![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
It doesn't sound like a design flaw so much as a freak accident (the dog may have just chewed out the area where the second hole was in the first place, still opening up the chance for suction). That being said, that does sound like it was a terrible experience for the owner.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-203062-100x100.png\")
Thanks for reporting on this. I will be poking additional holes in all my dogs toys from now on.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-5552-100x100.png\")
How awful. Glad to read that the company did the right thing, though, in recalling the toy.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-160819-100x100.png\")
Ouch, that wasn't something I'd even considered to be an issue before with dog toys. I guess I'll stick to the KONGs my 3 dogs have and bully sticks for treats!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-2295-100x100.png\")
That letter is actually pretty good.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-2352-100x100.png\")
Sounds like a feature, sell it to all the people who live next to a yapping dog.
Call it 'The Silencer'
They'll make millions!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-391270-100x100.png\")
Wow. Talk about service. I was scared they would be like \"Accidents happen. it's not our fault.\"
It's a sad story but I'm glad it seems to be worked out without the usual corporate bullshit.
So, essentially they allowed the dog to play with a toy already broken, not aware of what would happen? I sure hope they add that second hole to the toy to take care of this kind of issue in the future.
I'm glad they didn't try to bullshit their way out of this.
Despite the nice letter, obviously they didn't care enough to remove the product from their web site or recall it.
[www.fourpaws.com] [www.google.com]
Good post, though. With the benefit of hindsight, a better approach would have been to cut the ball to release the suction and / or cut it away from the dogs mouth (running the risk of cutting the tongue, but avoiding a much more serious injury).
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-2604-100x100.png\")
@hellinmyeyes: I think the ball already had one hole in it by design, to let the sound of the bell out. I've seen that sort of thing before.
@rainmkr: I second the love of Kong toys. Especially for heavy chewers. It's what they give the tigers at Great Adventure
@woot: It sounds like they did, but the tongue had swollen past the point it could be removed that way. Then it appears the arteries and veins were damaged which prevented proper blood flow.
I'm glad the dog is alive, and although he won't be able to lick you anymore, at least he is still with you.
Shame for the poor dog and its owner. Nice to see the company taking measures to prevent it. A sad scenario in which the best outcome possible in the circumstances occurred.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-453882-100x100.png\")
The notion that the dog's pain didn't matter because it was \"property\" made me so incredibly sad.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-479731-100x100.png\")
If that happened to my dog, I'd be looking for blood. And I'd fucking find it.
I just did a slightly panicked inspection of the dog's toy basket. The regular kong toy has a smaller hole in the opposite end. The four paws brand ball we bought last year has two holes and a cut out of a paw on one side with the bell ball inside. I can see where the model with one hole is a high risk for an accident. If I had one it would be in the trash asap.
Damn poor dog.
I am so glad someone did write that letter. I can't say for sure since it was 11 years ago, but I am sure that is the same toy that KILLED my lab! My lab and I were playing catch and the ball got stuck at the opening to her throat. The suction of her breathing in and the fact that there was no place for the air to started to choke her. I tried CPR, reaching my hand in there and a very fast trip to a vet to no avail. My ex-wife and I even called the local news to see if they could help us get the word out. Glad to hear that this dog only lost his tongue.
If companies recalled every item that happened to be involved in some sort of 1 out of several million freak accident, there would just be no stuff anywhere at all for anyone to buy.
I can understand that this person's experience with the chew toy was traumatic, but this doesn't immediately indicate that the product should be recalled.
@The_IT_Crone: From some reading I did recently on recent pet trends, it is possible to receive a higher reward for pet suffering if a judge considers the pet more than property, and some element of the family (and assigns them some fraction value of a human). There is legal precedence for this. Otherwise, the value of a dog is considered to be something like $10. But, no matter how pro-pet, and lavish we are, dogs really are property. They don't get to leave you and pick another owner, they don't have the rights of individuals, etc.
Commendable that they swiftly started taking care of this.
Poor dog though, lucky it was only 1 out of 500,000 though
I'm impressed that they're not \"taking it seriously.\"
Rest assured isn't much better, but it does look like they're working on it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-410733-100x100.png\")
@The_IT_Crone:
Agreed! Everytime I see a case about a dog on dog fight or something similar, I feel the same way because pets are viewed as property and thus aren't entitled to pain and suffering.
Pet toys are a mixed blessing; they provide hours of enjoyment, but at the same time can be death traps. And since pets (well, at least mine) seem hell bent on destroying every toy they are given, I have to check them all every day or two. I find sharp edges and potential dangers once in a while on my birds' toys, but luckily no injuries yet.
Get well soon Chai :)
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-139070-100x100.png\")
Poor Chai! Good to see the manufacturer responding so quickly.
My dog really only chews on parts of other animals that we get at the store or out of the freezer. If it isn't a bone, some skin, an ear, a trachea, a heart, a peener, or the whole lower leg of an antelope or deer, he's not all that interested. He'll only mess with his Kong if it's filled with peanut butter or meat.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-2180-100x100.png\")
@wiggatron: ...you're saying he chewed out the area with the second hole, creating... a bigger hole? Logic = Fail.
That's disturbing. A dog without a tongue. Saddest thing I thought of all day. I feel so bad for the dog.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-326654-100x100.png\")
Am I the only one wondering how the dog is going to drink after this?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-175610-100x100.png\")
It's good to see that they're doing something about it. Too many companies these days don't really give a crap. It was one of those \"design defects\" that really couldn't be foreseen, so hopefully they'll make that minor change to the product (adding a hole). Although removing the bell might be a good idea so it isn't chocked on.
I just read the blog post, and what do you know? The manager of the pet store also did something about the problem. I guess there are some decent people out there after all.
So my questions are, was all of Chai's tongue removed, or where they able to save any of it? How is Chai adjusting?
@InfiniTrent: Nope, I'm curious about that, too. I also thought that one of the ways that dogs regulate their body temperature is through the tongue. Poor doggie. :(
I have this same toy, even with the same company's logo on it. I checked it out, it has holes on opposite ends... ?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-391013-100x100.png\")
\"That's why we recommend that dogs always be supervised when they are playing with any toy.\"
I don't think anyone who is not actively throwing a toy to a dog has done this, EVER. You supervise children, but dogs? The toys keep them busy while you are at work, how are we supposed to \"supervise\" them?
Yeah, how is the dog going to drink from now on? Watching the first video of the dog just yelping in pain on the couch and floor just brought me to tears.
@TheUncleBob:
I think the ball in question was the result of a manufacturing defect, where the hole didn't form.
@god_forbids:
True, but at the same time, they kind of have to make that disclaimer.
All in all, I think they handled the situation as well as could be expected.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-2899-100x100.png\")
@god_forbids: We keep all of our dog's toys out of reach when we're not around, aside from a few stuffed ones that have no dangerous parts. If he's playing with a squeaky ball or similar, we're always within earshot at the very least.
I wish people would read the entire blog before posting a comment. The ball was NOT broken when first given to dog, Four Paws, Inc. basically told the owner that her dog wasn't important enough for them to be concerned with the problem until they started getting heat from the masses, and This was not a \"freak accident\" as there is a link on the original blog post directing you to other dogs who suffered from this toy. Such a sad situation and I really hope the lady gets compensated appropriately!
Wonder if dog tongue is as good as beef tongue.
@InfiniTrent: Good question, though there aren't many good questions that come from this story. Any vets out there that can qualify a dog's ability to drink without a tongue?
@lingum: Ha Ha. The Chinese seem to think so (just not while guests are around).
Too bad the dog got hurt, but just like with kids close supervision is a must, and accidents do happen.
As for Four Paws, 'if the cost of 'c' is less than that of a recall, we don't do one'. It's how we roll in a Capitalist society.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-54933-100x100.png\")
So THAT's why they have a small hole on the other end of a KONG.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-97892-100x100.png\")
Could it have just been that if a dog is stupid enough, the toy will sense this and try to kill the god?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-322260-100x100.png\")
My heart goes out to the dog and dog owner. This is just sad, and it sounds to me that the CEO couldn't care very much. Sorry, but I think there may be some pain and suffering money in order. I realize there are disclaimers and the whole observe your pet while playing, but come on. It sounds like this occured while they were watching it.
Bad toy company! BAD toy company!
@hellinmyeyes: My dog routinely chewed rubber balls to pieces within ten minutes or less. There were only a few brands that could withstand her. And she was a miniature poodle.
So it's entirely possible that their dog wrecked the toy the first time they gave it to him.
Seeing the OP give the dog water, could he somehow devise a hamster type feeder for his dog? The whole bowl thing didn't seem to work out so well.
@CumaeanSibyl: I get you. My best friend's dog (and thus, by extension, somewhat of my secondary dog) used to play with these steel core, rubber exterior balls. Anything else would be destroyed and become a choking hazard within minutes on a good day, seconds on a bad one, no matter what brand.
That dog died of old age with a neck and a pair of jaws stronger than a rock.
@woot: One freak accident doesn't warrant an expensive recall and there's no need to remove the product from the website since they'll obviously only send out fixed versions of the product.
Goodness. That's tragic.
I never buy my dog those kind of toys because 1) He doesn't like them. 2) I never felt they were safe. And 3) I'm allergic to the rubber (latex allergy).
I also don't buy the \"rope\" toys, especially the ones that have strings hanging off the end. After I saw a string come out the other end, I knew that was off the menu. Dogs can destroy toys so quickly, you never know what's going to happen.
It's important to pay attention to your dog when he's playing with a toy that has squeakers (my dog always tries to take them out). That doesn't give the company a thumbs-up to make an unsafe toy, however. When used correctly, this toy can cause a dog's tongue to get stuck. That's a bad situation and I'm glad the company is taking steps to address it.
As for myself, now I stick to the occasional pig ear, billy sticks, and tennis balls (well, and one ball that squeaks, which causes my hands to break out, but he loves it so and I have Benedryl cream).
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-16563-100x100.png\")
This is why you should only let your dog chew on fluffy, fat kittens.
JOKE! I j-o-k-e!
Just read her blog and she states that she's run into two other dog owners who've had similar (tho less drastic outcomed) experiences with the same toy. Considering this is only within her social circle, I look askance at the pet toy manufacturer's claims of not having run into it before.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out as it gains publicity and whether other potential dog owners add to this horrific story.
Yep, the manufacturer has been aware of a serious design/manufacturing defect since at least 2005 when a dog died from a very similar injury. At the time they said they'd fix it.
This ain't rocket science: make a bigger vent hole and have a QC procedure that makes sure it's open. They didn't bother and dogs will continue to die until they do. Doesn't seem to bother Four Paws.
Be safe, buy a Kong!
@pigbearpug: Sure. Comcast probably wouldn't honor the credits if they issued them, so why can't I just make some up myself?
There's a stupid joke I'm trying to make here, I just can't seem to get the bat off my shoulder.
Let's hope this doesn't turn into another Wal-Mart/Nazi T-shirt story.
Sympathies and condolences to the dog and its owners.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-76955-100x100.png\")
How will the poor dog eat, drink and cool himself without a tongue??
Poor little guy.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-71257-100x100.png\")
@Grive: steel core, rubber exterior balls? I must get some of these... Right now, the Kong is the only thing that has stood up to our dog, and thats just because he loses interest...
@SMSDHubbard: I'm saying that even if a small air hole existed in the first place, the dog could very well have just chewed that area, making one big hole instead of two (one small for ventilation/suction prevention and one large, where the dog was chewing). I'm not sure my wording made that clear.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-302597-100x100.png\")
I sure could use a couple of these for some co-workers...
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-353294-100x100.png\")
Goddamn, this ain't the kind of story I like to read in the morning. But it's an important story nonetheless. Forwarded it immediately to my sister who has two dogs and does a lot of dog-sitting for people during the week as well.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1196-100x100.png\")
@god_forbids: Yeah I always thought it was a stupid disclaimer. That said, there are certain toys and items that I do put away when I'm not around.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-462821-100x100.png\")
Now I'm a sad panda...on a friday!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-114986-100x100.png\")
I feel for the dog. Best of luck to him and hopefully Four Paws will make some form of restitution without having to go to court to get it out of them.
@wiggatron: the holes are on opposite ends of the toy (you can see the vent hole on the product picture on their website) so the dog would've chewed the toy in two had he created one large opening.
I agree it's probably a manufacturing defect. Which is still tragic for all the dog owners involved.
Who signed off on the name for this toy? Pimple ball with bell? What's next? Introducing HPV ball with bell!
I would like to comment on some of the issues above that people have raised, such as feeling that dogs are equivalent to people, pain and suffering compensation deserved, revenge, etc.
and perhaps they are most dramatically illustrated if you read the startling comments of \"pigbearpug\" above.
First of all, I like dogs myself. They are pleasing animal companions, and are fun to play with. They are endearing. And this case of the dog with tongue amputated is a sad case, a freak accident.
But you have to realize that in no reasonable society will an animal be equal to a human being. And you should not expect that. Even in an \"enlightened\" society. That is because being a human in any society comes with rights, responsibilities, and an expectation/implication that you understand how to behave and interact as an independent being. As a human, you are subject to the rules/benefits/punishments that society affords you.
Animals/pets do not have this capability (independence yet responsibility), and they cannot be expected to have resonsibility for their actions, and that is why they cannot have \"rights\". You cannot punish a dog for misbehaving in a park -- you punish the owner, right? Some pets may be very clever, and show aspects of human behavior, but they can never be independent actors in a human society. Animals do have \"rights\" in a sense that humans take it upon themselves to afford them humane treatment, and protection against cruelty. But those rights are invoked by humans on their behalf, not by animals. This is an important distinction, and something not understood by die-hard animal \"rights\" activists. Animals depend on people to invoke rights for them. Therefore animals do not have rights that they can claim for themselves.
Why all this preface? Well, mostly to try to tell the above commenters, that no matter how close you consider your pet, it is not healthy to put it on the equivalent of a human family member. You will end up believing they have \"rights\" like a human, and will be greatly disappointed/your time/emotion wasted when you try to act/recover from injury (physical,mental) based on that incorrect belief.
I don't understand people who don't understand that their dog, while a great companion, etc. -- is not what your life should be built around! You may have a great time, but I think a healthy perspective is needed -- you should understand that your dog is a dog. Not to be so cold as to say that an animal is a \"tool\" or \"property\" for your enjoyment, but to admit to yourself (and not forget) that a dog must not be confused for a human.
In a sense, it cheapens the value of your human relationships or suggests that you have a problem if your perspective on a dog reaches this point. How can you suggest \"looking for blood\" (I know it's figurative) because of an injury to your dog? Would you kill someone if they killed your dog in a car accident, or on purpose? No. A rational person sees that a dog is not on the same moral scale as a human being, and can go to great efforts to try to prevent something similar from happening.
Be close to your pets, appreciate their affection and companionship. But do not forget that they are not humans. Let's have some sympathy, but also reasonable perspective.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-406930-100x100.png\")
That is so sad :( Poor little doggie. Ugh, I'm carefully examining all of my dog's toys when I get home...
They'll only do a recall if its less expensive than the average out of court settlement.
@kepler11: I get what you're saying, and while I don't believe my dog has the same rights as a human, it doesn't mean I love it any less. If someone killed my dog on purpose, you bet your ass I'd be looking for blood. If someone released a toy that reduced my dog to whimpering on the couch, and the manufacturer knew of other instances where this happened before my dog, I'd be looking to break the nose of the manufacturer. If a neighbor kills my dog for on purpose, then I am going to beat the shit out of my neighbor. This is assuming my dog does not turn into Cujo and the person is put in fear of his safety.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-413611-100x100.png\")
@Bladefist: Thanks for reporting on this. I will be poking additional holes in all my dogs toys from now on.
Never had anything quite like this though, and boy am I glad.
FYI Keep all sugar-free gum / mints away from you're pets. I had a bunch of mints on the hutch and the wife was dusting and knocked one down. The casing broke open and spilled mints everywhere. We had to take one of our dogs (the other spits everything out the first taste, thank goodness) to get checked out that night (a weekend) and multiple vet visits to check liver function, et al, for over a month. My wife was terrified we'd have to put him down, because of the complications that can occur. Sugar free gum and mints are allowed in our house, but strictly placed where they can't fall / be gotten at by the dogs.
@kepler11:
Not to be so cold as to say that an animal is a \"tool\" or \"property\" for your enjoyment, but to admit to yourself (and not forget) that a dog must not be confused for a human.
@kepler11: It sounds like you're annoyed if pet owners feel that Fluffy deserves the right to vote, drink and to own firearms, which no one is suggesting. No one wants Fluffy to down a couple tall-boys then visit the local park with her .306. Squirrels DO annoy, but in this way, we all agree, lies madness.
Reasonable people could agree that there's a middle ground between pets being given a higher value than a four year old pair of shoes, yet less than a child. That's how I interpret the gist of what the pet-lovers are saying.
If the Chinese poison food train had brutally harsh consequences for poisoning our pets, they'd be less likely to infuse their product with antifreeze, which is a good outcome.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-411202-100x100.png\")
\"Please know that we are in direct communication with the pet owner whose dog was injured.\"
Can ANYBODY verify the truth in this?
@devsgurf: I was of the impression that this ball didn't have any vent hole(s) at all, and that's what caused the problem in the first place. Most balls that I've purchased for my dog only have 1 vent hole, not two or more. My point was that by chewing in the area of the one existing vent hole would create a single large hole with no other outlet/inlet for air which would allow the ball to become a suction device as it did.
Drink? Hell, how's the poor bastard going to lick himself?
@wiggatron: We've had plastic balls with just one squeaker opening, but the pimple balls have one larger hole to hear the bell and then a tiny pin hole on the other end (I checked my dogs' toybox when I got home). I wonder if a dog could hold the ball in such a way to block the vent as they're chewing around the larger hole.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-405405-100x100.png\")
All dog toys have warnings on them and when I used to work at a petstore, we would remind customers that if a dog begins destroying a toy to the point where pieces are coming off, then you need to take the toy away. They also warn you that dogs should always be monitored while playing with chew toys. Always.
The ball was destroyed when the vet was trying to get it off the dog's tongue. It was not damaged by the dog. The problem with the design is that there should be two holes in the ball to prevent a vacuum effect. If indeed there was supposed to be a pin hole, perhaps it should be larger than that.. obviously it is not working. And to those who say it should not be pulled or redesigned.. how many dead or maimed dogs should there be before it warrants redesigning? And how many have had issues with this toy that is not known.. quietly settled or just not mentioned to begin with?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-488475-100x100.png\")
Oh the poor thing! That is so sad.
My ex and I had a pet raccoon (the mother was killed and we raised it) and she had a pimple ball toy. She chewed a hole in it the same as in the picture. That makes me really glad nothing happened.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-492077-100x100.png\")
well the company should pay for the vet bill atleast.
but if there was just a squeaker hole then this was simply a freak accident. i don't think most reasonable people would have foreseen such an accident happening before they saw this. so i can't really say that it was negligent. their future products probably should have two holes just to be safe.
someone commented on rope toys..well it depends on the dog. not all dogs have skull crushing jaws:P many dogs can play with a rope toy and not destroy it. mine never did atleast.
and well, yes dogs aren't humans and shouldn't have the same rights. in a way both the company and the owner are at fault. if a toy is showing wear you gotta get rid of it, the dog has no sense. and many poorly trained dogs are from people anthropomorphizing them not realizing they think rather differently.
To all of the posters who gave Four Paws a pat on the back: Four Paws only did the right thing when the heat was turned up. The blog that Chai's master maintains states that Four Paws first discounted the severity of the incident, and then referred her to their insurance company.
To Kepler 11: People revere canines because they are innocent little
creates who, in the absence of free will as you so astutely observed,
are incapable of malicious behavior. Yes, and many of us treat them as
family members -- how irrational of us. When I die, I hope my spirit
goes where dogs go because God/Brahma/Allah wouldn't let such loving
beings simply pass into oblivion.
Dogs also depend on us to protect them, and we obviously let one of them
down.
The company has issued a recall. It's noted on their website. BTW the product also has been removed from their website. Sounds to me like they are stepping up which is nice to see!
I checked the Consumer Product Safety Commission's website today & searched for a recall on both the \"pimple ball\" and under the company name - no recalls posted (where they should be...). As this has been going on since August and still not on the CPSC's website I'm thinking their \"recall\" on the Four Paws site is halfhearted at best... I'm still boycotting!!!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-37033-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-327386-100x100.png\")
Wow, they paid attention. I hope they'll issue a fixed version soon.