedy for Fear of Thunder, Fireworks & Loud Noise) has produced substantial improvement in dogs suffering from a fear of fireworks. This is the only treatment for fear of fireworks that has been tested in a placebo controlled study, described in a report by veterinary behaviorists in the Veterinary Journal.1 In this study, compared with baseline, TFLN produced a significant improvement (71%) in the severity of behavioral signs.
An interesting finding in this study was that the owners of dogs who received a placebo were instructed on how to manage their dog’s fear. Just this good advice alone was followed by a significant improvement of 65%: improvement that is consistent with the placebo response generally seen in behavior studies in dogs.
The improvement reported after starting TFLN matches the results of a survey of dog owners who used a slightly different HomeoPet product designed to treat anxiety. In this survey, 25 of the treated dogs suffered from more than one anxiety, one of which was either fear of fireworks and/or fear of loud noises. Of those 25 dogs, the owners reported that 23 (92%) benefited from treatment. These owners indicated that they would use the product again, providing substantial evidence for the client satisfaction that can come from use of HomeoPet products.
Regardless of the treatment used to reduce a pet’s fear of fireworks and loud noises, it is important to recognize that a single approach is very rarely adequate. Any treatment should be combined with every possible effort to institute constructive behavioral modification that can improve the welfare of the pet and reduce the stress on the pet and owner alike.
Contributed by: Author Tom Farrington MVB MRCVS VetMFHom
Cracknell NR, Mills DS. A double-blind placebo-controlled study into the efficacy of a homeopathic remedy for fear of firework noises in the dog (Canis familiaris). Vet J. In press
That a dog (or person) can be startled when surprised by a sudden loud noise is quite normal, as is an immediate fear response such as increased alertness and rapid heart rate. A show of fear when startled is a normal adaptive response that prepares a dog (or any species) to escape from a possible threat to its safety. In the natural state, this is a useful and possibly life-saving reflex. However in pets, the feeling and display of fear is usually not needed and can sometimes become harmful.
A dog’s excessive fear, or phobia, is damaging to its welfare. The behaviors that result from the fear, such as trembling, whimpering, panting, constantly seeking the owners attention (or protection), and attempting to escape from the noise, can cause injury to the dog and are stressful to the owner. This can be particularly frustrating when a pet over-reacts to fireworks even though it is clear that the stimulus that caused the problem is temporary and clearly of no threat.
A fear of fireworks and of loud noises generally is common in dogs and other pets and in many cases is accompanied by other anxieties, such as thunderstorm phobia or separation anxiety. Dogs with multiple anxieties appear be predisposed to such fears.
For many dogs, the age at which such a phobia develops is not known. Sometimes, even with older dogs, it can originate from being exposed to a sudden loud noise that is particularly disturbing. Some pets may have been exposed to stressful or loud noises when still very young, leaving a lasting bad memory. For fireworks, it may not be just the noise causing the problem, it may be the flash of light that accompanies the loud noise, or the strong sulfur smell that comes after the explosion, or it may be the suddenness or the frequency of the noise (e.g. an explosion or a screeching rocket).
An unfortunate difference between people and dogs who suffer from phobias is that in people we can ask questions and discuss and identify the root of the problem. This can be important in getting to a solution. Usually in dogs we cannot know how or when the phobia started, and so must work with the tools we have to help find a solution.
The most important aspect of solving a dog phobia problem is to manage and de-condition the behavior. Veterinarians and clinic staff to whom the owner turns for advice need to be able to advise the owner on what should and should not be done. In educating the owner it is important to remember that the goal is to change the pet’s association with the fireworks from negative and frightening to neutral, through a process of gradual desensitization.
What owners should do to help their dog is not as clear as what they should not do. The first step is to avoid doing anything that reinforces the behavior. For instance, if the dog runs away and escapes the noise, that behavior is reinforced. Similarly, the fear response will be reinforced if an owner rewards the behavior with extra attention to the dog through stroking it, or trying to reassure it in any other way. The opposite approach of becoming angry or reproaching the dog will also be counterproductive. One tactic that may be useful is playing a game with the dog to distract it from the fireworks, or having it play with another dog (as long as the other dog does not have the same fear).
Because it is beyond most owners to make the commitment to change what are usually strongly established canine behaviors, a veterinarian can dispense various products to help alleviate these phobias. Regrettably, the treatments that are available for dog phobias are very limited, none have been proven to work completely, and there are no drugs registered to treat fireworks phobias in dogs. Treatments for fear of fireworks fall into two broad categories: Drugs and alternative therapies such as dog appeasing pheromone and homeopathic treatments.
The drugs most commonly discussed in treating fear of fireworks include benzodiazepines, the alpha-adrenergic propanolol (generally administered with phenobarbitone), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). All of these have possible side effects, such as lethargy and sedation, some may cause vomiting and none have really been proven to work in relieving the fear of fireworks. In the case of SSRIs and TCAs, treatment needs to be started weeks ahead of the stimulus that causes the phobia. In many cases, this is just not practical. Acepromazine is not recommended because of the sedation it can produce, and it can also sensitize the dog to sound, potentially making the problem worse. In contrast, natural homeopathic remedies do not cause side effects and have received promising reports.
Homeopathy is a traditional area of medicine that has become established over centuries of use, and now appears to be making a resurgence in veterinary medicine. The leader in veterinary homeopathic remedies is HomeoPet, and reports suggest that its product TFLN (Alternative Remedy for Fear of Thunder, Fireworks & Loud Noise) has produced substantial improvement in dogs suffering from a fear of fireworks. This is the only treatment for fear of fireworks that has been tested in a placebo controlled study, described in a report by veterinary behaviorists in the Veterinary Journal.1 In this study, compared with baseline, TFLN produced a significant improvement (71%) in the severity of behavioral signs.
An interesting finding in this study was that the owners of dogs who received a placebo were instructed on how to manage their dog’s fear. Just this good advice alone was followed by a significant improvement of 65%: improvement that is consistent with the placebo response generally seen in behavior studies in dogs.
The improvement reported after starting TFLN matches the results of a survey of dog owners who used a slightly different HomeoPet product designed to treat anxiety. In this survey, 25 of the treated dogs suffered from more than one anxiety, one of which was either fear of fireworks and/or fear of loud noises. Of those 25 dogs, the owners reported that 23 (92%) benefited from treatment. These owners indicated that they would use the product again, providing substantial evidence for the client satisfaction that can come from use of HomeoPet products.
Regardless of the treatment used to reduce a pet’s fear of fireworks and loud noises, it is important to recognize that a single approach is very rarely adequate. Any treatment should be combined with every possible effort to institute constructive behavioral modification that can improve the welfare of the pet and reduce the stress on the pet and owner alike.
Contributed by: Author Tom Farrington MVB MRCVS VetMFHom
Cracknell NR, Mills DS. A double-blind placebo-controlled study into the efficacy of a homeopathic remedy for fear of firework noises in the dog (Canis familiaris). Vet J. In press
Friday, June 12, 2009
EPA scrutinizing Flea and Tick Products
According to June’s issue of the Veterinary Practice News (VPN), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently intensifying its evaluation of whether further restrictions on the use of spot-on flea and tick control pesticides are in order. With the measurement the agency aims to better protect our pets. Under review are both, veterinary as well as over the counter products.
The magazine reports that according to an EPA spokesman this all comes because of the recent increase in reported incidents: In 2008 44,000 plus potential incident cases with registered products were reported. By federal law, all EPA registrants are required to submit reports of possible adverse reactions if they are possibly related to the use of the registrant’s products. These reports are to be submitted regardless of whether the product was or was not used according to manufacturer’s instructions.
Flea and tick products are available in a variety of application media, such as spot-on’s, sprays, collars and shampoos, however, according to VPN, most EPA reported incidents are based on spot-on products, which is what the evaluation seems to be focused on.
Active ingredients in those products include amitraz, cyphenothris, dimotefuron, etofenprox, fipronilimidicloprid, metaflumizon, permethrin, pyriproxyfen and S-methoprene. The EPA according to the magazine claims, that the adverse reactions reported ranged from skin irritations to seizures and unfortunately in some cases were even fatal.
VPN further reports that the evaluation started out at mid April of this year with a few products from about 7 different manufacturers, but by now was by the EPA extended to include all EPA registered spot-on flea and tick products. The EPA on its website provides a complete list of all registered products.
I visited the agency’s website and apparently “Since the chart previously located on this page reflected only a portion of the numerous pet spot-on products available, EPA felt that pet owners and consumers might be led to believe that only those products listed were the focus of concern. In fact, EPA is intensifying its evaluation of all spot-on products and is providing a more comprehensive list of these products.”
At this point I feel that it is also important to reiterate that “EPA is not initiating a product recall of these products nor is the Agency suggesting that the products not be used. EPA recognizes the importance of the products in effective flea and tick control. EPA’s objective at this stage is simply to advise consumers and pet owners to exercise caution when using the products and to monitor pet behavior following their use, as some animals have experienced adverse reactions following treatment.”
Here is the agency’s view on all of this:
“Pets may experience adverse reactions from flea and tick control products, including spot-on treatments, sprays, collars and shampoos. However, the majority of reports to EPA are related to flea and tick treatments with EPA-registered spot-on products. Spot-on products are generally sold in tubes or vials and are applied to one or more localized areas on the body of the pet, such as in between the shoulders or in a stripe along the back.
Flea and tick products can be appropriate treatments for protecting your pets and your family’s health because fleas and ticks can transmit disease. While many people use the products with no harm to their pets, EPA recommends that pet owners take precautions when using these products. People should carefully follow label directions and monitor their pets for any signs of an adverse reaction after application, particularly when using these products for the first time. Also, before use of these products on weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown signs of sensitivity to pesticide products, EPA recommends that a veterinarian be consulted.”
Additional safety tips are available for taking care of fleas and ticks on your pet.
As VPN writes, it is all a “Matter of Perspective: One needs to temper the 44,000 potential incidents with the available units for sale in the field, said Mark Newberg, director of corporate affairs at Central Life Sciences of Schaumburg, Ill. In that context, he said, the number of adverse reactions turns out to be very small.
“And of those 44,000, I’m going to guess that the lion’s share are mild or moderate reactions,” he said.
Newberg said he believes that many of the reports involve consumers applying the product incorrectly. For example, he said, because of the ailing economy, some consumers buy a product for a larger animal and mete it out over several months instead of buying the proper dose.
“It may sound like something that everybody is preaching, but (it comes down to) the label directions,” Newberg said. “Nowhere on the label directions do you see, ‘Split up doses.’ It says very clearly, ‘Do not use these products on cats’ when they are designed for dogs. I don’t know how much clearer you can be.”
What more can be done?
“That’s exactly what the EPA meeting is for,” Newberg said. “Once we put the cards on the table, we will have the opportunity to look at the adverse reactions. Maybe there will be a sub-meeting or subgroup that puts together a task force to look at labeling. … They may come back after the meeting and say these instructions are very clear and maybe change the way adverse incidents are reported, so that numbers don’t skew one way or another.”
Whatever the result, Newberg said he is anxious to work with the EPA on this issue.”
Here are some reactions coming from the manufacturers mentioned in the VPN article: “Common misuses include pet owners applying a spot-on product dose that is inappropriate for the pet’s size and applying a product designed for a dog on a cat and vice versa, said Hal Little, DVM, director of field veterinary services for Merial Ltd. of Duluth, Ga. That is why following instructions and working with a veterinarian are so important, he added.
“The veterinarian is a very important gatekeeper,” Dr. Little said. “Clients should be working with their veterinarian, asking questions, talking about directions and about the products.”
Merial maintains that while the EPA noted a “sharp increase” in the number of reported adverse events associated with spot-ons, company records do not indicate such a case for Frontline.
“The number of adverse events reported per volume of sales has remained consistently low since the introduction of Frontline in 1996,” Little said. “Over 1 billion doses of Frontline have been sold, so there is extensive experience with the product in marketed use.”
Merial and other spot-on product manufacturers are working with the EPA. A meeting was to be held in May in conjunction with the Canadian health department, which has identified similar concerns.
Fort Dodge Animal Health of Overland Park, Kan., is working closely with the EPA to identify and resolve any issues related to ProMeris for dogs, spokes-man Ryan Noonan said.
“Before ProMeris for dogs was released to the market in 2007, it went through extensive clinical testing,” Noonan said. “Because ProMeris is a new product, there may be more questions related to its use, as compared to other available spot-on products that have been on the market for a number of years.”
Mark Levin, vice president of technical affairs at Sergeant’s of Omaha, Neb., said he thinks the increased number of reports can be tied to the fact that products traditionally sold through the veterinary channel are being sold over the counter.
“The one item we feel we at least need to get on the table … is that when (veterinary products) are sold to a consumer and the consumer has an issue with that product, they take it and the animal back to the vet,” Levin said. “The vets don’t necessarily report those adverse events back to the manufacturer. Whereas for our over-the-counter products, if a consumer has a problem with our product, they call us directly and we respond with those numbers to the EPA.”
In regard to reports of incidents involving Sergeant’s products, Levin said those numbers are low.
“We don’t feel good about even one case, and we constantly look at any opportunity that we can to improve our products across the board,” he said.
For example, Levin said the company has found cases in which consumers used the wrong size product or used the product on the wrong species. Levin said the company also found cases in which household pets licked each other shortly after application.
Melinda Fernyhough, DVM, Ph.D., manager of Scientific Affairs for Hartz of Secaucus, N.J., agrees that reading the label carefully is important.
“Hartz wholeheartedly en-dorses the EPA advisory’s call to action to pet owners regarding the importance of carefully following label directions and making informed decisions when selecting and using spot-on flea and tick pesticides,” Dr. Fernyhough said. “As the EPA states: ‘The pesticide label is your guide to using pesticides safely and effectively.’”
Fernyhough said that EPA-reported adverse effects for Hartz UltraGuard products for cats decreased in 2008 from 2007 and those for Hartz UltraGuard for dogs maintained the same low ratio of reported incidents to sales.”
While I was browsing around at the EPA’s website I followed the link “Taking care of fleas and ticks on your pet “ , where among other advice the agency makes a point of how to properly use flea and tick control products:
“To help minimize incidents that may be caused by product misuse, EPA is reminding consumers to always carefully read and follow all instructions on the label for these products and these Safety tips for pet owners:
Consult your veterinarian:
Before use on weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant, or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown signs of sensitivity to pesticide products; and
If your pet experiences an adverse effect.
If you use a spot-on product or any other pesticide on your pet, carefully read and follow the product label.
Use flea and tick control products only on the animal specified by the product label, for example, dog products for dogs only and cat products for cats only.
Follow any label prohibitions against use on weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant, or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown sensitivity to pesticide products.
Apply only the amount indicated for the size of the animal being treated.
Do not apply to kittens or puppies unless the product label specifically allows this treatment. Pay attention to the age restrictions for puppies and kittens on the label.
Monitor your pet for side effects or signs of sensitivity after applying the product, particularly when using the product on your pet for the first time. Do not apply spot-on’s to pets known to be sensitive to pesticide products.
If your pet experiences an adverse reaction, immediately bathe the pet with mild soap and rinse with large amounts of water.
Keep the package with the product container (such as individual applicator tubes). Also keep the package after treatment in case adverse effects occur. You will want to have the instructions at hand, as well as contact information for the manufacturer.
Besides spot-on’s, there are other pesticides registered for flea and tick control on pets. These include shampoos, collars, dust, and sprays. Consumers should apply the same precautions when using these products as recommended for spot-on’s. Pet owners may also wish to consult their veterinarian for advice and recommendations.”
Advice for Reporting Incidents
Keep the package with the product container (such as individual applicator tubes). Also keep the package after treatment in case adverse effects occur. The package contains the product label, which includes important information such as the EPA registration number and contact information for the manufacturer.
Report any adverse effects to the manufacturer, who is required by law to report it to EPA. Contact information can be found on the product label. In addition, you may report the incident to the National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC), 1-800-858-7378
Encourage your veterinarian to use NPIC’s Veterinary Pesticide Adverse Effects Reporting portal at http://npic.orst.edu/vet to report any incidents. This portal is not for use by the public.”
Updated information on the agency’s progress is frequently being made available at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/flea-tick-control.html
The magazine reports that according to an EPA spokesman this all comes because of the recent increase in reported incidents: In 2008 44,000 plus potential incident cases with registered products were reported. By federal law, all EPA registrants are required to submit reports of possible adverse reactions if they are possibly related to the use of the registrant’s products. These reports are to be submitted regardless of whether the product was or was not used according to manufacturer’s instructions.
Flea and tick products are available in a variety of application media, such as spot-on’s, sprays, collars and shampoos, however, according to VPN, most EPA reported incidents are based on spot-on products, which is what the evaluation seems to be focused on.
Active ingredients in those products include amitraz, cyphenothris, dimotefuron, etofenprox, fipronilimidicloprid, metaflumizon, permethrin, pyriproxyfen and S-methoprene. The EPA according to the magazine claims, that the adverse reactions reported ranged from skin irritations to seizures and unfortunately in some cases were even fatal.
VPN further reports that the evaluation started out at mid April of this year with a few products from about 7 different manufacturers, but by now was by the EPA extended to include all EPA registered spot-on flea and tick products. The EPA on its website provides a complete list of all registered products.
I visited the agency’s website and apparently “Since the chart previously located on this page reflected only a portion of the numerous pet spot-on products available, EPA felt that pet owners and consumers might be led to believe that only those products listed were the focus of concern. In fact, EPA is intensifying its evaluation of all spot-on products and is providing a more comprehensive list of these products.”
At this point I feel that it is also important to reiterate that “EPA is not initiating a product recall of these products nor is the Agency suggesting that the products not be used. EPA recognizes the importance of the products in effective flea and tick control. EPA’s objective at this stage is simply to advise consumers and pet owners to exercise caution when using the products and to monitor pet behavior following their use, as some animals have experienced adverse reactions following treatment.”
Here is the agency’s view on all of this:
“Pets may experience adverse reactions from flea and tick control products, including spot-on treatments, sprays, collars and shampoos. However, the majority of reports to EPA are related to flea and tick treatments with EPA-registered spot-on products. Spot-on products are generally sold in tubes or vials and are applied to one or more localized areas on the body of the pet, such as in between the shoulders or in a stripe along the back.
Flea and tick products can be appropriate treatments for protecting your pets and your family’s health because fleas and ticks can transmit disease. While many people use the products with no harm to their pets, EPA recommends that pet owners take precautions when using these products. People should carefully follow label directions and monitor their pets for any signs of an adverse reaction after application, particularly when using these products for the first time. Also, before use of these products on weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown signs of sensitivity to pesticide products, EPA recommends that a veterinarian be consulted.”
Additional safety tips are available for taking care of fleas and ticks on your pet.
As VPN writes, it is all a “Matter of Perspective: One needs to temper the 44,000 potential incidents with the available units for sale in the field, said Mark Newberg, director of corporate affairs at Central Life Sciences of Schaumburg, Ill. In that context, he said, the number of adverse reactions turns out to be very small.
“And of those 44,000, I’m going to guess that the lion’s share are mild or moderate reactions,” he said.
Newberg said he believes that many of the reports involve consumers applying the product incorrectly. For example, he said, because of the ailing economy, some consumers buy a product for a larger animal and mete it out over several months instead of buying the proper dose.
“It may sound like something that everybody is preaching, but (it comes down to) the label directions,” Newberg said. “Nowhere on the label directions do you see, ‘Split up doses.’ It says very clearly, ‘Do not use these products on cats’ when they are designed for dogs. I don’t know how much clearer you can be.”
What more can be done?
“That’s exactly what the EPA meeting is for,” Newberg said. “Once we put the cards on the table, we will have the opportunity to look at the adverse reactions. Maybe there will be a sub-meeting or subgroup that puts together a task force to look at labeling. … They may come back after the meeting and say these instructions are very clear and maybe change the way adverse incidents are reported, so that numbers don’t skew one way or another.”
Whatever the result, Newberg said he is anxious to work with the EPA on this issue.”
Here are some reactions coming from the manufacturers mentioned in the VPN article: “Common misuses include pet owners applying a spot-on product dose that is inappropriate for the pet’s size and applying a product designed for a dog on a cat and vice versa, said Hal Little, DVM, director of field veterinary services for Merial Ltd. of Duluth, Ga. That is why following instructions and working with a veterinarian are so important, he added.
“The veterinarian is a very important gatekeeper,” Dr. Little said. “Clients should be working with their veterinarian, asking questions, talking about directions and about the products.”
Merial maintains that while the EPA noted a “sharp increase” in the number of reported adverse events associated with spot-ons, company records do not indicate such a case for Frontline.
“The number of adverse events reported per volume of sales has remained consistently low since the introduction of Frontline in 1996,” Little said. “Over 1 billion doses of Frontline have been sold, so there is extensive experience with the product in marketed use.”
Merial and other spot-on product manufacturers are working with the EPA. A meeting was to be held in May in conjunction with the Canadian health department, which has identified similar concerns.
Fort Dodge Animal Health of Overland Park, Kan., is working closely with the EPA to identify and resolve any issues related to ProMeris for dogs, spokes-man Ryan Noonan said.
“Before ProMeris for dogs was released to the market in 2007, it went through extensive clinical testing,” Noonan said. “Because ProMeris is a new product, there may be more questions related to its use, as compared to other available spot-on products that have been on the market for a number of years.”
Mark Levin, vice president of technical affairs at Sergeant’s of Omaha, Neb., said he thinks the increased number of reports can be tied to the fact that products traditionally sold through the veterinary channel are being sold over the counter.
“The one item we feel we at least need to get on the table … is that when (veterinary products) are sold to a consumer and the consumer has an issue with that product, they take it and the animal back to the vet,” Levin said. “The vets don’t necessarily report those adverse events back to the manufacturer. Whereas for our over-the-counter products, if a consumer has a problem with our product, they call us directly and we respond with those numbers to the EPA.”
In regard to reports of incidents involving Sergeant’s products, Levin said those numbers are low.
“We don’t feel good about even one case, and we constantly look at any opportunity that we can to improve our products across the board,” he said.
For example, Levin said the company has found cases in which consumers used the wrong size product or used the product on the wrong species. Levin said the company also found cases in which household pets licked each other shortly after application.
Melinda Fernyhough, DVM, Ph.D., manager of Scientific Affairs for Hartz of Secaucus, N.J., agrees that reading the label carefully is important.
“Hartz wholeheartedly en-dorses the EPA advisory’s call to action to pet owners regarding the importance of carefully following label directions and making informed decisions when selecting and using spot-on flea and tick pesticides,” Dr. Fernyhough said. “As the EPA states: ‘The pesticide label is your guide to using pesticides safely and effectively.’”
Fernyhough said that EPA-reported adverse effects for Hartz UltraGuard products for cats decreased in 2008 from 2007 and those for Hartz UltraGuard for dogs maintained the same low ratio of reported incidents to sales.”
While I was browsing around at the EPA’s website I followed the link “Taking care of fleas and ticks on your pet “ , where among other advice the agency makes a point of how to properly use flea and tick control products:
“To help minimize incidents that may be caused by product misuse, EPA is reminding consumers to always carefully read and follow all instructions on the label for these products and these Safety tips for pet owners:
Consult your veterinarian:
Before use on weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant, or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown signs of sensitivity to pesticide products; and
If your pet experiences an adverse effect.
If you use a spot-on product or any other pesticide on your pet, carefully read and follow the product label.
Use flea and tick control products only on the animal specified by the product label, for example, dog products for dogs only and cat products for cats only.
Follow any label prohibitions against use on weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant, or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown sensitivity to pesticide products.
Apply only the amount indicated for the size of the animal being treated.
Do not apply to kittens or puppies unless the product label specifically allows this treatment. Pay attention to the age restrictions for puppies and kittens on the label.
Monitor your pet for side effects or signs of sensitivity after applying the product, particularly when using the product on your pet for the first time. Do not apply spot-on’s to pets known to be sensitive to pesticide products.
If your pet experiences an adverse reaction, immediately bathe the pet with mild soap and rinse with large amounts of water.
Keep the package with the product container (such as individual applicator tubes). Also keep the package after treatment in case adverse effects occur. You will want to have the instructions at hand, as well as contact information for the manufacturer.
Besides spot-on’s, there are other pesticides registered for flea and tick control on pets. These include shampoos, collars, dust, and sprays. Consumers should apply the same precautions when using these products as recommended for spot-on’s. Pet owners may also wish to consult their veterinarian for advice and recommendations.”
Advice for Reporting Incidents
Keep the package with the product container (such as individual applicator tubes). Also keep the package after treatment in case adverse effects occur. The package contains the product label, which includes important information such as the EPA registration number and contact information for the manufacturer.
Report any adverse effects to the manufacturer, who is required by law to report it to EPA. Contact information can be found on the product label. In addition, you may report the incident to the National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC), 1-800-858-7378
Encourage your veterinarian to use NPIC’s Veterinary Pesticide Adverse Effects Reporting portal at http://npic.orst.edu/vet to report any incidents. This portal is not for use by the public.”
Updated information on the agency’s progress is frequently being made available at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/flea-tick-control.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
