DEAR DR. FOX: I have a 13-week-old puppy, and I used Activyl on him for fleas. About seven days later, he starting having these aggressive outbursts, then acts overly sweet after. You can almost see the confusion in his eyes.

This is not like him in any way. I don’t know if it’s the medicine, but that’s the only thing we have changed. Have you gotten any more reports on this? -- A.T., Tulsa, Oklahoma

DEAR A.T.: I am shocked you treated such a young dog with this kind of product. If a veterinarian prescribed this, he or she should go back to school. Most likely you made the purchase in a local store, which should be prohibited in every community and state.

Until your communication, I was not aware that indoxacarb -- the highly toxic, hazardous insecticide in Activyl -- was approved for companion animal use. It is strictly regulated in Europe: Greenpeace has put this chemical on its E.U. Pesticide Blacklist.

In addition to being toxic, this product does not kill the targeted insects before they have a chance to transmit any diseases they may be carrying. According to one report from the European Medicines Agency, “The most common side effects seen with Activyl Tick Plus (which may affect up to 1 in 10 animals) are transitory scratching, erythema (reddening of the skin) and hair loss at the application site. ... Activyl Tick Plus must not be used in cats as adverse reactions and even death can occur. ... Fleas, ticks and sand flies might still be able to transmit any diseases which they may be carrying.”

Various flea and tick insecticides have caused sudden, unprovoked aggression in dogs. There are safer alternatives to repelling fleas, ticks and other biting insects. All responsible, caring dog and cat owners should adopt these methods, rather than continuing to use insecticides that can cause seizures and death (as with Bravecto) year in and year out on their animals. Short- and long-term adverse health and environmental consequences can be avoided. For such preventive measures, see my website, drfoxonehealth.com.

SERESTO FLEA COLLAR LAWSUIT

From Johnathan Hettinger, Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting, March 26:

“Two pet owners who claim their dogs either died or developed problems after using Seresto flea and tick collars filed a class-action lawsuit this week against Elanco Animal Health, alleging it misrepresented the safety of its product.

“The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of California in Los Angeles, comes just days after a congressional subcommittee asked Elanco to voluntarily recall the flea and tick collars in the wake of reporting by the Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting and USA TODAY on thousands of incident reports about pet and human harm linked to the collar. The lawsuit cites the news outlets’ reporting. Elanco declined to voluntarily recall the product.”

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: Bill Neidjie was an aboriginal elder and spokesman for the Bunitj clan of Australia’s Northern Territory, and I quoted him in my 1996 book “The Boundless Circle: Caring for Creatures and Creation.” His words give us some insight into the kind of pan-empathy that is called for in planetary stewardship, healing and restoration:

“If you feel sore -- headache, sore body -- that mean somebody killing tree or grass,” he said. “You feel because your body in that tree or earth. Nobody can tell you. You got to feel it yourself. ... Tree might get sick ... you feel it.”

Through such empathy -- which calls for endurance, courage, self-sacrifice, bioethics and sound science -- humankind may begin the Great Healing: restoring the One Health of people, animals, plants and the environment.

One day, in the Forever, perhaps we will be able to hear the songs of myriads of insects in the jungle night and the dawn choruses and choirs of waking birds. In such restored and protected glory, we may walk in humility and grace and be worthy of our self-anointed title of Homo sapiens -- “man the wise.” Or will it be a virtual world devoid of virtue? One with desecrated, polluted, chemical wastelands of genetically engineered agribusiness crops feeding an electronically wired subspecies, Homo technos -- “technocentric man”?

I prefer the biocentric, but the choice and fate of future generations is ours to make: to listen to the Earth, and care, or not. No democracy or civilization can function long if it is not first and foremost biocentric. We must feel for the trees like Bill Neidjie and practice the wisdom of St. Francis of Assisi, patron saint of the environment, who said, “It is in giving that we receive.”

The challenge to modern civilization, as it was for past ones that failed, is to put the principles of One Health into politics and into practice. This includes respect for the land and all who dwell therein -- plant and animal -- because creating dysbiosis leads to dystopia and dysphoria. Indeed, many find euphoria in the living presence of a natural ecosystem, an ancient tree or a beloved dog. Animals and nature can heal us, as I detail in my book “Animals and Nature First,” but not if we do not care for them.

We must break away from our virtually unbroken human history of violence against the natural order, as well as against our own kind and other species. We all, ultimately, suffer the consequences: The common good and the good of the Commons are inseparable.

WILDLIFE TRADE, TRAFFIC AND FARMING MUST END

Wildlife trade and exotic animal farming put the world at risk for zoonotic disease pandemics and should be stopped, according to animal disease experts such as Wildlife Conservation Society Chief Veterinarian Christian Walzer. China restricted wildlife trade and farming after COVID-19 spread worldwide, but mink and raccoon dog farms are still allowed, and international gangs continue to traffic wildlife. (Full story: Reuters, 4/1)

DEAR DR. FOX: We are all saddened by the fact that we generally outlive our dogs. But what is sadder still is when our dogs outlive us.

I’m helping a friend look at adoptable dogs online, and many old dogs are available because someone died or got too sick to care for them. It breaks my heart to think of those good dogs having had so many years of safe and stable homes, and then having to start all over in their declining years -- in a world where everyone wants a puppy or a young dog. As I am in my retirement years and have old dogs, this strikes close to home for me.

Please encourage people to make provisions for their dogs in case of their death or disability, and, when adopting, to give those senior dogs a second look. Think twice before adopting a dog who is young enough to outlive you. Sometimes, the best choice might be an older dog. I hope you’ll address this in your column. -- M.D., Springfield, Missouri

DEAR M.D.: Addressed herewith! Many older dogs are in need of homes, if you check around local shelters and dog rescue organizations. I strongly advocate adopting all such dogs with a known history and veterinary records -- because of possible ongoing health issues -- after a through wellness examination.

A great advantage of adopting an older dog is that their temperament/personality is fully developed, and they are generally leash-trained and housebroken, so you have less work to do and fewer “growing pains” as you would with a puppy. I advise all ambulatory retirees to consider adopting an easygoing, easy-to-handle, affection-seeking older dog for company that will get them outdoors for some regular walks.

I call my dog Kota my “good medicine dog.” For many, the company of dogs is far more effective than taking antidepressant and antianxiety drugs, and can help lower blood pressure as well!

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR DR. FOX: My cat passed away a few weeks ago. She had been drinking lots of water, and the vet wanted us to measure how much, but I found that difficult and didn’t follow through. Everything else seemed OK, except she would occasionally vomit if she ate too fast.

She ate canned cat food, mostly the fish kinds, though she would usually just eat the gravy and very little fish. I was wasting a lot of food. I would rotate between the turkey and salmon varieties of the more expensive brands, plus smaller cans of different kind of grilled fish with gravy.

One day, I accidentally picked up several cans of the beef kind. I had never tried her on beef, but I gave her a small amount of it. I figured she could handle a little bit. She loved it and ate it, gravy and all, immediately. I was so happy to see her enjoy her food and eat the whole thing that I let her eat the rest of the small can without any gradual transition from the fish. A couple of days later, in the middle of the night, she became very ill. My husband took her to the emergency vet hospital, but she died on the way.

My question is: Did I kill my cat by feeding her beef without slowly transitioning from fish? And do you think feeding her mostly fish could have raised her mercury levels too high?

I am so sorry I didn’t do a better job of taking care of her. I have only been a cat parent when they choose me, and several have. Now I am living with regret, and am asking you to please help me understand what might have happened. We didn’t do an autopsy, so there is no way to know for sure. -- C.T., Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

DEAR C.T.: I am so sorry about the loss of your cat. She most likely had chronic kidney disease, which is why she was drinking so much water, possibly complicated by diabetes.

Regarding her diet: Many cats do not like fish, and tuna should be avoided since it is high in brain- and kidney-damaging mercury. I doubt this was an acute allergic reaction to beef. Most likely, her kidneys could not handle the high protein load from the beef she ate, which lead to uremic poisoning. It is unfortunate that the veterinarian did not test your cat’s kidney function early on, and put her on a special renal diet to avoid this health crisis.

Do not blame yourself. You did your best for your beloved feline companion.

DEAR DR. FOX: Scott Loss and I mentioned you in our article in Tulsa Pets Magazine, which refuted a prior article that had supported TNR (trap, neuter, release). I wanted to share the article with you: 4legspublishing.com/magazines/TulsaPets-Magazine-March-2021/14/

Thanks for all your continued great work on behalf of animal welfare! How is the cat sanctuary project going? -- P.G., Tulsa, Oklahoma

DEAR P.G.: You wrote an excellent article in this very beautiful and informative publication. I wish every large city could have such publications to educate residents about dogs, cats, wildlife and “pest” issues.

I will send your letter on to Julie Marvets, who is building a larger cat sanctuary in Minnesota (furballfarmpetsanctuary.com), effectively re-homing over 80% of cats that had been released by TNR-practicing animal shelters. I am also sending it to local leaders in the TRE movement -- trap, neuter, enclose -- which works in opposition to the annual release of some 1,000 cats by shelters and animal societies here in our area of Minnesota.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)