From our friends at GreenPaws.org:
Green Paws and the Natural Resources Defense Council are prompting consumers to appeal directly to the Presidents and CEOs of big box retailers like PETCO and PetSmart to remove flea and tick collars containing the harmful chemicals tetrachlorvinphos and propoxur. This attempt to directly contact retailers is designed to add greater support for our formal petition with the EPA to ban tetrachlorvinphos and propoxur from pet products as well as our lawsuit filed in California against 16 major retailers who carry flea and tick products which are in violation of California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, which prohibits businesses from knowingly exposing consumers without proper warning to any chemical “known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive harm”.
Those interested in sending a message directly to these retailers can do so at the following link: http://bit.ly/grnpaws
NRDC blog posts relating to Green Paws
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/greenpaws.php
Our updated product guide:
www.greenpaws.org/products.php
Stumble it!
1 Comment Received
January 16th, 2010 @7:26 am
This new campaign from Green Paws and the NRDC to get major retailers to stop selling toxic flea products is a great idea.
Despite the fact that the EPA issued an Advisory last April concerning spot-on products, most stores and websites continue to sell these products without providing ANY warnings to consumers. That is really unacceptable!
I hope that Green Paws and the NRDC will consider expanding its Consumer Action Campaign to include ALL highly concentrated pyrethroid-based (e.g. permethrin, phenothrin, cyphenothrin, and etofenprox) spot-on products. These products, which are inexpensive and available over-the-counter in pet stores, supermarkets, and drug stores, were responsible for the vast majority of the 44,000 adverse incidents that were reported to the EPA in 2008.
The EPA hopes to announce the results of its investigation of spot-on products next month. It will also put forth a risk mitigation proposal for PUBLIC COMMENT. EPA public comment periods are usually 30 days, but I have urged EPA to extend it to 60 days for this important issue.
I have been in contact with the NRDC, the American Veterinary Medical Association(AVMA), the American Association of Feline Practitioners (AAFP), and the Veterinary Information Network (VIN) and have urged them to submit comments to the EPA when the public comment period becomes available.
If the NRDC, AVMA, AAFP, and other concerned groups and individuals were to petition the EPA to remove the highly concentrated pyrethroid-based spot-on products from the over-the-counter market — replacing them with products that have a high margin of safety in all species — it would significantly reduce the number of adverse incidents that are reported each year from these products and create a safer environment for toddlers who interact daily with treated pets.
If we fail to take advantage of the public comment period, the EPA’s risk mitigation plan will most likely be ineffective, putting children and pets at risk for years to come.
Please let the EPA know what you think of their risk mitigation proposal when the public comment period begins next month, and please ask your friends to do the same!
Leave A Reply