ProHeart6 … uh … let’s think about this one
By Gina Spadafori
June 13, 2008
Last week Dr. Everett Mobley at the Your Pet’s Best Friend blog was enthusing about the return of ProHeart 6. This week, after listening to the seminar veterinarians are required to take before prescribing the medication, he’s not quite so excited any more:
So, if you’d like to use ProHeart-6, all you have to do is schedule an extra appointment, get some extra labwork, prove that your dog is 100% healthy and in the prime of life, read your handout, and sign the release form stating that you understand it all (including risks of adverse reactions). You can visit their new website for the official line, but I think this means that we are paying for the privilege of doing “beta testing” for Fort Dodge Animal Health.
Do I think it’s safe? Probably.
Do I think it will work? I hope so.
Will I be using it? Maybe.
Read his entire blog post for the list of conditions he has to follow before prescribing ProHeart 6. You? You just have to assume all risk of the product “adversely affectings” your pet.
ProHeart 6, just to refresh everyone’s memory on this, was the subject of major whistleblower action involving the FDA. From a 2007 article in the Dallas Morning News:
The first hints of trouble came from vague warnings.
Veterinarian Victoria Hampshire heard she was “pushing too hard”; she was “alarmist.”
“When enough dogs die, this product will take care of itself,” a colleague said.
But Dr. Hampshire heard herself say: “I don’t know what I’m doing here then.”
What she was doing was her job. She kept count of side effects from animal drugs for the Food and Drug Administration. She made tallies, analyzed numbers and alerted supervisors when something seemed wrong.
And something seemed very wrong that spring of 2004.
A big drug maker had what seemed a star performer in Proheart 6, a three-year-old injected drug to prevent heartworm, a common parasite in dogs. Dr. Hampshire’s numbers showed that dogs were dying at alarming rates.
What happened next, and the price she paid for speaking up, spurred a U.S. Senate inquiry, shining a spotlight on complicated drug safety issues.
Here’s the rest. Hmmmm …. the FDA … corporate interests over consumer ones … hey, it’s just a few isolated incidents (if you don’t count incidents, that is, or share the information) … why does this sounds so familiar?
Given the FDA’s recent track record on protecting anyone, human or animal, from problems with food or drugs … well … I won’t be using any medication that doesn’t have a long-established track record for efficacy and a high level of safety. For me and my pets.
Thank heavens that my dogs have done well for years on their same heartworm preventive … and that I have a long-term proven combination of medications to control my asthma.
Yeah, but what happens when the drugs that are working for us, the well tested ones, are all produced overseas with no oversight? I’m very leery of four dollar prescriptions these days.
Comment by C.L.H. — June 13, 2008 @ 10:16 pm
Good point, CLH. We had a major Heparin recall in Canada recently, the source was
China and they used a filler which mimics the molecular structure of Heparin but has the opposite effect.
And the ones who got burned, besides researchers, were major pharmaceutical companies.
It’s easy, repeat after me: “Fort Dodge?” No, thanks.
Comment by Caveat — June 14, 2008 @ 7:25 am
Yeah, same thing in the U.S. European countries were also affected.
Comment by C.L.H. — June 14, 2008 @ 8:14 am
However, the heparin was the brand name stuff. I am afraid of all prescriptions, not just the generics. Got to check on everything.
Comment by Roberto — June 14, 2008 @ 8:28 am
“…but I think this means that we are paying for the privilege of doing “beta testing” for Fort Dodge Animal Health.”
Bingo!!! It’s what I’ve been saying for years about Ft. Dodge. They use the market to test new products. Now they’ve simply formalized the process.
Comment by Deanna — June 14, 2008 @ 9:41 am
proHeart6 killed my 4 year old golden retriever on oct. 16, 2003. It brought on autoimmune hemolytic anemia and liver damage, two of the leading reactions that caused deaths. It was suppose to be so safe, Fort Dodge denied it was causing all these reactions and deaths. now they are saying it i reformulat and the residue that was causing the reactions/deaths last time has been removed. It is so safe. But isn’t that what they said last time? Many of use felt our dogs were used as “lab rats”. Wnat to know more about it? Go to http://www.dogsadversereactions.com and click on the moxidectin section and read the stories under memorials and survivos 9and some of the survivors are still on drugs to this day, some have died.
Comment by sandra — July 3, 2008 @ 9:20 pm