Look, I'm a dog owner and lover, but is it really the job of the federal government to protect the health and well-being of our pets? Seems like market forces could address this sort of problem without the government's (initially ineffective in this case) input.
Good question. I would say yes it is.
Medicine (even for animals) has to be regulated and it would be impractical for individual states to do it. I don't see how market forces could address this. Could you elaborate? I only agree that it's the fed gov's job because I can't think of a better alternative. Would be interesting to hear what others have to say.
Does anyone know if this medication is by prescription only, or can it be purchased at your local store?
The FDA took the job upon themselves. They approved the medicine and like many other medicines they approve it was faulty.
The FDA has to approve food additives and drugs used for farm animals that get into our food supply. The active ingredient in ProHart6, moxidectin, was already approved for use in beef and dairy cattle to kill intestinal roundworms. Heartworm is a type of roundworm. Your pet's heartworm meds will also kill intestinal roundworms.
Once the initial research and regulatory work to approve a drug has already been done for farm animals, then it's almost a freebie for the FDA to regulate it for pets. Only in this case, someone screwed up on testing it on a different species.
Also, some breeds of dogs are sensitive to certain heartworm meds. For example, collies, Shetland sheepdogs, and similar breeds are sensitive to a heartworm med called ivermectin. Within a breed, some individual dogs are more sensitive than others.
I don't know if the moxidectin problem is limited to certain breeds.