What’s Really Golin On?

As the title suggests, we wish to provide an update to the post “What’s Golin On?”.

Those who have read that post are aware, on May 1, 2012; Hartz began releasing news of brand new products just in time for the 2012 flea season. Here are the examples we provided:

• BeaumontEnterprise.com
• YahooNews.com
• 5WPR.net
• PRWeb.com

The links in these press releases go to old products. This, combined with the fact we found no traces of new products at many different stores, caused us to believe Hartz was just making another false claim. Why did we make such an assumption, you say? Because Hartz had tried to do this back in 2009 with one of the same products they linked to in these press releases and the EPA slammed them.

---

(EPA Registration #2596-150 Amendment, Dated January 13, 2009 Page 4, Paragraph 1)

The EPA clearly states to Hartz, “Delete the following claims which suggest that the product is new, when it has been registered since 2000.”

---

The only other links provided in the press release examples above go to Hartz.com and a gallery of old Hartz application videos from the HartzUltraguard.com website:

So, why are we revisiting this topic?

As stated before, we at Broken Hartz make every attempt to speak truthfully. We have no interest in spreading false information and have come upon evidence there is a little more to this story than we first uncovered. Besides, the whole story doesn’t pan out much better for Hartz anyway.

The following video provides a walkthrough of the original press release from PRWeb.com. You’ll see evidence of our above claims regarding the links on this release going to old product information, however, this particular release (unlike the 3 other versions of the press release we cited) features an embedded YouTube video.

That embedded video is the key to getting to the bottom of this issue. Check out the walkthrough:

There you have it; Hartz indeed has a new dog product, though they make it quite hard to find evidence of their newest poison. Here is its labeling amendment data.

Furthermore, the active ingredient in Hartz’ new dog product, etofenprox, is certainly nothing new to the world of pesticides. In fact, Hartz has been using etofenprox for a while now in some of its cat products.

Also, it is very important to note they have not released a new cat product.

The etofenprox cat product featured on the new HartzUltraguardPro.com website (EPA Reg# 2724-504-2596) was named in the EPA Public Advisory, published in March 2010.

We went more in depth on this particular product in one of our Hartz Exposé posts, “Fun With Charts!”. This is a very interesting post because it highlights the fact Hartz’ problem seems to reside in its inert ingredients, not its active ones.

Moving on, now that we have cleared up confusion, we’d like to take a closer look at this recent Hartz commercial.* As usual, Hartz is blurring the line. You’ll also see, it looks like they’ve decided to go with a more “camera-friendly” representative than previously seen:

^{*Bonus points to the first individual that comments, letting us know how many explosion effects there are in this commercial.}

By including Hartz cat products and cat imagery in this new product announcement, Hartz is definitely making it hard for consumers to determine what is new and what is not. This is made even more confusing by the alternate version of this new Hartz commercial, found on the homepage of HartzUltraguardPro.com.

In this second video, near the end, the announcer states:

“To ultra-protect your dog within 15 minutes or ultra-protect your cat, and all for half the price of Frontline Plus or Advantage II, call now for your 3 month supply of new and improved Hartz Ultraguard Pro for only $19.95.”

As if these two commercials aren’t misleading enough, we fear the confusion won’t end there.

Those who follow us on Twitter, may have seen the following tweet a little while ago:

The reason for our trip was an individual had spotted new Hartz products in a store. As mentioned above, our previous searches for new Hartz products in stores had come up empty-handed, so we were off. Of course, some of us had other concerns:

BH Affilates checked many different stores: pharmacies, pet stores, grocery stores and big box retailers. We found some new Hartz dog product (as revealed above) but, only sparsely, and it was always heavily outnumbered by old Hartz crap, like in the photos below:

In this photo, you see Hartz’ new dog product (EPA# 2596-168), flanked by old crap.

Again, you see how outnumbered the new guy is.

Hooray! A coupon!

What makes this whole thing truly interesting is the new Hartz dog product was not the reportedly new product that had been spotted. The products that had been spotted featured silver and purple boxes.

The following products are not new. They are merely old Hartz products that have received new packaging and labeling.

These are examples of the products that had been spotted:

The first example is none other than Hartz cat product 272-504-2596. This is the same product featured in Hartz latest commercial, though the commercial utilizes a version of this product with its old packaging. This product has not been reformulated.

For evidence, please note the highlighted EPA registration number 2724-504-2596.

This is product #2596-150, the same Hartz product linked to from the original press releases that announced the arrival of new products, This product has not been reformulated.

Again, please note the highlighted EPA registration number.

As you can see, Hartz has even re-packaged its dangerous, tetrachlorvinphos-containing flea collars. These collars present a danger to humans, especially children, according to many reputable sources, including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). They have not been reformulated.

These newly packaged products feature improved labeling, but they are still nothing earth-shattering. Aside from that, seeing as how misuse is only a fraction of the problem, we fail to see how re-labeled products are going to recitfy the issue. In fact; we fear these new packages, combined with a new product announcement, are going to cause many individuals to think this old Hartz junk, including their ultra dangerous, out-dated, organophosphate collars, are something new and therefore operating with a clean slate. That could not be further from the truth.

Despite having found Hartz still had plenty shady actions to go along with these press releases, we did not like having stated something incorrectly. Of course, this could have been avoided if Hartz would contact us but, they don’t dare because it would only serve to highlight that for which they have no answers.

Regardless, that has caused our crew to re-double our investigative efforts. Because of that, we found many labeling amendments for newly registered products, though none were for cats. Most interestingly were two separate amendments for technical formulations of Fipronil:

Here are the labeling amendment documents for the above formulation:

http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticides/f?p=PPLS:102:692438572295901::NO::P102_REG_NUM:2596-172

Here are the labeling amendment documents for this alternate Fipronil formulation:

http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticides/f?p=PPLS:102:692438572295901::NO::P102_REG_NUM:2596-173

Looks like fipronil-based products are in Hartz’ future as well, but seeing as how so much evidence suggests the real danger comes from all the unlisted crap being shoved into these products, we’re not breathing any easier from this knowledge.

Lastly, we wish to state the post, “What’s Golin On?” will be left as it was originally posted. This will be done to allow individuals to see what our original assessment had been and that we do not wish to hide the error, we only seek to correct it. The post will, however, feature a bold header and footer, noting the crucial update so people will not miss the complete story.

Also, for those who are curious as to whether or not Penny got her wish:

See you next time.

=^..^=

Penny’s Finds #8: What About Bob?

Look out, dis kittehs got claws.

After last week’s Finds were posted showing how Bob Martin went back on its claim they would be replacing their flea collars in the UK with alternative products, some interesting information surfaced from other activists in our community.

Bob Martin posted the following on Facebook in 2009:

Within the above screen capture, Bob Martin states:

“All Permethrin Spot Ons ALWAYS contain clear warnings against use on cats as Permethrin is potentially lethal. On very rare occasions, cats have mistakenly been treated with Permethrin Spot On, sometimes with devastating consequences.”

As Tiny Timmy points out, Bob Martin acknowledges Permethrin is potentially lethal to cats, yet carries cat flea collars containing… what active ingredient? PERMETHRIN. According to the Veterinary Support Personnel Network (among others):

“Cats are more likely than dogs to develop pyrethroid toxicosis. This is due to the feline liver being inefficient at glucuronide conjugation. Glucuronide conjugation is needed to metabolize permethrin. The low concentration products approved for cats contain 0.05-0.1% of permethrin and do not seem to cause the signs that the concentrated (45-65% permethrin) canine spot-ons do.” [VSPN]

Bob Martin’s cat collars contain 456mg of Permethrin, 18% w/w (percentage of the substance by weight). True, this is not 45-65%, but it’s certainly not .05-.1% either. What I think is truly important to note here is

Permethrin is toxic to cats.

Symptoms of Permethrin poisoning in cats include tremors, seizures, difficulty walking and many cats have died or been euthanized due to Permethrin exposure.

Is Permethrin the only option for treating fleas and ticks on cats, making it necessary for Bob Martin to sell these products for the greater good?

Of course not.

There are countless other options available for preventing and treating fleas and ticks on cats, including vacuuming your home and laundering all animal and human bedding. That’s right, regular old doesn’t-cause-seizures vacuuming kills fleas in your environment, where fleas live, according to the EPA. Vacuuming kills eggs, larvae and adult fleas, eliminating them from carpeting. I’ve also heard very good things about Food Grade Diatomaceous Earth. If you or your Vet insist on using chemicals due to a severe infestation or for whatever reason, a vast amount of products with newer active ingredients and wider margins of safety exist and are mainly sold through Veterinarians.

Knowing this, why would anyone want to put this garbage on their cat? Why would any company claiming to love animals sell this product? Why is it glittery?

This picture of Bob Martin’s bling-bling toxic neck ring was taken by BH Ambassador @Lulu_Lindi in Scotland two weeks ago at ASDA, a wholly-owned division of Wal-Mart:

You may also be interested in reading what The Endocrine Disruption Exchange has to say about Permethrin’s effects on humans. [TEDX]

Tanks to Tiny Timmy and teh BH Warriors fur sending us tips and info. Do you haz news fur me? Meow at me on Twitter @bhpenny or email pennysfinds@gmail.com.

The Wonderful World of Search Engine Optimization

We at BH see many interesting search terms used by individuals, causing them to stumble upon our site. We thought it may be best to share some of these and offer assistance to those seeking advice. We hope these answers will help future Googlers.

10) hoax hartz is killing dogs

Perhaps this EPA data will help to settle your question. The following screenshots are from the individual reports for both of Hartz Mountain Corporation’s dog products named in the EPA Public Advisory, Published in March 2010 (EPA Registration numbers 2596-150 and 2596-151)

Of course, you must also remember these are only the deaths Hartz has actually reported for only two of their spot-on products, this has been going on for decades, these reports only reflect 2008, plus it is suspected the majority of incidents go unreported or are left out due to technical limitations. These are the untold numbers.

Comparitively, how did Hartz’ dog products stack up against the other dog products named in the EPA’s Public Advisory?

The following chart shows, if a dog experienced an adverse reaction to any of the Spot-On dog products listed in the EPA Public Advisory Published in March 2010, what the likelihood was (based on percentage of reported events) of a dog experiencing Death or a Major, Moderate or Minor event. As you can see, in the case of an adverse event, dogs were 2.5 times more likely to die from a Hartz product than any of the other brands found in the EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010. Hartz also topped the list for Major events and Moderate events, clearly making it the most dangerous of these products.

Likelihood of Death, Major, Moderate or Minor Event if Your Dog Experiences an Incident With a Manufacturer’s Product Listed in the EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010:

For more fun with charts, click back there.

9) why does everyone hate hartz

We imagine this person now knows the answer to that question.

8) melinda dr. krazy dynotaku

??????????????

7) is hartz campaign by competitors

Umm… no.

6) “i am brokenhartzpets

No, you’re not. We wish to state this next bit is pure speculation, however, this seems like a lame attempt at investigation by an individual resembling the following illustration:

5) why are all these people blaming hartz

Because Hartz is to blame.

4) should i buy hartz flea and tick powder or sergeant’s household flea and tick spray?

Let’s see… there’s Hartzy… or Sarge.

May we kindly offer a third option?

3) is hartz victims for real

2) hartz organization that fights the hartz corporation

Welcome, new BH Warrior!

1) only positive feedback on hartz drops pro for dogs no negative remarks!

Why research the product if you are so thoroughly convinced it’s safe and do not wish to see evidence to the contrary?

We find it amusing you used an exclamation point. It’s almost as if you had lost patience with Google after numerous failed attempts to find the “Holy Grail” you seek.

We also find it quite amusing you broke down and visited our site anyway.

=^..^=

Change the Station

We hope you enjoyed reading our last post, “Mixed Messages”. We will be re-visiting that topic in today’s post thanks to the latest crap to come rolling down from the “mountain”.

Meet the Hartz Facebook Flea & Tick Care Station:

So, Hartz is going to relieve consumer fears about buying the wrong products by offering their suggestions on what’s safe to use?

You probably know where this is going.

The system works like this. You tell Hartz if you have a cat or a dog, how old the animal is, how much it weighs and where you live in the United States. This “sophisticated” app takes all that data, analyzes it, gives you a coupon for good ole Hartz and makes a postcard for you to tell all your friends about the wonderful deal you just got on some reckless poison.

To be fair, the Care Station doesn’t always recommend Hartz. If you tell the app your animal is under the age or weight limit, it cautions you against using the products, employing cutesy animal graphics. Aww.

Of course, Hartz, has also accounted for the combination of underage and underweight at the same time! What attention to detail:

Okay, so, aside from the expected bias towards Hartz products, what’s the problem?

We’re glad you asked.

In our last post we revealed that Hartz has been sending out messages in direct opposition to their EPA approved labeling, specifically on the subject of age.

As a reminder, here is some of the advice Hartz offers on its Facebook Flea & Tick Education Tab, on the topic of appropriate age:

In this instance, the advice above matches with Hartz’ labeling, though Hartz does not go into nearly as much detail on what they consider elderly on their labels (but that’s a whole other post):

Keeping all this in mind, please watch the following video (for the record, you do not have to be logged in to Facebook to use this app and the music is our addition):

Yep. Although Hartz considers cats to be elderly at 7 years of age and they state on their labeling not to use the products on aged cats, they carelessly tell you to run out and choose from an assortment of Hartz flea & tick “treatments” and apply them to your cat of 10 or more years of age, well over the Company’s definition of “aged”.

If you’re wondering, the same results can be obtained if you select the “7-9 Years” option and, yes, the error occurs on the dog side of the fence too:

As soon as we saw news of this release, we made sure to let Hartz know what was coming:

With today’s post, we believe we delivered on that promise.

P.S. – More on Fitch later.

=^..^=

Mixed Messages

Earlier this week, those who follow us on Twitter may have seen the following tweet from us:

The “Ask Dr. Melinda” portion of Hartz’s Ultraguard website was scrutinized in the conclusion of our “A [sic] Education Tab Series” so, of course, we couldn’t resist hitting Hartz more than once on this topic:

Well, Hartz’ pride must have been hurt by this, causing us to put out the next tweet a couple days later:

So, what happened?

We’re not exactly sure but, as we’ve pointed out before; with 25 years combined experience, the Broken Hartz team is well-versed in the field of web design and it does not appear to have been a technical glitch. The section simply went from functional, to broken then back to normal.

The section appears to have been intentionally taken down some time between the conclusion of our “A [sic] Education Tab” series and the day we discovered the discrepancy, only to appear again after we mocked Hartz for this act.

This return sparked our curiosity as we again found ourselves taking in the advice of Hartz’ nefarious drone, Dr. Melinda Fernyhough. In this re-visitation, something previously unnoticed caught our eye.

On the subject of aged animals, both Hartz’ cat and dog product labeling for their flea “treatments” caution against the administration of these products on seniors:

This statement is echoed in the FAQ section of Hartz’ Facebook Flea & Tick Education Tab:

Despite these cautions, here’s what the “good doctor” had to say on the subject:

In the screenshot above, the question and Dr. Melinda’s answer read as follows:

“I have an elderly dog, is he too old for a [sic] topical flea and tick treatments and, if so, what do you recommend I should do now to control his fleas?

Your dog is not too old. In fact, it is important to provide effective flea and tick control for your senior dog’s health and well-being. However, if your dog has been diagnosed with an illness, consult your veterinarian before using any topical flea and tick product.”

Wow, Mel, that sounds like a reckless statement that may lead to improper use of Hartz’ products and, consequently, more needless injuries or deaths.

In the next screenshots, you’ll notice Dr. Melinda doesn’t flat-out give the green light to consumers to use Hartz’ flea “treatment” products on senior cats, though the sentence following her initial statement seems to suggest she had intended to claim Hartz’ flea “treatment” products for cats are safe to use on elderly cats in the same manner she did when referring to Hartz’ flea “treatment” products for dogs.

We believe Dr. Mel to have been spared from making this deadly error a second time solely due to her poor proofreading skills, which have been well documented, incidentally, throughout our mission’s history.

“I have a 16 year old cat, is she too old for topical flea and tick treatments and, if so, what do you recommend I should do now to control her fleas?

Topical treatments should not be used on senior cats. In fact, it is important to provide effective flea and tick control for your senior cat’s health and well-being. However, if your cat has been diagnosed with an illness, consult your veterinarian before using any topical flea and tick product.”

Well, which is it Hartz? These mixed messages seem to be causing more contradictions between your websites and your labeling which, as we’ve already pointed out, may cause the EPA to declare your products to be inconsistent with the Fedaral Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

That could be a problem.

=^..^=

Penny’s Finds #6

Hai Efurrybodies!

Though my segment has habitually offered a smattering of finds; today, I’d like to focus on one matter in particular.

Our mission is directed squarely at Hartz Mountain Corporation’s deadly flea and tick products because:

1. This is the brand with which our affiliates had an issue
2. We proved their resident veterinarian, Dr. Melinda Fernyhough, to be a dirty liar
3. We found Hartz flea and tick products to be the most deadly by far, in the case of an Adverse Event, based on EPA data from their 2010 Public Advisory
4. The Company is shady as hell

That being said, during our investigations, me and other BH affiliates come upon information concerning not just Hartz, but other Flea and Tick brands as well. This is part of the reason we do not recommend any particular product, advising people to speak with a reputable Veterinarian before applying any product to an animal. More importantly, we seek to drive the point home that all these products are likely to be unnecessary. Vacuuming, laundering, baths with baby shampoo, flea traps and flea combs do an excellent job of protecting your family. We also recommend researching your Vet and any products they recommend. If there’s one thing we’ve learned throughout this mission, it’s that you can never be too careful when choosing a good Veterinarian and products for your furbabies.

To illustrate this point, I’d like to share some findings on Frontline. Frontline is probably the most well-known flea and tick control product on the market, but it is not without problems. Though not as deadly as Hartz, the brand has its own myriad of complaints from consumers:

• Frontline complaints discussion [Amazon]
• More Frontline complaints [Consumer Affairs]

That’s a lot of complaints but, again, Frontline is probably the most popular flea & tick brand on the market. More sales means more likelihood of incidents, which is why we have resorted to percentages in the absence of hard sales data when compiling our charts.

Another matter to consider in the case of Frontline is the knowledge that counterfeits exist, potentially causing many incidents to be incorrectly attributed to Frontline. The counterfeits reportedly contain anything from simply water to toxic pesticides.

• Warning About Counterfeit Frontline [Amazon Discussion Board]
• Information on Counterfeit Pesticide Products for Cats and Dogs [EPA]
• Fact Sheet: Retailers and Counterfeit Pet Products (PDF) [EPA]

Also, I can’t help but notice these negative reports for Frontline seem to come primarily from internet based purchases, even though Frontline is not sold by Merial to anyone but licensed Veterinarians. To assume this means all internet versions of Frontline are counterfeit however would be incorrect. To showcase this point, I call back to a piece from the Veterinary Information Network I mentioned in my first “Penny’s Finds” segment. This piece talks about a Veterinarian who went undercover to expose the illegal sale of Frontline. I only shared Part 1 last time, but did you know this was a 3-part series? It is a very interesting read!

Veterinarian Goes Undercover to Expose Illegal Sales of Frontline:

• [VIN – Part 1]
• [VIN – Part 2]
• [VIN – Part 3]

Funny, we’ve only heard of counterfeit Frontline and Advantage, never Hartz or Sergeant’s. We can’t imagine why. *rolls eyes*

I’d like to finish this week’s Penny’s Finds with a reminder that Truthfairy is very concerned about Frontline.

That’s all for this week!

Tanks to teh BH Warriors fur sending us tips and info. Do you haz news fur me? Meow at me on Twitter @bhpenny or email pennysfinds@gmail.com.

Behind Closed Doors

We wish to expand on our discussion from Thursday’s posting.

While Hartz was busy lying to someone on Facebook, another conversation was taking place, hidden from view.

---

---

A few weeks ago we were contacted by a Hartz victim in Canada who had applied Hartz Ultraguard One Spot Treatment for Cats and Kittens on two cats. Both of these cats reacted to the product with neurological issues. Chewie, sadly, did not survive:

“We euthanized him after a 20 minute grand mal seizure. We couldn’t even hold him in the room. My boyfriend and I had to go to Chewie in the lab while one girl held him down. The vet said ‘touch his head, tell him you love him, and let’s do this quickly’. It was the worst thing I’ve ever witnessed an animal go through.” – Hartz Victim

Hartz may wish to deny this video, pointing out the public has no way of knowing what product or brand was used, if any, or if the individual that contacted us was just making the whole thing up for no other reason than to try and pin another death on poor old Hartz.

While it’s true we have not met this individual face-to-face, those familiar with our blog should be aware we know our way around the internet and are not in the habit of accepting claims at face value. Immediately upon contacts of this nature, our team of investigators search for corroborating evidence.

Through research, we discovered:

• The name given checks out as a real name of a person living in the specific city in Canada this individual claims as their residence.
• Through IP address confirmation, this individual reached out to us from the specific city in Canada in which they claim to reside.
• Unknown to the individual, they confirmed personal, anecdotal information we had already discovered about the individual this person claims to be.

Additionally, this individual, aside from the video, has provided:

• Photos of the Hartz Ultraguard One Spot Treatment for Cats and Kittens package, claimed by this individual to be the culprit. This demonstrates the correct species product was used:
  
• The correct Health Canada number (26491) for the Hartz product claimed to be the culprit (This product matches up with US product EPA #2596-147, used by our affiliates)
• A phone number where this individual can be reached
• The case number Hartz assigned to this complaint after the victim contacted them
• Photos of Veterinarian notes on the case of Chewie:
  

  

Additionally, this individual has used their actual name through all correspondences with both us and Hartz. They would have gone to great lengths in order to stage what they claim has occurred and, in our opinion, their story more than sufficiently checks out. By the end of this post, we think you’ll agree.

As we’ve already mentioned, this individual contacted Hartz:

“The first thing the Hartz guy said was ‘I’d hate to think there was some sort of cross contamination or worse, if the wrong product was in the wrong packaging’. I thought that was a pretty random thing to say…” – Hartz Victim

Of course, that statement isn’t so random if you know Hartz has had packaging mix-ups in the past for Hartz Ultraguard One Spot Treatment for Cats and Kittens.

In the following screenshot, you’ll see the individual in question reiterated what Hartz said on the phone to the Company’s Facebook account. The Hartz Facebook team made no attempt to dispute that claim:

You’ll notice in this particular screenshot, at the beginning of corresponding with Hartz, the victim had hopes this would get resolved appropriately, though doubts were already forming. Regarding this conversation, the victim says:

“At this time I was still very upset and did not want to fight, I wanted answers. As you can see, I didn’t get one.” – Hartz Victim

Moving on, you’ll notice in the Veterinarian’s notes above, they assert an opinion that Chewie suffered from what appears to be Permethrin poisoning. There is not supposed to be any Permethrin in Hartz Ultraguard One Spot Treatment for Cats and Kittens (2.9% Methoprene), though it is found in Hartz Ultraguard One Spot Treatment for Dogs and Puppies (2.9% Methoprene, 45% Permethrin).

You’ll also note, in the screenshots above, a toxicologist was consulted who supports the Veterinarian’s opinion concerning this case. It resembles Permethrin poisoning (or some other toxic exposure) despite there being no indication on the packaging of Permethrin’s presence or anything other than Methoprene, an Insect Growth Regulator, widely accepted to be safe.

Because of this, the toxicologist inquired if there was a dog in the house that may have been treated with a Permethrin product or some other toxic substance. The veterinarian consulted with the Hartz victim, then noted:

“Called [Hartz Victim]. Discussed info from toxicologist. Confirmed dog in house, however, he was treated with Revolution (Selamectin)”

Revolution is an FDA-Approved Animal Drug, for use on both cats and dogs. As the Veterinarian notes, Revolution contains Selamectin, which kills fleas and flea eggs, along with treating for mites and a variety of worms. It does not match the profile of a possible culprit in this case.

The Veterinarian and toxicologist’s findings followed in line with the Hartz representative’s readily-offered suspicion that perhaps Permethrin was mistakenly placed into Hartz’ cat packaging, causing the death of Chewie.

This prompted the individual in question to post these notes from their Veterinarian on Hartz’ Facebook wall:

After posting this information on Hartz’ Facebook wall, the individual in question reached out to us.

Here is where this already interesting case takes an even more interesting spin.

---

“Vet AND Toxicologist agree. The symptoms, timing of onset, even reputation of this product and brand – the only conclusion is that Hartz killed my cat The lab tech even said ‘we see this all the time’” – Hartz Victim

“This picture lasted exactly 7 minutes on the Hartz fb page before someone deleted it” – Hartz Victim

---

This was followed up privately shortly thereafter with the following revelation:

---

“I went back and it’s there!! People even slammed them in the comments… so weird. So I posted it, it was removed… then re-appeared?

I asked them in a public forem for a written apology [:)]

*forum

Can you see it from your page?” – Hartz Victim

---

No, we could not see it from our page, nor could we see it using various control methods.

Clearly, there was a discrepancy.

Here is a portion of what the Hartz Victim (represented in black) was seeing:

Here is what we were able to see:

So, it became apparent we were witnessing a different Hartz tactic. This tactic is a bit more advanced than Hartz’ typical course of action: deletion.

The flaw in this plan is people really don’t take kindly to a product that causes them to inadvertently sicken, injure or kill those they love.

These kinds of people have a habit of finding each other and uniting. Through that, there were individuals watching this case unfold from both sides of the privacy setting, exposing Hartz’ intent to lure this victim into thinking this comment had been left in the public domain when it had, in fact, been hidden.

Unfortunately for Hartz, this individual (represented in black) was on to them.

In the screenshot above, the victim states:

“Isn’t this form a good DM as it is only visable [sic] to some people?” – Hartz Victim

“time dated screen shots from another computer show this is not a public message.” – Hartz Victim

To this, a Hartz Facebook “prisoner”, probably long forgotten, made themselves known:

“[Hartz Victim], Hartz removed this picture from their page, so it’s no longer visible to the public. Basically, they don’t want others to know about how dangerous their products are so they can keep making a profit. Sad.” – [Name Removed]

So, we come back to Hartz claiming other sites are guilty of misleading the public while, at the same time, they hid Veterinary documents pointing to the very serious possibility of a deadly packaging error.

The likelihood something of this nature would be limited to one package is highly unlikely and we hope Hartz is taking a close look at what is happening with Health Canada product #26491, though we are not holding our breath.

The individual in question makes one last point on this posting, regarding Hartz’ request for contact information:

“Hartz has all my info and has been able to ‘reach out’ to me at any time.” – Hartz Victim

It has been days now since the individual in question called Hartz out on their Facebook grouping tactic, with no response:

“I believe I am just being ignored.” – Hartz Victim

In the meantime, we checked back on the posting that led to Thursday’s piece.

We notice Hartz has removed a comment since the time of our last entry. We have accented the comment in question in the following screenshot from June 27, 2012:

Here is a susbsequent screenshot, taken on June 30, 2012, showing Hartz’ decision to remove the comment, which had received 5 “likes”:

“Don’t use Hartz. It’s terrible for your pets” – [Name Removed]

Upon closer inspection, we noticed this posting consists of 7 comments, even though a Facebook glitch notes 10 comments in the preview of this posting:

It would appear Hartz has removed 2 other comments before we got any screenshots of this posting.

We wonder what else they chose to censor.

=^..^=

You Know How to Comment, Right?

Hello again, Readers.

It would seem Hartz has taken issue with all those speaking out against them and decided to make a public statement.

Of course, by “public statement” we mean “a statement made strictly within the confines of Hartz’ own Facebook page where they choose to block/delete commenting from us, other activists, countless Hartz victims and surely many, many others”:

The screenshot above shows a recent conversation on Hartz’ Facebook timeline. In it, a person asks for a comment from Hartz on recent photos and videos they have seen of animals having reactions, ranging from burns to death, due to Hartz products.

To this, Hartz responds:

“We understand how worrying stories and negative websites could be to a pet parent. There are many false stories and incorrect information out on the internet and other forms of media. So many stories and situations involve misuse of the products, such as layering multiple products, or involve products that are not even made by Hartz Mountain Corporation.

All flea and tick control products applied topically, whether sold over the counter or through a veterinarian, must be tested for safety and efficacy prior to registration with the EPA for marketability. Since Hartz Mountain is in the pet-product industry, the safety and well being of your pet is of extreme importance to us and each product is marketed with this in mind.

We stand behind all of our products and appreciate the time you have taken to contact us. For more information on Hartz Brand Flea & Tick products, please refer to http://www.HartzUltraGuard.com.”

This statement is junk.

Hartz tries to claim we, other activists, countless Hartz victims, various media outlets, the Humane Society, EPA, FDA, NRDC, reputable Veterinarians and others have all got it wrong. To back this up, all Hartz cites is one of their own websites, HartzUltraGuard.com. This website is essentially Hartz’ Facebook Flea & Tick Education Tab, which we have already thoroughly discussed.

Attention Hartz Mountain Corporation, you claim everyone but you has got it wrong, but you present no proof of your claims.

If you feel we are unjustly hurting your reputation, we wish to remind you comments have been enabled on our blog since day one.

You have always been free to speak up and debate us but, up until now, have been noticeably silent.

We strongly encourage you to comment on that which you find false.

We’d love to hear what you have to say.

---

UPDATE: WE DID A FOLLOW-UP PIECE TO THIS ENTRY.

---

Please make sure to read an important follow-up piece to this entry.

=^..^=

Penny’s Finds #4

In case you missed it
The chihuahuas in the video above, DJ & Gizmo, are two of Hartz Mountain Corporation’s newest victims. They were treated with Hartz UltraGuard Rid Flea & Tick Shampoo, purchased at Walmart. Neither animal survived. The video of these two victims has been shared on HartzVictims.org by the family as well. Here is an additional video of Gizmo. [Gizmo Poor Baby]

Oh, Look, Another Lawsuit Against Hartz
The latest lawsuit being filed against Hartz Mountain Corporation is on behalf of Scranton, Pennsylvania couple, Pattie and Thomas Koslowski, the nature of the suit being “Torts – Injury – Personal Injury – Product Liability”. Personal injury? It wouldn’t surprise us. What does surprise us is Hartz has requested a trial by jury. This hasn’t worked out well for them in the past.

Earlier this year, we wrote about the death of David Wilgus’s dog and the subsequent lawsuit filed in Indiana against Hartz and Walmart. Wilgus cited “Torts – Property – Property Damage – Product Liability” as the nature of the suit. The word “property” is, sadly, how our court system refers to animals.

If you have any information regarding these cases, please contact us. [Justia]

Diamond Pet Food Class-Action
Diamond Pet Foods Inc. and Costco Wholesale Corporation have been hit with a class-action suit in the state of New York by Barbara Marciano, who claims her animal companion, Jelly, died after eating dog food tainted with Salmonella. Affected consumers are encouraged to join the suit. You can find out more by visiting mah furriend, Mollie, at PoisonedPets.com. [Poisoned Pets]

Punk Rock Activists Jailed in Russia
Three alleged members of the punk rock feminist activist group, Pussy Riot, have been arrested in Russia under charges of hooliganism after staging a flash-mob style performance inside Moscow’s main Orthodox Church. The performance, which the band called a prayer, contained lyrics condemning the church’s support for Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin. In a classic debate over the relationship between church and state, many wonder if the girls would be in prison if the act did not include an (artistic) attack on Putin. If convicted, the girls face up to seven years in prison. The brightly-colored, balaclava-donned protesters have quickly become internet superstars, while Russia remains divided about whether or not the girls deserve such a harsh sentence. Broken Hartz members have varying political and religious beliefs, but we fully support all peaceful forms of anonymous activism, freedom of opinion, artistic expression and are opposed to the holding of prisoners of conscience. Many groups and political figures worldwide have been calling for the girls’ release. [Amnesty International]

Additional information is available at FreePussyRiot.org.

To hear some of the girls’ opinions on their mission, watch this video.

Birds of a Feather Dump Toxic Waste Together
The Hartz Consumer Group, on behalf of Hartz Mountain Corporation, is one of 70 companies found to be potentially responsible for the highly-toxic contamination of the lower Passaic River, which flows through some of the most industrialized areas of New Jersey. The Environmental Protection Agency is requiring the listed corporations to pony up more than $20 million in estimated recovery costs. [EPA]

Congressman Asks FDA to Ban Toxic Pesticide, Lindane, for Use in Children’s Lice Treatment
The insecticide Lindane was banned by the EPA for agricultural use in 2006 due to its toxicity to humans, but is somehow still approved by the FDA for use in lice and scabies treatment for children. Congressman Edward Markey is asking the US Food and Drug Administration to stop its use, due to research on its toxicity and ineffectiveness. That’s right: not only is it toxic, but it doesn’t work. Sound familiar? [Beyond Pesticides]

Tanks to teh BH Warriors fur sending us tips and info. Do you haz news fur me? Meow at me on Twitter @bhpenny or email pennysfinds@gmail.com.

Who is Broken Hartz?

We are all Broken Hartz.

Everyone who has ever suffered at the hands of the negligent, callous, profit-driven beast known as Hartz Mountain Corporation.

Everyone who has witnessed this company’s product lines: flea treatments, food and even toys sickening, injuring and killing animals in America, Canada and elsewhere.

Everyone who has ever suffered at the hands of Hartz Mountain Corporation’s like-minded counterparts.

Every animal they have sickened.

Every animal they have injured.

Every animal they have killed.

Every family they have destroyed.

Every person made to feel guilty by these reckless corporations.

Everyone they have lied to.

Everyone they have cast aside.

Everyone they have tried to silence.

Everyone they have threatened.

Everyone that has become aware of this issue, been shaken by it and inspired to rise up and take action.

We ask you to join with us and get loud.

If you’ve already joined us, get louder.

Together, we can do what the system has failed to achieve.

=^..^=