Many assumed that video to have been the item we had been referring to in our shamelessly vague post, but it wasn’t.
The steps necessary to get Phase III moving were far trickier than anticipated, but we are happy to report our efforts have begun to bear fruit.
Though this is good news, it has become apparent we must take a small “cat nap” from the blog in order to ensure this opportunity does not go to waste. We will still be around on Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest but, for the next couple of weeks, we must prepare for our next move.
Wish us luck.
While in hibernation, we encourage you to look back through our catalog of nearly one-hundred posts.
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:
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.
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:
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:
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.
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.
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:
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:
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.
Bob Martin Clarifies: By “Remove the Flea Collars”, They Actually Meant “Keep on Shelves Until They Sell Out”
After receiving numerous calls from concerned consumers since France issued a ban on flea collars containing organophosphates, Bob Martin, a European producer of over-the-counter flea and tick products, announced on May 16, 2012 they would be “working with retailers in the coming weeks to remove the products and provide alternative products.” Despite this announcement, Bob Martin flea collars were spotted at a grocery store in Scotland on July 3, 2012 (pictured above) by BH Ambassador @Lulu_Lindi. When questioned via Twitter on when exactly the flea collars would be removed, the company responded with the following:
“we’ve voluntarily stopped selling the collars; the product hasn’t been banned; retailers may have residual stock”
Bob Martin added:
“any remaining stock that shops may have on their shelves will sell through but will not be replenished by us”
While we applaud Bob Martin on their decision to stop producing the products, the statement the company provided on Twitter conflicts with their press release claiming the products would be removed from shelves and replaced with alternative products. Sneaky sneaky, Bob. This means that the flea collars, found to be potentially toxic to children and deemed unacceptably dangerous by France, could potentially remain on store shelves elsewhere for years as the products sell out, or until the UK decides to ban the toxic plastic strips as well.
Read more about France’s flea collar ban and other animal industry updates from PoisonedPets.com:
BANNED: Flea collars are pulled off shelves in France, citing danger to pets and children [PoisonedPets]
Purina Recalls AquaMax Products, Expands Recall of Mazuri and LabDiet Feed Products [PoisonedPets]
Class Action Filed Against Monte’s Milo’s Kitchen [PoisonedPets]
In PetMate Lingo, “Warranty” May Be Better Interpreted as “Expiration Date”
An individual contacted us with the following account of an issue she experienced with a PetMate carrier. Two years ago, she purchased a soft, collapsible PetMate carrier for her 8lb cat, Boo. This June, her husband took Boo to the vet. Upon, returning, he was transporting Boo from the car to the house when the zippers of the carrier broke apart and Boo, startled, got out. The pair searched for their scared little girl all night long to no avail. They put up fliers, spoke to all the neighbors, put out food and water, set humane traps, enlisted others to help with the search but still failed to find Boo. The following day, around noon, a neighbor called with a sighting:
“I was at their home in less than 2 minutes and found warm blood and bloody paw prints. We were frantic but hoped she’d just hurt her paw.”
That wasn’t the case. They continued searching day and night without sleep or food. Their other cat cried at the window the entire time, refusing to eat as well. Two days later, in the evening they found their little girl behind a garage alive, but in obvious distress. Her leg was severely broken and the individual, who volunteers at a cat rescue, knew it would require amputation. Further inspection revealed the true tragedy, poor Boo’s entire abdomen (skin & muscle) had been forcibly ripped off, most likely caused by a car pinning her between it’s wheel and the curb, according to this individual’s Veterinarian.
“She mustered some meows for us but she was looking at several surgeries. We were looking at over $10k to save her and she would have been in extensive pain for 6+ months. Her temp was so low it wouldn’t register and several times before we had to make the call I thought she’d already passed. We spent all our bill money on vet bills. We can never unsee what we saw, but I wish we could.”
The couple contacted PetMate with this opinion:
“I’d like to let you know that your defective product caused this so you can make better products so people don’t have to go through what we did. I am holding on to this carrier in case you want to pay to have it shipped to you so you can look it over. If not I’m going to throw it away. We are beyond devastated by all of this and traumatized by how our little girl looked when we found her.”
This was PetMate’s response:
“Thank you for your email, and we are truly sorry for your loss. We understand that the loss of a pet, especially when they are cherished members of the family, is devastating.
We really appreciate you taking the time and extra step to let us know what happened. We have passed on your valuable feedback to our Product Development teams and are saddened as anyone when a beloved pet is injured in any way, as we are pet parents ourselves.
When I inquired about having the unit returned, it was determined that since the unit is two years old, it would be beyond the warranty instilled for this product line and not a necessary action. It was suggested that you could e-mail pictures and we could add them to the file. This would be up to you.
Our compassion is with you in this time of sadness and healing.
If I can assist further please let me know.
Sincerest Regards,
[Name Removed]
Consumer Services Supervisor”
We have shared this in sympathy for a devastated family:
“I would love you to tell her story so others know. If I would have known the carriers weren’t reliable past their warranty I would have replaced it every year! But I wasn’t made aware of this until that email from the company mentioned the warranty. I hadn’t even thought about it. I only wanted them to know they had a faulty product that caused a beloved pet to die in a horrific way with much pain and suffering so they could do better. But they don’t want to do better they just want to hide behind their warranty expiration. If they cared they’d want to see this.”
While we fear there is no legal recourse that can be taken against PetMate in this case, since the product did not directly cause the injury, we wish to stress members of Broken Hartz will be throwing out their hard-shelled PetMate carriers, well past warranty, and will seek another option.”
Lennox Euthanized by Belfast City Council, Backlash Ensues
After a two year legal battle, Belfast City Council euthanized Lennox, the family animal companion who never bit anyone, under Breed Specific Legislation. However, many questions remain. The council refused to return Lennox’s body or even the dog’s collar and many are questioning when Lennox actually died and how. New video surfaced of Lennox being evaluated by a behavioral expert hired by Lennox’s family while Alexandra Lightfoot, the dog warden who testified under oath she was terrified to be near Lennox, sits nearby and pets him. The video shows Lennox wagging his tail, sweetly taking treats and showing no signs of aggression despite being carefully taunted by the behavioral expert. Sinista DaCapo and Cypress DaKilla released a rap song and video expressing their outrage over Belfast City Council’s actions, which has gone viral. The Lennox Army is calling for an investigation into Belfast City Council. [Examiner]
Some of the latest from HartzVictims.org
These people treated 8 cats with Hartz. Only one survived. To the best of our knowledge, Adverse Events involving multiple animals are still not included in EPA studies. The EPA is trying to determine how to include these reports. [HartzVictims.org]
OTC Flea and Tick Product Activists Bid Farewell to BioSpotVictims.org
After eight long years, the highly informative resource on over-the-counter flea and tick products BioSpot Victims.org was removed by site owner, James TerBush. This is a very sad loss for all of us fighting this battle. You can read more about the site and its owner at TinyTimmy.org. Tiny Timmy followed up this piece with a welcome to Broken Hartz and a summary on how our mission came to be. All of us at Broken Hartz thank Mr. TerBush for his years of service to our community and for the factual information he provided which helped fuel the launch of our mission. [TinyTimmy.org]
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.
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”.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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:
The piece is very fair and balanced. If anything, it skews slightly more favorably to the manufacturers. Despite that, the publication of this article did not sit well with Hartz Mountain Corporation, resulting in The Center for Public Integrity publishing a follow-up article:
“Earlier this month, the Center received a five-page “open letter” from Hartz Mountain Corporation alleging that our 12/16/08 story, Pets and Pesticides: Let’s Be Careful Out There, contained inaccurate and misleading information about spot on flea and tick treatments for pets.”
The story of someone debating Hartz, then receiving an insulting, crap document in response is quite familiar to us. Though our affiliates’ crap document came from Dr. Melinda Fernyhough, this particular dispute was led by Hartz Mountain Corporation’s Dr. Marta Draper. We’d love to get our hands on this letter, but it is no longer available.
The Center for Public Integrity discusses Dr. Draper’s disputes and categorically dismisses her false accusations. This case is just one more instance of Hartz accusing others of being misleading when, in fact, they are the party guilty of this deplorable conduct.
We strongly encourage readers to take a moment to read both pieces from The Center for Public Integrity, one of the country’s oldest and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organizations with a mission statement quite near to our hearts:
“Our mission: to reveal abuses of power, corruption and dereliction of duty by powerful public and private institutions in order to cause them to operate with honesty, integrity, accountability and to put the public interest first.” – The Center for Public Integrity
Since then, our boards have been growing, becoming ever more populated with supporter submissions. We’d like to share some of those submissions with you today.
This first piece comes from less of a BH Warrior and more of a BH Compatriot, HartzKills.org.
We’ve been absolutely thrilled by the level of attention we’ve received from this excellent Hartz protest website that’s been in operation for years, but when this graphic was created in honor of our 13-day Twitter trend, we were over the moon!
Next up, we have a submission from one of our longest standing, strongest supporters; Lulu (@Lulu_Lindi on Twitter). Lulu’s involvement in our mission has earned her the title of BH Ambassador.
Continuing, the revelation Skelanimals has partnered with Hartz prompted active Hartz opponent, Boycott Hartz (found on Facebook and Twitter) to add the following graphic to its prolific body of protest compositions:
Though slightly newer to our mission; BH Warrior, Corina (@Rinarubee on Twitter), has made many contributions to the mission, including this important message for Hartz:
The last example of great Hartz Mountain Corporation protest art we will be sharing today comes from none other than BH Warrior, Guye (@Di_sss on Twitter). When it comes to BH Warrior art, Guye is the grandfather. He pretty much launched the artistic wing of our mission all on his own, inspiring us and others to follow suit. Here is just one of his many excellent creations:
Thank you to everyone out there that keep making Hartz Mountain Corporation protest art to add to the collection. Art has a way of reaching people in a manner other forms of communication cannot and, in the war against Hartz, we believe artistic expression will continue to play a strong role in achieving our goal.
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
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]
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
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.
RT @paige_doss: @BrokenHartzPets Put Hartz collar on my adult cat. She spiked a high fever, lost clumps of fur, vomited, refused to eat, ... 3 months ago
Happy New Year to all who've supported our mission in some way, shape or form. Without all of you, we would never have a chance of success. 4 months ago
@Di_sss Thank you very much, Guye. We look forward to a great 2013 together! =^..^= 4 months ago
The lab tech even said ‘we see this all the time’” – Hartz Victim
