Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Consumers from Toxic Pet Products

[Traci]

Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Consumers from Toxic Pet Products

New NRDC Analysis Reveals Flea Collars Create Toxic Chemical Residues on Pet Fur that Threaten Human Health

Read more: http://www.nrdc.org/media/2009/090423a.asp

[Auntie Debbie]

Hartz has been under fire for years for their bad products that have affected pets from their owners...so now that someone has come up with the notion that these products might not be safe around humans, it's time to go after these companies? If my continued touching these products on my pets or their affected fur can cause me harm, how much harm would they be causing my pet?

[Traci]

Actually, the NRDC has been going after the EPA for years trying to get them to recognize the true problems of organophosphates as well as other pesticides, in BOTH pet products and the risks to children since they handle the pets with the pesticide products applied on them. The EPA knows these chemicals are hazardous, they have mountains of evidence and studies reflecting as such, yet, they keep on registering them. It's ironic really, the EPA has limited criteria for testing pesticides in animal use, which are based on human toxicity "safety levels". Testing isn't done for the benefit of safe products for pets, it is done to ensure the pet products pose no health hazards to humans. There is SO much wrong with the methodology it's pathetic.

Don't blame the NRDC, they had a huge hand in getting the EPA to get the last two Hartz flea and tick products for cats off the market. They also have to, it seems, reduce themselves to the children's way of thinking when dealing with the EPA. In other words, the EPA are the real children running the show, and in order to get their attention, you have to play their childish game.