Seresto Flea and Tick Collar Reports of Sickness and Death Class Action

Since Seresto flea and tick collars first appeared, the complaint for this class action alleges, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has collected reports of roughly 2,500 pet deaths and more than 98,000 other incidents linked to the collars. This class action, against Bayer Healthcare, LLC, Bayer Corporation, and Elanco Animal Health, Inc., claims that the problem is the combination of pesticides used in the collars.

Two classes have been defined for this action:

• The Nationwide Class is all persons in the US who, during the fullest period allowed by law, bought a Seresto collar for use on a pet and not for resale.
• The California Class is all persons in California who, during the fullest period allowed by law, bought a Seresto collar for us on a pet and not for resale.

The complaint alleges, “Seresto’s danger stems from its unique combination of imidacloprid and flumethrin, two dangerous pesticides that, together, magnify their harmful effects.” This produces what the companies call a “unique pharmacological synergism” but the complaint alleges that in fact it “results in increased toxicity.” Even worse, the complaint alleges that the collars contain “a third, unspecified ‘Tradesecret’ ingredient.’”

The complaint alleges that imidacloprid can have effects on humans as well, “including skin rash, muscle tremor, difficulty breathing, vomiting wheezing lock jaw, memory loss, and renal failure.” It also claims that Bayer itself warned of the dangers of flumethrin to humans and domestic animals.

Canada has already banned the sale of the collars, the complaint alleges, “based on its conclusion that the Seresto collar posed too great a risk to animals and humans to be safe for use” while other countries have required warnings, such as the word “poison,” to be placed on the product.

“Despite recognizing flumethrin’s dangers,” the complaint alleges, the companies “seemingly never engaged in any independent unbiased testing of the collars, but rather employed company-controlled studies…” The studies that are publicly available, the complaint alleges, “make no effort to consider long-term use.”

The companies have not disclosed this information to consumers, the complaint alleges, still maintaining that the product is safe for pets and their owners. The complaint claims they “have not warned consumers because Seresto pet collars accounted for more than $300 million in revenue in 2019 alone.”

A good part of the complaint is taken up by reproductions of online reviews that speak of liver failure, seizures, other sicknesses, and death, some with images showing tumors or sores allegedly caused by the collars.

The House Committee on Oversight and Reform’s Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer policy undertook an investigation of the Seresto collar, which produced a report in June 2022. The complaint alleges the report recommends a recall of the collars because of the dangers to pets and humans.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer
Tags: Breach of warranty, Deceptive Advertising, Deceptive Labels, Design Defect, Fraud, Strict Product Liability—Failure to Warn