Mereja

Author: Marla Cone, Environmental Health News

  • Are Frontline and other spot-on flea and tick treatments safe for dogs and cats?

    Warning that the powerful poisons can endanger some dogs and cats, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will require new instructions and labeling for on-spot flea products.

    The products, including the popular Frontline and Advantage brands, are small vials of liquid pesticides that pet owners apply monthly to the backs of dogs or cats to kill fleas and ticks. The EPA began investigating the products after a sharp rise in the number of pets reported to be sick after they were treated.

    The yearlong investigation, conducted by a team of veterinarians assembled by the federal agency, concluded that certain pets – small dogs between 10 and 20 pounds – are most susceptible to the problems, which include rashes, vomiting, diarrhea and seizures.

    EPA Assistant Administrator Steve Owens said Wednesday that no products are being banned at this point, but “we’re going to be watching the situation very closely.”

    New instructions and warnings are expected on product labels within the next several months. If these steps don’t reduce the problems, “we will take more significant action. We will remove products from the market if we have to,” Owens said.

    Fleas and ticks can cause discomfort and diseases for many dogs and cats around the country. As a result, the on-spot treatments are commonly recommended by veterinarians.

    Many pet owners who use the treatments think they are applying medication to their pet, but they actually are treating them with potent pesticides, including permethrin, which also is used to kill pests on crops and yards.

    “These are poisons that we are applying to our pets,” said Owens, who said it is a personal as well as a professional issue for him because he owns two dogs and three cats. “Pet owners should exercise caution.”

    Incidents reported by consumers who used the products on their pets rose from 28,895 in 2007 to 44,263 in 2008, an increase of 53 percent in one year.

    Most of the problems were minor, such as skin rashes, but about 600 dogs and cats died in the incidents reported in 2008, EPA records show.

    Chihuahuas, shih tzus, miniature poodles, Pomeranians and dachshunds had the most reported incidents, according to the EPA report released Wednesday. For products containing cyphenothrin, those breeds accounted for 33 percent of the reported problems. For products containing permethrin, shih tzus, bichon frise, chihuahuas, yorkshire terriers and maltese were involved in more than 25 percent of the incidents. K-9 Advantix for Dogs contains permethrin and some Sergeant’s products and Sentry’s Pro XFC contain cyphenothrin. “Small breed dogs were more commonly affected with the number of incidents out of proportion to their popularity,” the EPA report says.

    The problem might be the dose. The agency is telling manufacturers to narrow the range of weights identified for their products.

    “We will make clear that certain products cannot be used on smaller animals,” Owens said.

    In addition, the investigation found that cats were often sickened when products intended for dogs were used on them. Permethrin is particularly dangerous for cats and is not used in any on-spot treatments for cats.

    EPA officials said they will meet with each manufacturer individually to go over the changes that the agency wants, such as more precise instructions regarding the proper dosage for pets’ various weights. Also, markings should distinguish better between cat and dog products, and similar brand names will not be allowed for both. New labels also would advise people to keep cats away from treated dogs for a period of time.

    Manufacturers seem willing to work with the EPA, so the changes are expected over the next several months, Owens said. “They realize this is a serious problem that they need to address,” he said.

    Merial, Ltd., a Georgia-based company that makes Frontline flea and tick treatments, said in a statement that it “will work cooperatively with the EPA to help pet owners to use our products safely.”

    The company, however, said the incidents were rare and minor. “The number of adverse events reported for Frontline has remained consistently low since the product’s introduction in 1996,” the statement said. Owens said the EPA’s investigation found incidents “all across the board,” with all brands and products.

    EPA officials said they cannot explain the sudden jump in reported incidents, except that it may be due to increased use of the on-spot treatments or more awareness among pet owners. The investigators could not verify that all the illnesses among the pets were actually linked to the products.

    “The incidents have not been verified and may have causes other than exposure to the pesticide,” the report says.

    In some cases, pet owners were misusing the products, but EPA officials stressed that most of the blame goes to the industry, not consumers, because of the poor labeling.

    “When used appropriately in most cases they are safe,” Owens said, but “the labels are unclear right now.” Owens said the actions announced Wednesday “are really just the first step.” The EPA also plans to require more rigorous testing of products, similar to the Food and Drug Administration’s requirements for animal medications. “We are not getting the kind of data we need” to predict whether pets will have problems with these products, he said.

    In addition, new on-spot products will be granted only conditional and time-limited approval so that side-effects can be investigated before the products are fully approved. Manufacturers also will have to disclose more information about the inert ingredients – the non-pesticides – in their products, and some of those ingredients will be restricted.

    More from The Daily Green

    Reprinted with permission of Hearst Communications, Inc

  • Chemicals used widely in cosmetics and fragrances are linked to ADD

    Children exposed in the womb to chemicals in cosmetics and fragrances are more likely to develop behavioral problems commonly found in children with attention deficit disorders, according to a study of New York City school-age children published Thursday.

    Scientists at Mount Sinai School of Medicine reported that mothers who had high levels of phthalates during their pregnancies were more likely to have children with poorer scores in the areas of attention, aggression and conduct. Children were 2.5-times more likely to have attention problems that were “clinically significant” if their mothers were among those with the highest exposure to phthalates, the study found. The behaviors correlated with high exposure are found in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and other so-called disruptive behavior disorders.

    “More phthalates equaled more behavioral problems,” Stephanie Engel, a Mount Sinai associate professor of preventive medicine and lead author of the study, said in an interview Thursday. “For every increase of exposure, we saw an increase in frequency and severity of the symptoms.”

    The connection was only detected for the types of phthalates used in perfumes, shampoos, soaps, nail polishes, lotions, deodorants and other personal care products. No behavioral effects were found for the phthalates used in vinyl toys and other soft plastics.

    A federal law that went into effect a year ago bans phthalates in children’s vinyl toys and other products. But there are no U.S. restrictions on phthalates in cosmetics and other personal care items. They are, however, banned in cosmetics sold in Europe. Manufacturers of the products maintain that the chemicals are safe after being widely used for about 50 years.

    Scientists on Thursday said the study has uncovered a new problem that could be related to phthalates — effects on a child’s developing brain. Until now, most research has focused on their potential to block male hormones and feminize boys or contribute to male reproductive problems.

    “Clearly environmental toxicants play a role in child neurodevelopment, and phthalates, in particular, have been understudied in this area,” Engel said.

    Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician at Mount Sinai and director of the Children’s Environmental Health Center, the chief advocate for the National Children’s Health Study and a nominee for a 2009 Heart of Green Award, called it “a new area of concern” about phthalates.

    “Clearly it needs to be replicated, as does any study that breaks new ground, but the study itself is very well done and very credible,” he said.

    How to avoid phthalates in cosmetics

    Phthalates are solvents that are often used in cosmetics because they help retain fragrances and help lotions penetrate the skin. Many nail polish manufacturers have already eliminated phthalates, which had been commonly used to make the polish flexible and durable.

    Nearly every human tested has traces of phthalates in his or her body, and women are most highly exposed. Fetuses are “uniquely vulnerable, particularly for endocrine disruptors,” she said. “But we are very concerned about the problem of post-natal exposure as well. The kids continue to be exposed as they grow up.”

    “There is sufficient evidence to be concerned about phthalates, and it’s prudent to reduce exposure as much as possible,” Engel said. “But they are so ubiquitous right now it’s hard to eliminate exposure without regulatory action.”

    Engel said people should “press legislators” to restrict phthalates in adult, as well as children’s, personal care products.

    Consumers who want to learn more about the ingredients of their brands of cosmetics can use a database compiled by the Environmental Working Group. However, manufacturers don’t always list phthalates on their labels.

    About the study

    The new study, published online in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, involved 188 children between the ages of 4 and 9 who were born between 1998 and 2002. Most were from East Harlem or the Upper East Side of Manhattan, and three-quarters of them were from low-income families.

    The children’s scores were based on the answers that their mothers provided to standardized questions commonly used by psychiatrists and other clinicians to help diagnose attention deficit disorders. The mothers responded to 130 questions designed to detect problematic behaviors on a 4-point scale ranging from “never” to “almost always” and to 86 questions on another survey designed to measure cognitive function, such as memory.

    Some effects were stronger in boys than girls, but the associations to the chemicals were still considered significant in the girls, Engel said.

    The researchers did not use doctors or other clinicians to evaluate the children. Instead, the findings were based on the mothers’ evaluations.

    “A parent’s report about a child’s behavior is certainly subjective,” Engel said. But she added that mothers have been found to be very accurate in assessing poor conduct, aggression and attention problems.

    The mothers were tested for phthalates during pregnancy, the most sensitive time for a child’s brain development. In a study published last year, Korean researchers linked childhood exposure to phthalates to ADHD.

    The researchers said they do not know how prenatal exposure to phthalates may lead to behavioral problems. But they theorize that it may be because the chemicals disrupt thyroid hormones, which are critical to an infant’s brain development.

    In April, the Mount Sinai team reported effects in the same group of children when they were newborns. The girls — but not the boys — with high exposure to phthalates had differences in alertness and orientation, two indicators of neurodevelopmental effects in infants, according to that study published in the journal Neurotoxicology.

    The new study raises the question of whether phthalates and other hormone-disrupting chemicals could be playing a role in the increasing rate of attention deficit disorders diagnosed in children. However, phthalates have been around for about 50 years, and it is unknown whether people’s exposure to them has increased.

    “The percentage of kids diagnosed with behavioral problems has increased over time and it’s not clear why,” Engel said. “It would be a stretch to attribute it all to endocrine disruptors. There are probably multiple different causes.” (Endocrine disruptors are a class of synthetic chemicals that mimic human hormones; phthalates are among the known endocrine disruptors.)

    The principal researcher for the study was Mary Wolff, director of Mount Sinai’s Center for Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research. The team also included two researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and a Cornell University scientist.

    Environmental Health News, one of The Daily Green’s trusted sources of information, first published this article. It is reprinted with permission.

    More from The Daily Green

    Reprinted with permission of Hearst Communications, Inc