Talk

Advanced search

FDA warns against using Bravetco, Nexguard, Simparica, etc

(28 Posts)
Aurea Fri 21-Sep-18 09:08:36

https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/ResourcesforYou/AnimalHealthLiteracy/ucm620940.htm

OP’s posts: |
BiteyShark Fri 21-Sep-18 09:14:35

To be honest that link says nothing more than I expect for any medicine, human or canine.

The FDA considers products in the isoxazoline class to be safe and effective for dogs and cats but is providing this information so that pet owners and veterinarians can take it into consideration when choosing flea and tick products for their pets.

ALL drugs have the potential for side effects. Look on the sheet that comes with paracetamol. It's up to owners to weigh up benefits against potential side effects which they should be doing anyway.

I plan to continue to treat my dog with nexgard and always assess benefit versus possible side effects just as I do for anything else I give him.

Veterinari Fri 21-Sep-18 09:18:22

This is why those meds are prescription-only in the UK. All drugs have side effects.

And your title is totally inaccurate and misleading the FDA does NOT warn against using them.

BiteyShark Fri 21-Sep-18 09:19:39

Yes I did think the title was scaremongering.

Aurea Fri 21-Sep-18 09:52:03

IMO the FDA would not publish this unless they had serious concerns.

The drug companies are extremely powerful and will not be happy to be given negative publicity. The article also suggests recommends using alternative products.

An ingested, long-lasting pesticide with no antidote is asking for trouble IMHO.

Read into it what you like......

OP’s posts: |
geekone Fri 21-Sep-18 13:20:21

No, I don’t think you are understanding the FDA and it’s role.
I all drugs human or otherwise the FDA have to publish new findings. When new or potential side effects are found the FDA look at the data gathered by vets and make decisions based on the findings. The findings show that those products are fine for the majority of dogs and cats. If they didn’t they would be removed from market.
I get you are probably a “big pharma are evil” subscriber but for the same reason dogs don’t die in films it would be worse for the pharma companies to kill people’s dogs than a few humans it would cause an outcry.
The FDA are really strict on medicines in the US but all products come with side effects and it’s the risk we all take to be generally more healthy people and animals.

Deadbudgie Fri 21-Sep-18 15:09:08

Read the side effects of any drugs and it will scare you shitless. It’s always up to the relevant people weighing up the cost:benefits

Veterinari Fri 21-Sep-18 15:27:19

IMO the FDA would not publish this unless they had serious concerns.
And what’s your opinion based on?

The drug companies are extremely powerful and will not be happy to be given negative publicity. The article also suggests recommends using alternative products.
And those ‘alternative products’ are also produced by pharmaceutical companies so what would be the rational for scaremongering?

An ingested, long-lasting pesticide with no antidote is asking for trouble IMHO.
Do you have a background in pharmacology or veterinary medicine? Thought not.

Read into it what you like......

I read into it that you set a lot of store by your own uninformed opinion and want to scaremonger

TheCrowFromBelow Fri 21-Sep-18 15:56:17

Your title is totally misleading.

The FDA doesn’t warn against using them. It’s saying they may not be suitable for some animals with a certain medical history and you should take the advice of your vet.

Lonecatwithkitten Fri 21-Sep-18 20:47:31

If you read the data sheet of absolutely any flea product you will discover the risk of neurological signs listed.
The FDA is just providing a response to the media the VMD have done a similar response regarding lepto 4.
All prescription medicines ( and all the over the counter ones) have side effects. As do human products.

Floralnomad Fri 21-Sep-18 21:19:06

As others have said all drugs have side effects , my mums elderly cat has recently had to be pts due to catastrophic liver failure after about a week of standard treatment for hyperthyroidism, our vet said he had never seen the reaction before , should everyone else stop using the standard treatment for cats .

RedHelenB Fri 21-Sep-18 21:44:44

Dog lives his Nexguard!

Booom Fri 21-Sep-18 21:57:06

I'm not sure why people use flea drugs with such regularity. We have had dogs for 17 years and had fleas once (whixh tbh I think the cat brought in). They are very social dogs and do lots of playing. I never have seen the need to use the as preventative drugs. What is the rational?

RedHelenB Fri 21-Sep-18 22:12:41

It's not just for fleas but for worms too. I really don't want fleas in the house so use a prevention treatment.

Booom Fri 21-Sep-18 22:24:15

We've never had them in the house. found them on the dog. Treated all the animals
.Hoovered and changed bedding. No more problems. The only per to have had works was a dog we got from a rescue centre who came with them. Again treated all the animals and cleared up.

Booom Fri 21-Sep-18 22:24:40

works =worms

BiteyShark Fri 21-Sep-18 22:39:12

I'm not sure why people use flea drugs with such regularity.

Booom you prefer to wait for your dog to have fleas or show signs of worms before treating. I prefer to use regular medication so that any worms, fleas or ticks are killed (I use nexgard spectra). Having moved into a house with flea infestations I prefer to avoid that at all costs as it was very unpleasant. Given I live in a high tick area I prefer to kill them to reduce the relatively high risk of lymes disease. And for worms I prefer not to wait for my dog to show symptoms before treating.

For me the benefits are large compared to the relative small risk of side effects (of which my dog has had none with this particular medication).

Booom Sat 22-Sep-18 07:29:49

@Biteyshark I completely understand if you live in an area with ticks. My mums dog was very ill from a tick bite. (Unfortunately she did have a flea/ tick collar on but it didn't work. But that said I still would use one there)
In all honesty unless In a tick area it feels like a waste of money and potentially harmful particularly given the info on this thread. Like I said 17 years with pets and only one case of fleas that was easy to sort out. And at one point we had 4 pets (for about 9 years). So why risk it (in a tick free area!).

Vallahalagonebutnotforgotten Sat 22-Sep-18 08:35:48

But the thing about all oral tick protection is that the tick has to attach to be killed so there is still a risk of lymes . It does not stop your dog from being infected with worms just treats them when they get the worms. Owners are being guilted into giving powerful treatment when there are safer alternative and alternatives that do require a bit of effort but no risk to the dog at all.

Just for interest I worm count 6 dogs and in 8 years have only had to treat for worms once on one dog - think of all the chemicals my dog would have been having for no reason at all over that time period and the unnecessary risk that giving the chemicals to me dogs. I have owned dogs for over 30 years and have never ever had a flea on one dog ever.

There are huge scientific reasons why we need to be careful with our drug usage, in view of the environment and resistant to over use- we need to look at the bigger picture of this.

Oral protection is just so ott for the cause it is treating and as stated does hold a risk to the dog.

Worm count for worms, Seresto for ticks and fleas (If you must use chemicals) if you do want protection at least Seresto attempts to stops the tick attaching so the protection is higher from lyme disease.

Obviously everyone has the right to make their own decision BUT do make sure you know ALL the facts and risks.

Womers do not stop your dogs getting worms
Oral treatment does not stop ticks attaching to your dogs.

BiteyShark Sat 22-Sep-18 08:48:54

Obviously everyone has the right to make their own decision BUT do make sure you know ALL the facts and risks.

Vallahalagonebutnotforgotten I do know all the facts. I am not stupid and studied a bit of pharmacology in the past which I find fascinating. What annoys me about these threads is the implication that consumers of these products don't think about the pros and cons and would see this title and run about with our hands waving in the air saying those nasty pharmaceutical companies didn't tell me medicine can have side effects. If my dog had side effects then I would and have considered alternatives.

I know the tick has to attach but the drug kills the tick within 24 hours which minimises the risk. And for the seresto collar I have used it and the benefits didn't outweigh the risk because we found loads of live attached ones all the time. I didn't mention I have tried alternatives because I am happy with my choice and continue to monitor and discuss my choices with the relevant people, namely my vet.

BiteyShark Sat 22-Sep-18 08:51:35

Sorry, fleas within 24 hours but ticks up to 48 hours but I have noticed they are killed within a day.

Lonecatwithkitten Sat 22-Sep-18 09:29:45

The FDA's point is that we all live in different regions with different risk factors and different lifestyles. So there is no one solution that will suit every owner.
I live in a high risk Lyme and lungworms area so need to protect for these. We are also have several rivers and canals run through our region so vast numbers of our dogs swim so the vast majority of spot ons are not suitable. Very large numbers of my clients allow their dogs to sleep on their beds so seresto collar is not suitable. So that leaves bravecto, nexguard and simparica.
Cost comes into it to where you have a number of dogs yes doing a pooled faecal sample from all the dogs for a worm count is cheaper than worming they all, but this is not the case where you own one small dog.
Clients want effective safe products that protect them and their pets and the vast majority of clients will not tolerate seeing even a single flea, but they want this at the lowest possible cost.

Vallahalagonebutnotforgotten Sat 22-Sep-18 13:14:21

Bitey we will always disagree on this one smile

Vallahalagonebutnotforgotten Sat 22-Sep-18 13:17:53

ps recommended to get ticks off before 24 hours to prevent lymes.........

I love this - seresto is not suitable to have near adults beds but it is fine for the dogs to wear 24/7 or give stronger chemical orally - the irony smile

BiteyShark Sat 22-Sep-18 13:19:04

Vallahalagonebutnotforgotten I have no issues with people doing things their way so no treatments or only when symptoms occur or worm counts are positive.

What I object to is the assumption that people who choose to medicate don't understand the facts and are in the wrong.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in