Topic: Daily Mail

The Daily Mail has published a lead article today which accuses vets of profiteering through the over-treatment of dogs owned by people who are desperate to keep their pets alive.

The article points towards the corporatisation of the profession, with 51% of practices now owned by private equity groups and 67% belonging to a group of three practices or more, as the main driver for an increase in vets' fees of over twice the rate of inflation between 2015 and 2020. 

However, what the article focuses on, which is the issue of complex and very expensive treatments for pets, is a multifactorial problem which cannot be entirely blamed on corporatisation.  

At its heart lie advances in science which now allow vets to offer ever more complex treatments and diagnostics which, when used in human medicine to prolong a human life might sometimes seem expensive, but when used to prolong the life of a dog, can occasionally seem a bit bonkers.

Indeed the article does point towards over-treatment being partly driven by 'celebrity vets advocating increasingly complex surgeries'.

Then there's the fact that both parties to the transaction are often heavily invested in the idea of doing whatever can be done to save the dog: the pet owner, who has anthropomorphised their pet since they first collected it, and the vet, who's entire career has been dedicated to doing their best for the patient in their care. 

Then of course there's the inflationary effect of insurance on treatment.

After all, if the animal is insured, why wouldn't you throw the kitchen sink at it?

Things are complicated by the difficulty in estimating the cost of veterinary treatment at the outset, when so much depends on the unknown outcome of diagnostic tests, the progression of disease and the success or failure of treatment. It's not like quoting for a new exhaust system.

There's also the inflationary effect of the increasingly litigious and socially litigious world we live in. It would be no surprise if veterinary surgeons have become more likely to test for everything, when the consequences of missing something is a soul-destroying trial by social media. 

And finally, there's the subjective value of money. 

Nevertheless, the Daily Mail has a point.

Selling any product or service is about meeting clients' and customers' needs.

If you keep increasing the price of your product range  until all you can offer is a Rolls Royce, sooner or later you're going to price yourself out of the market.

One other lesson for the profession from that article: 'No comment' is not a good look for a caring profession.