6 CONTROL BULLETIN NO. 157 



In most single cases of pet poisoning, therefore, it is almost futile to have 

 an analysis made. The pet involved usually is one that is not confined and might 

 have picked up some toxic material anywhere within a radius of a mile from the 

 home. If circumstances are such that only a chemical analysis is needed to clinch 

 the case against a particular person, such analysis may be warranted, but only if 

 the precautions implied in the above case are followed in the handling of the sample. 



When feed is suspected as the source of poisoning, and analysis of the feed is 

 recommended by a veterinarian, the Control Service always cooperates. This is 

 an essential part of feed control work and is well illustrated by the following case. 



Information and samples received from veterinarians in the eastern part of 

 the State indicated that one brand of dog food was responsible for the death of a 

 number of dogs. The dogs died with the same symptoms in each case. There 

 were extensive internal hemorrhages and usually bleeding at the nose and mouth. 

 These symptoms are observed in cases of poisoning caused by a rat poison known 

 as Warfarin. 



Samples of feed taken at the places where poisoning occurred were fed to test 

 groups of rats. Some of the rats died with exactly the same symptoms observed 

 in the affected dogs. 



Apparently, only one batch of dog food contained the toxic material, and the 

 manufacturer could not explain how that batch became contaminated. Tests of 

 subsequent batches showed them to be free of any toxic materials. The manu- 

 facturer paid the owners for the loss of the dogs. 



