View Full Version : 1800petmeds.com
alittleoffkey
10-07-2008, 07:03 PM
The thread about expensive vets made me think to post this. :cowboy:
We use Sentinel for our dogs... and I just bought Roto's pills (he and Lucky take the same dose, so we switch back and forth and just keep one box on hand) and they were $110 for SIX MONTHS! Which was absolutely ridiculious, so I did some online-shopping around and actually went to 1800petmeds.com.
And they had a whole years worth of Sentinel for $110 - and if you spend over $40 it's free shipping... and right now they have a sale going on of x amount off your purchase if you spend $x! They contact your vet and get the prescription from them, so you don't have to worry about it. I was really impressed, since our vet is the cheapest in the extended area (obviously they need to switch suppliers :rolleyes:).
Just thought I'd let ya'll know! Other forums swear they're the cheapest, and I did a lot of shopping around and couldn't find anything better. :)
outriding01
10-07-2008, 07:19 PM
I was just wondering about this today when I saw their ad on tv. Garacie's stuff is getting ridiculous and now she's on a thyroid medication too.... I may have to try this out.
SedonaThunder
10-07-2008, 07:21 PM
Wow - thanks ALOK! When my vet was here today we were actually talking about Sentinel. I have always used Frontline on all the dogs and cats but this last time Bentley (the Golden) got a big owie (weepy and scabby) where the stuff was applied. So the next time I used Advantage and he still has fleas - that stuff doesn't seem to work. The vet and his tech (also fiancee) said they use Sentinel on their two dogs but told me it is expensive. I wasn't sure I understood how it worked though because they said something about a pill and a topical?
Ex-Racers-Rule
10-07-2008, 07:24 PM
They just had a coupon for 20.00 off any order but it's expired now....
alittleoffkey
10-07-2008, 07:27 PM
Sentinel keeps flea eggs from developing, but it doesn't make adult fleas drop dead like Frontline or another topical would... so if your dogs get fleas you can just give them a bath and it'll kill them ('cause fleas drown), some people (those whose dogs stay outside a lot or who live in areas with lots of fleas, or if they're going anywhere really public with other dogs) use a topical in addition... just to be on the safe side.
But we've used Sentinel with Lucky for the past 9 years, and aside from the occasional flea after we've gone to Petsmart (or until recently when we weren't using anything on Roto and he picked up a couple) we have literally never seen a flea. They also deter ticks (we've never seen a tick on Lucky, and he goes on walks in the woods with me and *I* get ticks!) and keeps them from getting heartworms. We used it on our outdoor-only lab before we had to get rid of him, and he never had fleas or ticks on him either. :)
I'm a HUGE fan of Sentinel
WashingtonBoy
10-07-2008, 07:29 PM
We get Bay's Isoxsuprine and our beagle Barkley's Soloxine (thyroid med) from http://www.allivet.com (http://www.allivet.com/). They run about half the price of getting it from our regular vets.
WashingtonBay
10-07-2008, 07:36 PM
Hmmm... We've had good luck with Advantage, but it is expensive with a lot of animals.
As few flea troubles as we've had though, we save money by only treating about half the animals at any given time and that's covered it. I wonder if Bentley's sensitive to the Frontline, you might get away with treating everyone but him.
42many
10-07-2008, 07:44 PM
Can that Sentinel be used in place of Heartguard for heartworms, then?
alittleoffkey
10-07-2008, 07:49 PM
Yep, that's what we do. We have one pill that takes care of everything. We tried just treating Lucky... but I wound up with fleas in my bed so we had to start treating both of them. :)
The problem with 1-800-petmeds is that they have been know to ship expired products, very very short-dated products (will expire in days) or to purchase products from out of the country where there are fewer controls on quality/safety in manufacturing and where alot of counterfeit drugs (like counterfeit frontline) are coming from.
Just an FYI, I've talked to several other techs who's practices use Sentinel and then had dogs come back heartworm positive on it. So getting heartworm testing yearly or every other year on it is not a bad idea.
SedonaThunder
10-10-2008, 08:42 AM
The problem with 1-800-petmeds is that they have been know to ship expired products, very very short-dated products (will expire in days) or to purchase products from out of the country where there are fewer controls on quality/safety in manufacturing and where alot of counterfeit drugs (like counterfeit frontline) are coming from.
Just an FYI, I've talked to several other techs who's practices use Sentinel and then had dogs come back heartworm positive on it. So getting heartworm testing yearly or every other year on it is not a bad idea.
Good to know about the expired drugs!
On the heartworm test - is that something that shows up on a regular blood panel or is a special test? A lot of people didn't worry about them up here in the Pacific Northwest as they were so rare, but my vet just told me an interesting story. He said that after Hurricane Katrina heartworm started showing up in dogs up here... huh? He went on to say that there were a lot of dogs brought up here for rescue afterward and they weren't tested for heartworms... and went on to spread them! :eek:
alittleoffkey
10-10-2008, 09:40 AM
Our dogs are tested for heartworm every year, regardless. We like to be sure. :) But thanks for the info on 1800petmeds... that hadn't come up on any of the searches I did. ;)
WashingtonBay
10-10-2008, 09:53 AM
He went on to say that there were a lot of dogs brought up here for rescue afterward and they weren't tested for heartworms... and went on to spread them! :eek:
How are they spread? You're right... I've never worried bout it here.
SedonaThunder
10-10-2008, 11:35 AM
How are they spread? You're right... I've never worried bout it here.
That's what I asked next... he said that mosquitos feed on the doggies with heartworm and the little ickies are living in their blood - so then when the mosquito bites the next dog they pass some of them on.
Yep, mosquitos transmit heartworms from dogs to dog. The test isn't a "standard test" on a blood panel, it's a specific/special test that you or the vet must ask for.
Tatesgram
10-10-2008, 12:32 PM
The problem with 1-800-petmeds is that they have been know to ship expired products, very very short-dated products (will expire in days) or to purchase products from out of the country where there are fewer controls on quality/safety in manufacturing and where alot of counterfeit drugs (like counterfeit frontline) are coming from.
Just an FYI, I've talked to several other techs who's practices use Sentinel and then had dogs come back heartworm positive on it. So getting heartworm testing yearly or every other year on it is not a bad idea.
Thanks for this info and it is good to see you here:).
The other problem with pet meds is that many of the drug manufacturers will not honor their product guarantees. So if your buying your heart worm prevention from pet meds call the manufacturer of your drug and make sure thhat if your pet becomes infected while on prevention they will honor their product.
We have had 2 dogs break while on Interceptor bought from pet meds and the company does not pay for the treatment whereas if they had bought it from their vet the company would have paid for treatment as well as a years worth of your choice of heart worm prevention.
The companies won't honor product guarantees because these products are not being produced in the US in many instances and their importation from other companies is illegal.
Note: 1-800-petmeds is also known as PetMedExpress
Florida Board of Pharmacy disciplines PetMed Express, Savemax
Internet pharmacies given another chance On April 16, the Florida Department of Health's Board of Pharmacy reached an agreement with PetMed Express Inc. whereby the company accepted penalties but did not admit guilt. The company was accused of operating an "alternate veterinarian program" that contracted with veterinarians to write prescriptions for animals they had never examined—a violation of Florida law.
"Essentially, PetMed was engaged in an enterprise whereby a customer could log onto their Web site, fill out a questionnaire regarding their animal's health complaints, and that information would then be forwarded to a veterinarian who was either employed by, or under contract with, PetMed," said David Herman, prosecuting attorney in the case for Florida's Agency for Health Care Administration. The veterinarian would review the questionnaire, write a prescription, and send the prescription to PetMed Express, which would fill it.
This modus operandi violates Florida law because the state does not consider the authorizing veterinarian to have a valid doctor-patient relationship. It is also illegal in all but a handful of states, according to Edwin Bayo, legal counsel for the Florida Board of Pharmacy.
The company was also charged with selling drugs not approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
Savemax Inc., accused of violating similar regulations, also accepted penalties but did not admit guilt.
Déjà vu
For some Florida Board of Pharmacy members, the April 16 proceedings had a déjà vu quality. The board disciplined PetMed Express in 1999 for distributing drugs to clients who did not have prescriptions for them. The company was also charged with various advertising violations as well as with failing to keep a complete and accurate record of controlled substances, to maintain a daily hard copy of dispensed prescriptions, and to label prescriptions appropriately.
In 1999, the company and its pharmacist settled 56 cases out of court. The penalties included paying investigative costs and a $32,500 fine, attending a continuing education course on pharmacy law, undergoing two years of semiannual inspections, and submitting quarterly pharmacy reports for 30 months.
Several members of the Board of Pharmacy expressed dismay that the company had once again broken Florida law. "I thought that [PetMed Express] understood us well when they were here before," said Helen Fong, chair of the hearing.
"I am very disappointed that you guys are here again, and I do not want to see you in a couple of years from now and you pay your $40,000 and it is just the cost of doing business."
Michael Stamitoles, another board member, commented that the current stipulation was eerily similar to the 1999 stipulation, especially one item that stated that failure to adhere to the stipulation terms would be considered a violation of a Final Order, which could result in disciplinary action.
This seems to be the same language that was in the agreement three years ago, said Stamitoles, who mused that, to him, it appeared the company was in violation of a whole bunch of final orders already.
According to attorney Herman, however, that is not the case. "The previous discipline was technically for [violating] different regulations," attorney Herman said. "So, they are not in violation of the previous order."
Nevertheless, the company was once again violating the law, and some individuals questioned whether the company had retained a veterinarian to provide prescriptions, not in an effort to abide by the law but to circumvent it. "I don't understand how that produces a valid vet-animal relationship ... other than trying to circumvent the law and generate profit," Fong said.
Endgame
On April 16, the Board of Pharmacy formally charged PetMed Express with 36 cases involving 80 counts, including 33 counts of making deceptive, misleading, untrue, or fraudulent representations or employing a trick or scheme in, or related to, the practice of a profession. Thirty counts involved selling or dispensing drugs without a proper prescription.
But these were just the cases that the board had time to formally charge the company with—the agency has, in fact, received over a hundred complaints.
"I have been on the board for five years and I have never seen this many cases [brought against one company]," Stamitoles said.
Through the Florida stipulation, PetMed Express Inc. agreed to three years of probation, random pharmacy inspections, and community service in the form of providing free pharmaceutical services to the public. The company also agreed to dismantle the alternate veterinarian program and pay a fine and investigative costs. ([B]See PetMed Express Inc.: The Verdict (http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/jun02/s020601a.asp#verdicts)). Similar cases that occurred prior to the final ruling will be dismissed.
An original clause that allowed PetMed Express to file for early termination of probation after one year was shot down. "A one-year probation for a hundred and something cases ... it's unacceptable," Stamitoles balked.
In addition to PetMed Express, the Florida Department of Health's Board of Pharmacy reached an agreement with Savemax Inc., which also accepted penalties but did not admit guilt. At the time of the hearing, Savemax was located at the same address as PetMed Express and was charged with violating a Florida law that dictates that a pharmacy permit be issued only to a single entity at a single location. Savemax was also charged with dispensing prescriptions that were not signed by a veterinarian who had examined an animal and with not maintaining certain required records.
(finished in next post)
According to PetMed Express CEO Menderes Akdag, Savemax is an independently owned and run pharmacy that handles overflow from PetMed Express. Gregory Chaires, legal counsel for both companies, explained, saying, "It is a fair representation that Savemax was initially [started because] of a concern over PetMed's liability, and whether it [would] continue." Savemax, which was charged with three cases, agreed to move its location, undergo one year of random pharmacy inspections, and perform community service. The company also agreed to pay fines and all costs arising from the settlement, including the inspections. (See Savemax Inc.: The Verdict (http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/jun02/s020601a.asp#verdicts)). Similar cases that occurred prior to the final ruling will be dismissed.
The board also penalized and fined four pharmacists employed by the companies during the period of investigation: Gordon Gyor, Gary Koesten, Richard Schwartz, and Martin Wiederkehr.
The outlook
According to Herman, PetMed Express is essentially being given a fresh chance. The company promises to clean up its act. "I assure the board that compliance is our number one priority," said Akdag, adding that the company had implemented a number of policies, procedures, training, and quality improvement programs to help them attain that goal. In addition, they had enlisted Rod Presnell, a former member of the Board of Pharmacy, as a consultant to review the company's procedures.
One veterinarian who spoke at the hearing was uncomfortable with the settlement. "I felt like the two lawyers have got everything in front of you and are kind of running it through a bit," said John Owens, a Cleveland-based veterinarian. "
But the settlement was one way of cleaning up a messy problem. "If we were to take each case on an individual basis, there would be no end to the prosecution," Herman said. "It would substantially increase the cost to both sides. Each case would have to be investigated, prosecuted, and litigated."
The agreement also got rid of the source of many of the problems. "Anytime you have a plea bargain, you give something to get something," board attorney Bayo said. "In this particular case, the ability to [get rid of] the staff veterinarian program right now is very significant."
Bayo, who is also legal counsel for the Florida Board of Veterinary Medicine, says that other state veterinary boards are being encouraged to pursue action against veterinarians involved with PetMed. "We cannot take action against any vets who are engaged in the alternate vet or staff vet program because none of them held licenses in the state of Florida. The [Florida] Board of Veterinary Medicine has certainly encouraged the other states to take action." So far, Bayo has uncovered a veterinarian in Maryland and another in North Carolina who were involved with the program.
Donald Schaefer, executive director of the Florida VMA, who spoke at the hearing, commented later, "Under the current political reality of the way government agencies deal with corporations that are brought before them with multiple infractions, this was the fairest settlement we were going to get."
Schaefer hopes that the board's chosen inspector will have a veterinary pharmacology background and noted that the chair invited him to submit a list of qualified candidates. He also hopes that, given the offenses, the community service involves an organization that has a veterinarian involved in the diagnosis and treatment plan.
The Board of Pharmacy plans to provide information about the hearing to the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy, which will distribute it to the state boards through its disciplinary clearinghouse. According to several speakers at the hearing, veterinarians in other states have filed complaints against the companies, and the agreement may start a domino effect, with more states pursuing legal action. At press time, the Ohio State Board of Pharmacy had charged PetMed Express with various violations and scheduled a hearing.
Only time will tell whether PetMed Express will take the twice-given advice of the Florida board, but if it doesn't, it faces a tougher battle. According to Bayo, if PetMed Express breaks the law again, "They won't be able to bring a stipulation. They will have to go to trial and take their chances."----http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/jun02/s020601a.asp
And this one: http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=37514 (http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=37514)
"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently fined the company $100,000 for selling Australian products with metric system dosages to U.S. consumers. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is rumored to be investigating as well. "
Hey Cindy,
Have you seen any of the "HARTGUARD" come though your clinic? It's an Australian made heartworm prevention that apparently doesn't work well... We had an entire family of dogs HW pos today that were all on this purchased from 1800 pet meds... The parents were so upset. There doesn't look to be any recourse either. There wasn't even a list of active ingredients on the box. Doesn't that violate labeling standards?
Or it's HEARTGUARD. I can't remember which way to spell the faker... I use Iverheart.
There really isn't much recourse except to alert the FDA that x product was purchased from 1800PetMeds (and I definitely would). Importing drugs from other countries when the same product is available in the US is illegal. Heck importing drugs from other countries into the US that aren't currently approved in the US is also illegal without lots of red tape. They just keep breaking the law because they don't get caught often enough to have their fines out-weigh the amount of profit that they haul in on a daily basis.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.