Tag Archives: veterinarian

July 3, 2012

Penny’s Finds #5

By brokenhartz

Generic Over-the-Counter Flea and Tick Medication Containing Tetrachlorvinphos (TCVP) Kills Family Dog [Video]
Derek Demo of CBS 12 News is warning the public that chemicals in over-the-counter flea and tick medications can be dangerous.

The CBS reporter spoke with Jessica Mentz, who recently lost her 1 1/2 year old Boxer, Rocky, after applying less than the recommended amount of a generic over-the-counter flea and tick spray. The main active ingredient in this spray was none other than tetrachlorvinphos, a chemical to which we have previously called attention. See: Tetra-who-vin-what?

Naturally, the manufacturer of the product takes no responsibility.

“They just told me they can guarantee it wasn’t their product. They’ve tested on their animals and it’s never happened.” -Jessica Mentz

Dr. James Esh, a local Veterinarian, strongly disagrees with the manufacturer:

“There are a number of products that are actually the older chemicals we had 30 years ago, when I became a veterinarian and some of those are very, very toxic.”

Broken Hartz applauds Mr. Demo on this piece for its clear public safety message. [KHSL TV]

Speaking of Old, Toxic Chemicals and Shady Companies
June Buggie the cat’s mom, Jen, experienced a close call due to some poor advice given to her from a PetSmart employee. She had come in for Frontline, but the clerk steered her away from it, recommending she treat her medicated dog DeDe with First Shield, the official flea & tick product of PetSmart’s in-house clinic, Banfield Pet Hospital. This treatment, which contains permethrin, is the same active ingredient in Hartz UltraGuard One Spot for Dogs and Puppies. Permethrin, as many of you know, is toxic to cats and, therefore, reputable Veterinarians will not even send someone home with a permethrin product if there is a cat in the house.

Thankfully, Jen knew about permethrin too and noticed the clerk’s error before using the product. First Shield is a Summit Vetpharm LLC product and, at one point, Summit was a direct sibling to Hartz Mountain Corporation, when both brands were primarily owned by Sumitomo Corporation. With Sumitomo selling off primary shares of both companies, the relationship has distanced, but Sumitomo still holds quite a bit of stock in both. In case you’re wondering, Sumitomo is a chemical manufacturer that, among other unsavory patents, holds the rights to none other than permethrin. For the record, recent studies have shown permethrin and all other pyrethrins, pyrethroids and pseudo-pyrethroids to not be as safe for dogs as once believed either.

Be sure to check out June Buggie’s full story on her sibling Rumpy’s excellent blog. [Rumpy Dog]

Meanwhile, on the subject of Banfield, we have nothing good to say. We became aware of them by chance during an incident with a detractor, who just so happened to be a Banfield employee, and were horrified by what we saw:

Note to Pedigree: Plastic is Not Part of the Food Pyramid
A voluntary recall was issued by Pedigree for a limited range of three varieties of their weight management canned dog food due to the discovery of pieces of blue plastic in the varieties cited. While we’re not applauding Pedigree, we feel it’s important for animal product manufacturers to receive some level of merit for having the willingness to acknowledge a problem, with seemingly little or no pressure from a government agency, rather than attempting to sweep the problem under the rug. Consumers can and should return the product for a full refund. [Life with Dogs]

For great information on manufactured pet food, please remember to check out Poisoned Pets. [PoisonedPets.com]

Tainted Chicken Jerky Treats from China and Product Liability
The Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog offers some information on product liability and pet supplies, pointing out it’s challenging to determine damages after a family loses their animal companion to a faulty pet product, since the law currently views animals as “personal property”. Damages are based on the animal’s fair market value and that is sad, to say the least. [Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog]

Lennox’s Family Will Not Continue Legal Action
The family of Lennox the dog released a statement saying they have chosen not to prolong Lennox’s suffering fighting a battle they cannot win. This is a sad, yet understandable, course of action and all of us at Broken Hartz thank the family for the attention they brought world-wide to Breed Specific Legislation so it may inspire change. [Examiner]

Website Shocked to Discover People Will Not Pay for Free Information
On a side note, the North Country Gazette has dedicated a lot of time to covering the story of Lennox. Broken Hartz, along with other organizations and tens of thousands of Lennox supporters, had been thankful for this service, but the editor is seemingly pissed off that their plan to draw more attention to this story succeeded, dubbing loyal, repeat visitors to their website as being nothing more than common thieves. Here’s why:

The “paper” is, apparently, a pay service with no pay wall wherein the “company” has chosen to employ a hysterical combination of the honor system, mixed with passive-aggressive threats (less passive, more aggressive) to extract “donations” to their organization. They even go so far as to blame the “abuse” of Lennox supporters for threatening the website’s livelihood. The editor launches into a tirade, claiming Google to be anti-Lennox due to NCG’s AdSense account being disabled seemingly as a result of the website receiving an overwhelming amount of traffic from Facebook. We guess NCG hasn’t figured out how to capitalize on their recent spike in traffic without Google’s AdSense service.

We cannot stop laughing at how bizarre this is and wish we had looked into this more when we first recognized their red, mid-article donation demands. The following article points to a case where North Country Gazette was up-in-arms with another website for sharing an article that turned out to have been “borrowed” from a Florida news organization by NCG. [PI Bill Warner]

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.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Legal Proceedings, Penny's Finds, RIP, Videos

June 30, 2012

Behind Closed Doors

By brokenhartz

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.

=^..^=

2 comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Facebook, Findings, RIP, Videos

June 4, 2012

Penny’s Finds #1

By brokenhartz

Hai, dis Penny.

Welcome to mah new weekly feature, “Penny’s Finds”. While on patrols, I often comes across tings dat is interestins, but may not be directly related to da missions. BH decided der was plenty of room in teh week for me to shares dis kind of stuffs anyway. Enjoys.

Dr. Peter Helmer: “They [over-the-counter flea and tick medications] are not as safe as the prescription products and you are going to spend a lot of money and we’re going to see you afterwards anyway”

Sentinel, a popular Veterinarian prescribed flea pill preventative, is on back-order. Dr. Helmer, a Veterinarian, is concerned animal parents will try over-the-counter flea and tick treatments in its absence, which he says are not as safe and more costly in the long-run. [10 News Tampa Bay]

Luka Magnotta taken into custody, Barbi Twins continue search for copycat killer

Two years ago, animal activists around the world worked tirelessly to identify alleged murderer Luka Rocco Magnotta and bring him to justice after several videos surfaced on YouTube of him brutally killing kittens, but police were busy with ‘more pressing matters’ until human body parts started turning up. Magnotta was taken into custody yesterday by German police after he was discovered Googling himself at an internet café in Berlin. However, animal advocates Sia and Shane Barbi continue the search for a copycat kitten killer still at large. [Examiner]

Dog dies after treatment with ProHeart 6 heart worm protection shot, Veterinarian’s professionalism called into question

A family recently lost their beloved dog and continue to search for answers. Read their story. [Justice for Jack]

“As a Hartz employee, you have the responsibility to ensure that our products are safe to use and that they meet or exceed our customers’ and our consumers’ expectations.”

Check out this Hartz training video. I feel much better now that I know they use hair nets. [Vimeo]

Veterinarian goes undercover to expose unethical sales of Merial’s Frontline

After being solicited by the aptly named WTF Wholesale Supply Corp, a Veterinarian-turned-secret-agent collects information on the slimy underworld of flea product brokers. [VIN News Service]

Poisonous chicken jerky treats will go away when people stop buying them

Despite receiving more than 800 complaints of dogs sickened due to chicken jerky treats and a growing grass-roots movement to have the products recalled, the tainted treats have remained on store shelves. When will the products be recalled? Steve Dale of the Chicago Tribune thinks the products will only be pulled when manufacturers stop profiting from them. [Chicago Tribune]

Here are some tips for what to do after your animal companion has been poisoned by pet food from Mollie at PoisonedPets.com. [Poisoned Pets]

Would you spray toxic chemicals on your lawn for a $40 gift card?

Despite warnings of possible danger to humans from environmental groups, 185 families in Maryland have volunteered to spray bifenthrin, a synthetic chemical derived from chrysanthemums, on lawns (yet again) for a continued controversial government Lyme disease study. The article mentions “keep pets away”. [PennLive]

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.

7 comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Announcements, Penny's Finds

March 24, 2012

A Tale of Two Doctors (and One Fairy)

By brokenhartz
Click this link for the previous article in our Truth Week series: Truthfairy in the Great White North

We’d like to conclude Truth Week by reviewing comments left on HartzVictims.org by Truthfairy, Dr. Melinda Fernyhough and Dr. Marta Draper.

We are not sure if Dr. Draper is still with Hartz but, for the time period in which these comments were made, she was Hartz’ Vice President of Research And Development.

Here are five posts, in chronological order, made on this excellent website:

 

 

What You Can Do (Besides Lawsuit) – December 5th, 2008

By: shannonbad

  1. “Here is the WhoIs info for Hartz’s purchase of Hartzvictims.com and Hartzvictims.net:
    Administrative Contact , Technical Contact :
    The Hartz Mountain Corporation
    jboehm@hartz.com
    400 Plaza Drive
    Secaucus, NJ 07094
    US
    Phone: 201.271.4800

    Hartz doesn’t have an email address contact info on their website (wonder why).

    Email them and let them know what happened to your pet! Ask them why they are interfering with hartzvictims.org by purchasing related domain names.

  2. Write a complaint to the Better Business Bureau. Here is a link: http://newjersey.bbb.org/WWWRoot/Report.aspx?site=89&bbb=0221&firm=12001623

    File a complaint with the BBB. If you can’t use the link then goto http://www.us.bbb.org and do an advanced search for “hartz” and use “Secaucus” (in the city field) and “NJ” (in the state field). Use Microsoft Word to check your word count (characters including spaces must be under 2030 characters).

  3. Contact your state consumer affairs division. Google it.
  4. File a complaint at the store where you got the product – insist on filing the complaint with a manager.
  5. Let everyone you know (friends, families, facebook, myspace, etc…) to AVOID Hartz products because they will harm/kill your pet. Don’t use the word “boycott” because that implies that you are objecting to Hartz products based on a political agenda. This is not political – this is a SAFETY issue!
  6. Here are some additional email addys I found for hartz:

    cciciliano@hartz.com

    mpetersen@hartz.com

    questions@Hartz.com

    legal@Hartz.com

    ksandie@hartz.com

    jcaperton@hartz.com

    rdevine@hartz.com

    mpeano@hartz.com

    vzhou@hartz.com

    qpwoei@hartz.com

    larry@hartz.com

    jobopps@hartz.com

    maxmarx@hartz.com

    aahn@hartz.com

    jrichardson@hartz.com

  7. Keep all the receipts for Vet care. Have your Vet give you a written diagnosis. Make sure it states he feels the use of the product is the cause of the animals need for the current medical treatment or death. Photo copy this and add it to all written complaints you send.
  8. * File a complaint/report with Hartz at 1-800-275-1414 Follow that with written complaints to the following:

    HARTZ Contacts
    Consumer Relations Department
    The Hartz Mountain Corporation
    400 Plaza Drive Secaucus, NJ 07094 USA
    Associate Director Consumer Relations and Technical Services The Hartz Mountain Corporation

  9. The Owners of Hartz
    Sumitomo Corporation of America (SCOA)
    Atsushi Nishijo Executive Vice President General Manager for the Americas
    Director & President, Sumitomo Corporation of America
    There Amerciacn offices- New York (Headquarters)
    Sumitomo Corporation of America
    600 Third Avenue New York, NY 10016-2001
    Tel: 212.207.0700 Fax: 212.207.0456
    Web site http://www.sumitomocorp.com/ Email contact at http://www.sumitomocorp.com/contact.html
  10. * Make a report with the EPA National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC): 1-800-858-7378,
    seven days a week excluding holidays, from 6:30 AM to 4:30 PM Pacific Time – or fax them on(514) 737-076 or send an email npic@ace.orst.edu (or do both)
    You can write to the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs at: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    Office of Pesticide Programs (Mail Code 7509C) Ariel Rios Building
    1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, D.C. 20460
  11. Also file a report with Pesticides: Topically Applied External Parasiticides
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 800) 858-PEST
  12. Also contact your State EPA office to file a report.
  13. Write your government officials ask them to bring pressure on the EPA over the tremendous numbers of complaints filed over the years about animals being seriously injured and/or dead after this product being applied by humans that do read and follow the instructions. Include your State Attorney General and Consumer Protection advocates for your state.
  14. The members of the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs and Product Safety:

    http://commerce.senate.gov/subcommittees/consumer.cfm

  15. The members of the House Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards:

    http://www.house.gov/science/committeeinfo/members/environment/

  16. File a complaint and have your Vet do so also wite Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration at the web address: http://www.fda.gov/cvm/contactcvm/contactCVM.html and following a link for “Report a Drug Reaction”. You can also submit an adverse drug reaction to the Center for Veterinary Medicine by telephoning 1-888-332-8387.
  17. File complaints with the FDA
    Animal Drugs, Devices and Foods
    Veterinarians and animal owners may report adverse drug experiences to FDA by:
    Telephoning the Center for Veterinary Medicine: 1-888-FDA-VETS
    IMPORTANT:The identities all persons and animals is held in strict confidence by FDA and protected to the fullest extent of the law.The reporter’s identity may be shared with the manufacturer or distributor unless requested otherwise.
  18. File a complaint/report with:
    Animal Biologics: Vaccines, Bacterins and Diagnostic Kits
    U.S. Department of Agriculture (800) 752-6255
  19. Call your local Poison Control (see the front of your phone book) and make a report.
  20. The HSUS would also like to keep track of these cases. Please send your contact information, the product name, a brief description of the health problem, and a brief summary of your veterinarian’s findings to The HSUS at the following address:
    The Humane Society of the United States Companion Animals Department: Flea Products 2100 L St. NW Washington, D.C. 20037
  21. Contact your local news stations, TV, radio, and newspapers about what Hartz did to your beloved companion.
  22. Make a written complaint to the main office of the store where you purchased the product from Do not give them the package until you’ve written down every number on it. Hartz and the store will ask you for the UPC code, the batch number and any other number they think of. The store may claim they need to test any remaining residues of the product you may have in the tube to see if it was a ‘bad batch.’ Let them, but only after you’ve gotten all the info off the box. Even if you don’t have the box or tube anymore, still make the complaint.

    MAJOR PET SUPPLY RETAILERS
    Petsmart Customer service email address custserv@SSG.PETsMART.com
    1-800-738-1385, EXT 2518
    PETsMART, Inc. 19601 North 27th Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85027
    Storehelp@petsmart.com

    Corporate Address:
    PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc. 9125 Rehco Road San Diego, CA 92121
    Telephone Number:(858) 453-7845 Phone: 1-888-824-PALS(7257) (Monday – Friday: 7am – 6pm PST)
    Email form http://www.petco.com/corpinfo_contact.asp?webt=0

    Walmart too!

    http://www.geocities.com/againsthartz/WhatUCanDo1.html”

 

 

First up for the Hartz team, Dr. Marta Draper:

 

 

In response to, “What You Can Do (Besides Lawsuit)”

By: Dr. Marta Draper on December 9th, 2008

“Dear Shannonbad,

I read your post and, in addition to other observations of inaccuracy, I noticed that many of the email addresses of Hartz employees are old or invalid and therefore I am providing below the relevant and updated email addresses of Hartz employees who can be of help to you. As the Vice President of Research & Development at Hartz, I take content posted to this site very seriously and want you and the readers of this site to know that I and my team of scientists, veterinarians and technicians are dedicated to providing safe products and I welcome pet owners to contact me directly at marta@hartz.com with any questions.

A couple other email addresses you may be interested in:

Nancy Moland, Manager, Consumer Affairs & Information Center at Nancy@hartz.com.

Dr. Melinda, Manager of Scientific Affairs via DrMelinda@hartz.com . She can also be reached via this online form: http://www.hartz.com/HUG/ask_dr_melinda.aspx

Or, you can call us at 1-800-275-1414.

Furthermore, in reading your statement, “avoid Hartz products because they will harm/kill your pet”, I realized that you may not be aware that Hartz has a long history of decades of safely managing flea and tick issues for domestic animals. In fact, the safety of our pets is the highest priority for me and everyone at Hartz. The active ingredient in our dog products, d-phenothrin, is considered and rated by the EPA to be among the safest available on the market, and just as safe as the products you can buy from the veterinarian. Similarly, the active ingredient in our Hartz Ultra Guard topical product for cats, etofenprox, has been given the highest safety rating by the EPA, with the lowest possible toxicity of any cat topical product available for sale today, either through your local mass merchandiser or from your vet. Simply put, our products are among the least toxic available.

If you have any other questions, please contact me.

Dr. Marta Draper”

 

 

Following this comment, a reader replies:

 

 

In response to, “What You Can Do (Besides Lawsuit)”

By: Trisha on December 28th, 2008

“Dr. Draper,

I understand that you believe your products to be safe, but you cannot ignore the heartbreaking stories, photos, and VIDEOS on this website. I can guarantee you that the distraught pet owners really do not give a hoot what the EPA says about etofenprox. It obviously needs to be re-evaluated. I am glad to hear you take the site seriously and that you have provided contact info, but I do not want to see ONE MORE PET die as a result of this POISONOUS product. I wish every pet owner could see this site, but its very existence is definitely a start. Dr. Draper, if you truly care about pets, you will TAKE THIS PRODUCT OFF THE MARKET to be reevaluated – and possibly – reformulated to meet better safety standards.

Sincerely,
Trisha Chokshi
trishachokshi@yahoo.com”

 

 

Two and a half years later, long after Dr. Marta Draper went back to her cave, another Hartz victim made this comment:

 

 

In response to, “What You Can Do (Besides Lawsuit)”

By: Jo Witt on July 29th, 2011

“The people at Hartz haven’t cared less about their Ultra Guard Flea & Tick Drops killing our dog. After providing them with the information they requested over a month ago, they became incognito after that. And our vet bills totaled over $909 trying to save our dog after his being poisoned by their drops.”

 

 

Broken Hartz wishes to point out:

Dr. Draper’s insulting introduction implies there are serious errors she wishes to address with shannonbad’s post, but she follows this up by only correcting some Hartz email address info, as if shannonbad being unaware of turnover at Hartz is something despicable.

The only other rebuttal made by Dr. Draper attempts to criticize shannonbad for not being aware of Hartz’ “long history of decades of safely managing flea and tick issues for domestic animals”.

Hartz has had a deplorable safety record since the eighties, riddled with injuries and deaths in countless beloved animals, human injuries, product recalls due to problematic formulations, product recalls due to mislabeling and product cancellations due to unsafe ingredients.

Lastly, Dr. Marta Draper does not specify not all Hartz Ultraguard products contain etofenprox. Ultraguard Pro and Ultraguard Plus contain etofenprox but Ultraguard OneSpot does not. It has always been formulated with (s)-Methoprene and its questionable inert ingredients.

To date, Hartz Mountain Corporation has not followed up on this matter.

We now move to this Hartz Victims post:

 

 

Losing Tigger

By: tigger4ever on December 17th, 2008

“It has been a month now since tigger has passed away, and I had no idea of how harmful the Hartz products are. If I would have known about all these sad stories, then I would have never given the treatment to him. He was 10, I gave him the Hartz flea and Tick treatment, and when I gave it to him, he started foming out of his mouth, I then washed it off of him with mild soap. The day after for about a week went downhill for tigger. He wouldnt eat, causing him to lose a few pounds. By the 3rd day after giving him the treatment, I took him to the vet. They gave him fluids, and meds. It didnt help, that night he could hardly walk, didnt touch his food, and it seemed like he was going blind. Then the next day tigger passed away….. After reading and researching about hartz I am so outraged, I went into a Kmart just the other day, where I had bought the treament from and there it sat on the counters. I read an article where the production was supposed to be stopped. I told the service counter about the products, so hopefully they will look into it further. I just wish I would have been more educated about hartz, I tried contacting them and they provide no email, just a number.”

 

 

The next day, tigger4ever added:

“We will always miss him. He was the best cat I have ever encountered, and Hartz took him away.”

Here’s what Dr. Mel had to say about all this:

 

 

In response to, “What You Can Do (Besides Lawsuit)Losing Tigger”

By: Dr. Melinda on December 19th, 2008

“Dear Tigger4ever,
I read your post and wanted to answer you personally. I am deeply sorry to hear about Tigger.
The Hartz UltraGuard flea & tick treatment product you refer to, sold at Kmart and many other retail outlets across the nation, contains an active ingredient which has been fully approved by the EPA and is actually classified in its lowest toxicity rating. It is one of the least toxic pet pesticide products available on the market today.
The Hartz Advanced Care flea & tick treatment in the news article you mentioned is referencing a prior product for cats, with a totally different active ingredient, which Hartz voluntarily removed from the market 4 years ago, and is no longer available.
I noted your frustration that Hartz had no email for you to contact, and wanted to let you know we are adding that service to our website soon. In the meantime, if you would give me your contact information, I’d like to reach out to you further regarding Tigger and answer any questions you may have.
Best,
Dr. Melinda”

 

 

Tigger4ever then provides an email address and there are no more comments on this post. Broken Hartz attempted to contact this individual, but the email address is no longer valid.

We find it interesting Dr. Melinda acts as if she knows what product was used even though Tigger4ever never mentions a specific product.

Also, in case you missed it, here is what really happened with Hartz’ “Voluntary Recall” in 2004.

Moving on, here’s the third post:

 

 

Poor Kitty

By: acoots0004 on December 28th, 2008

“Harts One Spot flea treatment killed my cat. It caused acute liver failure and it happend quickly. I had called the company and was told that it contained no pesticide, just give your cat a bath, I’m sorry she’s having a reaction. They took my personal information and told me that if I could get a refund if I sent the reciept and the leftover product. Why would I save a receipt, I didn’t know this was going to happen! The refund was the least of my worries. By the time I got her to the vet she was almost gone. I was told the best thing to do was end her suffering. A couple of days later the Harts Company called me back to see how my cat was doing. I told them she had to be put to sleep because of liver failure. The lady said that it had to have been going on for a long time. I told her she was healthy before using the product and hung up. I was furious!! I’ve warned all my friends & family. I wonder how many other beloved family pets have to die this way before something is done?”

 

 

Here comes Dr. Draper again:

 

 

In response to, “Poor Kitty”

By: Dr. Marta Draper on December 31st, 2008

“Dear acoots0004,
I am deeply sorry to hear about your cat, but want you to know that Hartz Ultra Guard One Spot does not contain anything that can cause liver failure or other internal damage.
The sole active ingredient in Hartz Ultra Guard One Spot is S-methoprene, an IGR (Insect Growth Regulator), which is effective in controlling young, pre-adult fleas only by impacting arthropod metamorphosis. This effect is unique to insects and other arthropod pests and has no impact on mammals. Additionally, the active ingredient is 100% non-systemic and does not pass into a mammal’s bloodstream.
The safety of S-methoprene has been well documented since 1975, when it was first registered; it is the same IGR that is used in the vet brand, Frontline. S-methoprene is even used by state and federal insect control programs to control mosquitoes in drinking water systems for humans. The use of IGR’s, such as S-methoprene, is actually recommended by both the ASPCA and Humane Society of America.
If you have any other further questions about how the product works, please don’t hesitate to contact me directly at Marta@hartz.com or our in-house vet, Dr. Melinda at DrMelinda@hartz.com.
Dr. Marta Draper, VP of R&D, Hartz”

 

 

The above response from Dr. Marta was made on the last day of 2008.

Here is the list of body systems affected by the Hartz Ultraguard One Spot product line (EPA Registration #2596-147) in 2008 according to this product’s individual report linked to the EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010:

 

 

The above list clearly provides evidence in direct opposition to Dr. Draper’s claims.

Not only were multiple internal systems damaged but, you’ll notice the liver was affected, albeit rarely. It’s important to remember, however, that many incidents do not get reported by consumers, the EPA does not include reports involving multiple animals and Hartz is strongly suspected of under-reporting incident occurrences. This means there are likely many more instances when this product has damaged an animal’s liver, as well as other internal systems.

Also, Dr. Marta Draper (like Dr. Melinda Fernyhough) tries to focus attention on (s)-Methoprene; although the EPA states, in multiple areas, its concern with Hartz Ultraguard products lies not with (s)-Methoprene, but with Hartz “inactive” ingredients.

Here is one example of the EPA’s opinion on this product:

(EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010, Page 16, Paragraph 2, Sentences 1-3)

“Incidents were reported for all products, including two products containing s-methoprene as the sole active ingredient. Companion animal safety studies were not required for these products because s-methoprene, which is an insect growth regulator, is of low toxicity to mammals. There are concerns for the potential toxicity of a formulant ingredient being responsible for toxicity of these products in cats.”

Lastly, you’ll notice this response form Dr. Marta comes three days after Trisha responded to Dr. Marta Draper on the post above, “What You Can Do (Besides Lawsuit)”. We feel this strongly suggests Dr. Draper did not miss Trisha’s reply to her comment: she simply couldn’t think of a response.

On to post four:

 

 

My Cat Mikki

By: shanna on January 12th, 2009

“I used Hartz on my 9 year old cat Mikki and a few days later he was lethargic and made the most horrible meow I have ever heard. I immediatley took him to the vet. I was told that he was poisoned by the flea medicine and was as close to death as he could get and this was not the first case they had. It was at least the 10th case they have had in 3 months. We were lucky, others had died. We were able to bring him home a few days later. Unfortunately, he is now back at the vets again. This time with a complication due to the poisoning. He now has a liver problem and has been at the vets for over a week. They say he should make a full recovery. I feel blessed that I have such a great vet. Others have not been so lucky. It is horrible that these products are still on the market.

Your pets are an extension of your family. They provide unconditional love and friendship. I feel for every single person that has lost a member of their family due to these harmful products.”

 

 

Dr. Melinda attempts to field this one:

 

 

In response to “My Cat Mikki”

By: Dr. Melinda on January 16th, 2009

“Hi Shanna,

I am the Hartz in-house veterinarian – I’m so sorry to hear about Mikki’s experience and glad to hear he is feeling better now.

Can you recall the name of the Hartz product referenced in your post, because the reaction you describe is not typical for any of our flea and tick treatments for cats? Usually, if Mikki was to experience any reaction to a Hartz flea & tick product, it would manifest within the first 12 to 24 hours after treatment and not take a few days to show symptoms. This gives us an indication that Mikki’s health issue would not be related to whichever flea & tick product you used but more likely due to a pre-existing condition, and I recommend that your veterinarian conduct diagnostic testing on Mikki to gain further insight.

Also, I must clear up any misunderstanding about the toxicity of Hartz flea and tick products. Unfortunately, there is a lot of incorrect and misleading information about the toxicity of Hartz products on the internet and I understand that it is easy for consumers to be confused. You should know that Hartz UltraGuard flea and tick topical spot treatments for cats are non-systemic. In other words, the treatment does not penetrate the skin, NEVER enters the blood stream and, therefore, could not cause Mikki’s liver problems. Once applied to the skin between the shoulder blades, through the process of translocation, the active ingredient in the product is carried across the skin on the surface of the cat’s body by the natural oils associated with fur follicles. When applied according to labeled instructions, this treatment is entirely safe. The formula contains the active ingredient etofenprox, which has been rated by the EPA in the lowest toxicity category of any pet pesticide active ingredient on the market; with lower toxicity than either of the active ingredients in the two leading vet brands.

I’m very interested in your case and would appreciate the opportunity to speak with your vet and offer any assistance. I would also like to be available to you to offer you any help regarding Mikki and to answer any questions you may have about Hartz products. You can reach me at DrMelinda@hartz.com.

Dr. Melinda
The Hartz Mountain Corporation”

 

 

The next day, shanna responded:

 

 

In response to, “My Cat Mikki”

By: shanna on January 17th, 2009

“Dr. Melinda,

What we used on Mikki was Hartz UltraGuard One Spot Treatment for cats. You state that the treatment never penetrates and is carried across the skin. What happens if he licks himself or licks another cat that has the treatment on their skin? Does it not enter his body at that time?

Mikki has been a VERY healthy cat. When I took him to my vet I told him what I had done in the last week in regards to Mikki. My vet was the one that told me he had been poisoned by the flea treatment. The problem that he had with his liver was because he lost a lot of weight due to the trauma his body went through when he was poisoned.

I find it hard to beleive that so many people have had problems with Hartz products and it is all “misleading information”.

Shanna”

 

 

Firstly, in the response above, Dr. Melinda states:

“I’m so sorry to hear about Mikki’s experience and glad to hear he is feeling better now.”

Dr. Melinda, Broken Hartz would like to know how this part of the victim’s statement suggests the animal is doing better:

“We were able to bring him home a few days later. Unfortunately, he is now back at the vets again. This time with a complication due to the poisoning. He now has a liver problem and has been at the vets for over a week. They say he should make a full recovery.”

Dr. Melinda’s reflex action of lying, leads her to make this false statement in typical clumsy fashion:

“Can you recall the name of the Hartz product referenced in your post, because the reaction you describe is not typical for any of our flea and tick treatments for cats? [sic]”

Here are listings of all clinical signs reported for every Hartz product listed in the EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This particular Hartz product is one of three products which are identical in terms of active ingredients, varying only in the contents of these products’ inert ingredients. This allows for compelling evidence to be derived in support of Hartz having an inert ingredient issue, which was discussed in Part Two of our Hartz Exposé, "Fun with Charts!"

 

The above lists from the EPA clearly show lethargy and vocalization to be among the most common reported clinical signs for all Hartz products named in the EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010. Not only that, this lie was totally unnecessary, seeing as how these signs are among the most-commonly reported for all products listed in the EPA’s Public Advisory published in March 2010. Dr. Melinda is just so predisposed to speak falsely, she can’t help herself.

Also, Dr. Melinda’s reply contains this little gem:

“Unfortunately, there is a lot of incorrect and misleading information about the toxicity of Hartz products on the internet and I understand that it is easy for consumers to be confused. You should know that Hartz UltraGuard flea and tick topical spot treatments for cats are non-systemic. In other words, the treatment does not penetrate the skin, NEVER enters the blood stream and, therefore, could not cause Mikki’s liver problems.”

Here are listings of all reported body systems affected by adverse reactions to the Hartz product listed in the EPA Public Advisory published in March 2010:

 

 

 

The medical defintion for the the term, "Hepatic" is: 1) Of, relating to, or resembling the liver. 2) Acting on or occurring in the liver.

 

 

 

 

This particular Hartz product is one of three products which are identical in terms of active ingredients, varying only in the contents of these products’ inert ingredients. While there were no reported events of the liver having been affected in the case of this product, clearly, other internal body systems were.

 

In response to Dr. Fernyhough’s statement:

“When applied according to labeled instructions, this treatment is entirely safe.”

Broken Hartz has already debunked this in a previous post:

(EPA’s DATA EVALUATION RECORD FOR ENHANCED SPOT-ON REPORTING CAT PRODUCT [2596-147], Page 4, the paragraph beneath Table 1)

“Of the 33 deaths reported following only dermal exposure, 16 animals were treated by a veterinarian. Eight of these animals were euthanized. Label directions were not followed for five of the 33 deaths.”

This means, 85.85% of all deaths associated with this product occurred when the product was used as directed and the route of exposure was limited to its intended method (dermally). Broken Hartz hardly considers that to be “entirely safe.”

Lastly, Dr. Melida states:

“The formula contains the active ingredient etofenprox…”

Not only hadn’t the victim named the offending product yet but, as already mentioned above, not all Hartz Ultraguard products for cats contain etofenprox; the exception being Ultraguard OneSpot, which turns out to be the actual Ultraguard product used by the customer. As mentioned above, Ultraguard OneSpot has always been formulated with (s)-Methoprene and an unknown list of other ingredients. This can be confirmed by visiting this portion of the EPA’s website and viewing the label amendment documents, linked at the bottom of the page.

To date, Hartz Mountain Corporation has not followed up on this matter.

We now move on to the fifth and final Hartz Victims post we will be discussing today:

 

 

NO MORE HARTZ…for the LYTLE’S

By: LytleDogs on April 22nd, 2009

“On April 18, 2009 we applied Sergeant’s Silver Flea & Tick Squeeze-On for Dogs on our 2 puggles (Daisy Mae & Jack) & our Lab Mix (Cody). All just have turned a year old in February and April.

HOW CAN THEY CONTINUE TO PUT A PRODUCT LIKE THAT ON THE SHELVES FOR CONSUMERS? I SURE WISH I WOULD HAVE INVESTIGATED THE PRODUCT ON THE INTERNET BEFORE APPLYING IT!!!

Shortly after we applied the product to Jack he started running around scratching & itching. He was whining and just could not sit still. Not knowing that it was a reaction to this product we waited thinking that it was something else making him “go crazy”. When he started foaming at the mouth we decided we better get him to the nearest vet. hospital. Before we could secure our other 2 dogs… Daisy started foaming at the mouth as well. We contacted the vet. hospital and talked to the emergency vet and she told us to bathe them with dishwashing liquid and then get them to the hospital. So after bathing all 3 dogs, loading them in the car and RACING to the hospital with 3 foaming, salvating, whining dogs and 2 distraught owners we find out that it’s the application for fleas & ticks causing this scare of a lifetime.

After a $261.80 hospital charge and several injections to each dog, a sleepless night and now today (the next day) I’m on the Internet searching this product and find all these people that have either lost or severely ill pets.

I AM OUTRAGED! Is our dogs in for more permanent health problems due to this product?

Other symptoms we have noticed SO FAR:
in the emergency room both puggles were shaking, twitching ears, twitching muscles

We had to contact the vet. hospital again this evening for more meds.

This product is causing pyrethrin poisoning on pets and the public should be told before more pet’s lives are lost!”

 

 

Dr. Draper and Dr. Melinda had given responding to Hartz’ victims a good try, but failed.

It was time to send in the fairy:

 

 

In response to, “NO MORE HARTZ…for the LYTLE’S”

By: Truthfairy on May 12th, 2009

“Hartz does not make Sergeants products. Sergeants makes Sergeants products. So the title of this posting….”No more Hartz for the Lytle’s” is very misleading. Lytledogs issue is with Sergeants, not with Hartz.”

 

 

While Truthfairy has made a technically correct statement here, there is a big problem with her comment (which we’ll address momentarily), but here is what was said on the comment feed in reply to her statement. You’ll notice this response was made on the same day as Truthfairy’s comment, so we are pretty confident she saw it:

 

 

In response to, “NO MORE HARTZ…for the LYTLE’S”

By: Matt on May 12th, 2009

“Dr. Melinda, you’re right…this posting is mistitled and that is not fair to Hartz. Fair is fair…and this title isn’t.

Could you bring us up to date, however, on the 956 adverse incidents the EPA says Hartz’s cat products were responsible for in 2008? And what about your dog flea and tick products–how many injuries and deaths in 2008? How many in 2007? How many so far this year?

And just how many cat and dog injuries and deaths do you people at Hartz believe is an acceptable number? Your spokesperson, John Mullane, told the USA Today in 2005 that 7,000 cat injuries and deaths were a small number compared to the number of applications…that was just prior to the EPA issuing a Cancellation Order on your products. Is that an acceptable number of cat or dog injuries and deaths–7,000?

Oh, one final question–what kind of flea and tick products do you use on your own pets?”

 

 

While Hartz does not make Sergeant’s Silver Flea & Tick Squeeze-On for Dogs (EPA Registration #2517-85), their parent company at the time, Sumitomo Corporation, holds the patent to Cyphenothrin (AKA GOKILAHT) and sells this negligent, out-classed chemical to Sergeant’s; therefore making them the responsible party, when all is said and done.

Sumitomo has inked a deal with Unicharm, a leader in the asian pet-care market, to hand over primary shares of Hartz Mountain Corporation to them. To the best of our knowledge, this deal gets finalized in May 2012, but Sumitomo will continue to hold a large amount of stock in Hartz and, of course, will continue to provide its reckless chemical offerings to them.

 

 

A listing of all Sumitomo’s dangerous Environmental Health Division Products can be found here.

To date, neither Hartz Mountain Corporation nor Truthfairy have followed up on this matter.

We hope you not only enjoyed Truth Week, but you found it to be informative as well.

As mentioned in “Truthfairy in the Amazon”, it’s quite possible Truthfairy is not Dr. Melinda, but the odds of Truthfairy being anything other than a Hartz troll is highly improbable.

Plus, Broken Hartz is not done investigating Truthfairy and will update our Readers if/when the time comes.

=^..^=

 

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Findings, Truth Week

February 27, 2012

Let’s Get “Technical”

By brokenhartz
Click this link for the previous article in our Hartz “Executive Summary” exposé: Misuse or Mislabeling?

Today, we’d like to draw attention to the contents of pages 2-4 of Hartz’ “Executive Summary of EPA Evaluation of Pet Spot-On Incidents”, titled “SUMMARY OF EPA SAFETY AND APPROVAL CRITERIA (SPOT-ON REGISTRATIONS)”.

Dr. Melinda Fernyhough deceptively tries to pass off this portion as coming from the EPA but, as we’ve already pointed out, no part of this pack-of-lies comes from anyone but Hartz Mountain Corporation.

Pages 2-4 of Hartz’ “Executive Summary” document is an excerpt (pages 14-16) from a larger Hartz document entitled “Hartz Technical Monograph Canine”, found on the “For Vets” Page of Hartzultraguard.com.

If you visit the “For Vets” Page link above, you’ll notice a link to the Hartz Technical Monograph Feline document as well. Our affiliate was happy to find this, as a document addressing cats would have been far more relevant to the case. Unfortunately, this link was mysteriously broken though Hartz has finally seen fit to post it in an effort to save face and make our claims appear inaccurate, but we all know about Hartz’ “broken” links by now, don’t we?

During the course of tracking down other “missing” information on the Hartz website, our affiliate revisited the “broken” link to the Hartz Technical Monograph Feline document on the “For Vets” Page of the Hartzultraguard.com website, mentioned above.  We will spare our readers the details, but wish to point out the canine version of this document is available through many different channels. The feline version proved far more elusive, but in the end it was uncovered. Since receiving our affiliate’s response, Hartz has tried to clean up these “loose ends”, but the “broken” link in their “For Vets” Page persisted until the beginning of May 2012.

In our affiliate’s case; this document, like its canine counterpart, has little relevance to Hartz’ “Executive Summary of EPA Evaluation of Pet Spot-On Products”, but it makes some interesting statements. Statements found in this document make it quite clear why Hartz preferred to keep it hidden until we forced them to post it:

(Hartz Technical Monograph Feline, Page 4, Paragraph 4, Sentence 5)

“Unfortunately, the likelihood of purchasing an inappropriate product or using a product incorrectly increases when veterinarians are not part of the equation.”

So, in light of this admission, why does Hartz continue to distribute its products through retail channels? It’s simple…

 

No conscientious Veterinarian would ever recommend a Hartz product.

 

Since the problem our affiliate experienced with Hartz’ product 2596-147, dozens of veterinarians were contacted. In the conversations, more than three-quarters of them immediately named Hartz as the worst offender in the flea and tick control market, unprompted, stating they have treated many animals that have had the misfortune of coming into contact with these poisons. As for the remaining 1/4 of veterinarians surveyed, when asked about Hartz directly, they did not have positive things to say either.

Also, this Feline Monograph document speaks highly of the benefits of newer flea treatment options, like neonicotinoids, phenylpyrazoles and semicarbazones.

(Hartz Technical Monograph Feline, Page 15, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2)

“New products have revolutionized flea control and provided veterinarians and pet owners with a broad range of weapons.”

So, why does Hartz continue to use dangerous pyrethroid and pseudopyrethroid products? To answer this, you have to look at who owns Hartz Mountain Corporation: Sumitomo Corporation. You may recall, we mentioned Sumitomo before.

Sumitomo Corporation has long been one of Hartz’ primary chemical providers but; in 2004, amidst another round in Hartz’ history of legal troubles, Sumitomo quietly acquired Hartz Mountain Corporation, creating an international pet-care business. With this move, Sumitomo began to profit on both the chemical manufacturer and end-user side of the pet-care industry.

With 26 of Sumitomo Corporation’s 31 patented Environmental Health Division Products being pyrethroids, it’s obvious why they have worked so tirelessly, despite the facts, to unethically defend the viability of these outdated, unnecessary, dangerous products.

Earlier this year, Sumitomo Corporation struck a deal with a major manufacturer in the Japanese pet-care market, Unicharm, and will transfer 51% of Hartz Mountain Corporation to Unicharm in May of this year. Sumitomo will still maintain a significant interest in Hartz Mountain Corporation after this date and will no doubt continue providing their outdated chemicals.

Still more to come.

Click this link for the next article in our Hartz “Executive Summary” exposé: Misuse Revisited

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Findings, Hartz Executive Summary Exposé

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 47 other followers

%d bloggers like this: