Seresto Report Podcast Script DANA: Hello! My name is Dana Baldwin and I work in the congressional and public affairs unit within the Office of Inspector General at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Joining me today is Gaida Mahgoub, a health scientist with the OIG. Thanks for joining me, Gaida! GAIDA: Thank you, Dana. Glad to be here. DANA: Today we’re discussing a new EPA OIG report that may be of particular interest to people who have dogs and cats. The report is titled “The EPA Needs to Determine Whether Seresto Pet Collars Pose an Unreasonable Risk to Pet Health.” Gaida, why did your team conduct an evaluation on this topic? GAIDA: We conducted this evaluation in response to multiple OIG hotline complaints. Listeners may recall the news media reporting several years ago that pets had died and fallen ill while wearing Seresto collars, which work by releasing two pesticides, flumethrin and imidacloprid, to control fleas, ticks, mosquitoes, and other pests. Over about a decade, the EPA received more than 100,000 incident reports regarding Seresto pet collars, and of those more than 2,500 involved pet deaths. Our evaluation had two objectives: to determine whether the EPA’s response to reported pesticide incidents provides assurance that Seresto collars can be used without unreasonable adverse effects on pets and to determine whether the EPA adhered to pesticide registration requirements, particularly relating to toxicological data, in its approval of the collars. DANA: Thanks, Gaida. You’ve used the word “incident” a couple of times. Could you please explain what that means? GAIDA: Sure. Pesticide incidents are exposures or effects from a pesticide’s use that are not expected or intended. Illness and death fall into that category. While the evaluation we’re discussing specifically concerns domestic animals, pesticide incidents can also involve humans, wildlife, plants, and bees. In 1992, the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs set up an Incident Data System for registrants of pesticides to report information about pesticide incidents. The system also includes data on incidents pre-dating 1992. DANA: Thanks for explaining. Can you say more about the EPA’s responsibilities as they relate to pesticides? GAIDA: Certainly, Dana. Federal law generally requires that pesticides distributed and sold in the United States be registered by the EPA. The process for EPA to issue an initial registration for a pesticide includes a review of chemistry, toxicological, and efficacy data required as part of the application. After initial registration, the EPA is responsible for reviewing each pesticide no more than 15 years later and assessing incident data. I should mention that the Seresto pet collar, along with one of the pesticides it contains, flumethrin, was registered in 2012. The other pesticide, imidacloprid, was originally registered much earlier, during the 1990s. DANA: Didn’t the EPA conduct its own review, in response to receiving so many complaints about possible harm to pets from the Seresto collars, before the OIG had completed this evaluation? GAIDA: Yes, while the OIG’s evaluation was underway, the EPA conducted its own analysis of incident data with the assistance of the Food and Drug Administration, which was completed in July 2023. The EPA said that many incident reports involving pet deaths were missing critical details. Consequently, the Agency reported it was unable to determine the causes of the deaths. The EPA also limited its active approval of the relevant Seresto pet collars’ registrations to five years and announced it will continue to evaluate any additional incidents reported over this period. DANA: Okay. Let’s pivot back to the evaluation the OIG just concluded. What did the team find? GAIDA: We found that, to date, the EPA’s response to reported pesticide incidents involving Seresto pet collars has not provided assurance that the collars can be used without posing unreasonable adverse effects to the environment, including to pets. Further, the EPA’s Incident Data System receives required aggregate reporting of pet incident data but does not capture the information that the EPA needs to actually determine unreasonable adverse effects. Specifically, the Agency should be collecting data about the dog or cat species affected, exposure scenarios, and symptoms. DANA: Interesting. Did the OIG issue any recommendations to the EPA? GAIDA: Yes, we issued eight recommendations, which are detailed in our report. One recommendation is aimed at adherence to law and regulations, four address the need for updated standards for pesticide registration and reviews, and three are intended to improve pesticide incident reporting. DANA: Thanks, Gaida. What’s the overall intent of the OIG’s recommendations? GAIDA: As the title of our report suggests, the recommendations are intended to help the EPA determine whether the Seresto collars can be used without posing unreasonable adverse effects in pets. DANA: Did the Agency agree with the recommendations? GAIDA: EPA officials agreed with most of our recommendations, and most corrective actions are still pending. There is one exception. The Agency disagreed with Recommendation One, which proposes issuing certain amended decisions with written determinations and explanations for the active pesticide ingredients in the Seresto pet collars. That recommendation would allow for public comment as part of a formal process. DANA: Thanks, Gaida. I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me today. And thank you, listeners, for checking out our podcast. To read our full report and other EPA OIG reports, please visit our website at www-dot-epaoig-dot-gov.