A final year Bioveterinary Science student at Harper Adams University is carrying out some new research into Onchocerca Cervicalis, otherwise known as neck threadworm, and is asking equine vets to take part. 

The research is being conducted by Sarah Mansell under the supervision of Dr. Malgorzata Behnke. They say this parasite hasn't been studied in depth in the UK since the 1970's, because the symptoms can be controlled by routine worming measures. However, as the industry moves away from routine worming as a measure of reducing the risk of parasites developing resistances to treatments, a condition such as this which is now considered to be quite rare in the UK can start to re-emerge.

Sarah is asking vets to fill out a short questionnaire to assess awareness of Onchocerca Cervicalis in veterinary practices. The survey includes specific questions about the parasite as well as questions about cases of unresponsive skin conditions because a similarity in symptoms can lead to misdiagnoses that could, in fact, turn out to be Onchocerca Cervicalis.

Sarah said: "Hopefully the findings will raise awareness of this problem and help shape future research in this area."

She added: "I want to get vets thinking about this issue much more than perhaps they are at the moment."

To take part in the survey, visit: https://harper-adams.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/assessing-the-awareness-of-onchocerca-cervicalis-amongst-e-2

The BVA has chosen nine finalists for this year's Veterinary Photographer of the Year competition.

BVA President Malcolm Morley said: “Judging this competition has been genuinely both extremely enjoyable and really difficult.

"The entries this year have absolutely surpassed expectations and the level of talent on display is amazing.

"However, the photographs we have chosen are all well worthy of being finalists.

"From photos that made us laugh out loud, to others that made some of us feel close to tears, they evoked a range of emotions, but we were also impressed by the quality of the images, the creativity of the photographers and the composition of the photos, as well as the stories behind the lens.

The finalists are:

Vets at work

• A Gentle Touch by Sam Price. A Ring-tailed Lemur gently grasps the vet’s finger while recovering from an anaesthetic.
  
  
  
• Mopping the Brow by Justyn Loveridge shows some light relief after a long procedure.
  
  
  
• #Colostrumisgold by Sophie Aylett, captures the moment a young calf was up and on the teat before the cow’s muscle layers were even sutured up following a c-section. 
  

All creatures great and small

• Roe Buck Running by Jenny Grewal, who photographed this roe buck as he ran through the mustard flowers in the fields of an estate on the Wiltshire-Hampshire border.
  
  
  
• On the Shoulders of Giants by Katherine Edmondson. Taken at sunrise at Kwantu Game Reserve, South Africa, this image shows three red-billed oxpeckers hunting for insects on the back of a young giraffe in the early hours of the morning.
  
  
  
• Cheeky Munch by Lilia Silva, who had gone to a local park in London to take photos of birds but couldn’t resist capturing a cheeky squirrel munching away on some berries.
  

Happy pets that make us smile

• Jumping for Joy by Sam Price. This photo features dog Winnie, who loves nothing more than a beach day.
  
  
  
• Snow Focused by Alice Watson. Rusty the dog on a snowy day in Nowton Park, Bury St Edmunds.
  
  
  
• Main picture: Sheep-a-Doodle Do! by Charlotte Clough. A car boot overflowing with six 12-week-old puppies, in a vet surgery car park.

The winners will be announced at BVA Live at Birmingham’s NEC in May, where this year there is also an opportunity for BVA Live delegates to vote for their favourite image from the shortlist, with a new ‘People’s Choice’ winner being announced in the weeks following the event.

VetSurgeon.org has announced the launch of VetSurgeon Jobs, a new service designed to change the way veterinary surgeons are hired, saving veterinary practices hundreds, sometimes thousands of pounds.

Since 1761, when the veterinary profession first came into existence, employers have had no choice but to advertise job opportunities for veterinary surgeons and practice managers in magazines. 

Editing, printing and publishing a magazine is an eye-wateringly expensive business, costs which have been reflected in the price advertisers have had to pay.

The Internet has brought those costs right down. Furthermore, in a survey of job seekers carried out last earlier this month by VetSurgeon.org, 70% said they spend most time browsing jobs online these days, as opposed to in a magazine. 

However, when you look at the costs of advertising on websites published by veterinary magazine publishers, which start at £395 and quickly rise to £795 for a 28-day online advert, it is clear that these prices still reflect the considerable costs of magazine production. 

Today, VetSurgeon.org launches it’s online-only job advertising service, priced simply at £99+VAT, which gets you a 60-day advert on the website most followed by UK veterinary surgeons. 

That price doesn’t just offer a considerable saving over alternatives in the veterinary profession, it also beats the major online-only players outside the profession (including Monster, Reed and Totaljobs)

There’s more to it than just price, though. Unlike the alternatives, VetSurgeon Jobs is not an 'off-the-shelf' solution, but something designed from the ground up for the veterinary profession.

For jobseekers, VetSurgeon Jobs has been designed to make finding the right job as simple and straightforward as possible. Just enter the postcode and search radius, and the available jobs re-order by distance. You can subscribe to be alerted of only those jobs that meet your very specific criteria (such as locum positions within a given radius). Perhaps most importantly, VetSurgeon Jobs is an integral part of the thriving community on VetSurgeon.org. So you can add your CV to your online profile and then engage directly with employers on the site.

For employers, VetSurgeon offers the opportunity to publish a more engaging, interesting advertisement than is currently offered anywhere else, including maps, photos, logos and headline propositions.

Arlo Guthrie said: "It’s a cliche, but if ever there was a 'win-win' situation, this is it. I’m able to offer you the chance to save a small fortune, whilst making some for myself and to reinvest in yet more features designed to support your profession."

For more information, visit https://www.vetsurgeon.org/jobs/, ring 0207 183 2511 or email support@vetsurgeon.org. 

And if you want to support our efforts ... please share this story using the links immediately below.

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has reprimanded one veterinary surgeon and suspended another for four months, following a joint hearing regarding their professional conduct while they were in practice in Slough, Berkshire in August 2016.

The Disciplinary Committee considered a number of charges against Javier Salas Navarro MRCVS and Roman Kristin over 35 days.

The charges against Dr Navarro concerned his treatment of a kitten named Marnie. They included: 

• In August 2016, failing to read the anaesthesia consent form in relation to a surgical spay he performed;

• When Marnie was readmitted for surgery, failing to read the anaesthesia consent form, failing to undertake adequate assessment of Marnie’s condition; performing surgery without adequately considering her condition; subjecting Marnie to anaesthesia without recognising the seriousness of her illness; failing to obtain informed consent from the owners; administering medication which was contra-indicated; and failure to make an adequate record of his involvement in Marnie’s care.

The charges against Dr Kristin also related to his treatment of Marnie. They included:  

• In August 2016, failing to undertake an adequate assessment of her condition; failure to recognise and record the fact that Marnie could not pass urine; failure to refer or offer her for specialist treatment; and failure to ensure Marnie received care and treatment overnight. 

• When admitting Marnie for surgery, that he made a number of clinical mistakes including failure to gain informed consent; and failure to recognise the seriousness of her illness;

• that there were a number of failings in relation to Marnie’s care, including failure to arrange adequate overnight care, failure to monitor and record her condition, and failure to gain informed consent for the overnight care.

• that he failed to advise Marnie’s owners that he suspected her uterers had been ligated during the spay, failed to advise Marnie’s owners that she required specialist veterinary treatment; and advised that Marnie undergo further surgery at the practice in spite of this meaning her having to undergo further anaesthesia in a week and with poor chances of survival;

• that the above conduct was misleading and dishonest.

The Disciplinary Committee found a number of the facts in the charges against both Dr Navarro and Dr Kristin proven (the full details can be found in the documentation at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary). 

The Committee found that Dr Navarro breached a number of aspects of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons including: making animal health and welfare the first consideration when attending to animals; the provision of appropriate and adequate veterinary care; responsible prescription, supply and administration of medicines; communication with professional colleagues to ensure the health and welfare of the animal; being open and honest with clients and respecting their needs and requirements; effective communication with clients; keeping clear and accurate clinical records; and working with the veterinary team to coordinate the care of animals. 

Of the proven charges, the Committee found that his initial failure to read Marnie’s anaesthesia consent form on 5 August did not amount to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, but that the repetition of this failure on 9 August did amount to disgraceful conduct. It also found that Dr Navarro’s failure to undertake adequate assessment and perform surgery without this assessment amounted to serious professional misconduct. Furthermore, the Committee found that subjecting Marnie to anaesthesia in spite of her being unwell, failure to obtain informed consent and failure to keep adequate records also amounted to serious professional misconduct. 

For Dr Kristin, in summary, the Committee found not proven the allegation that he had failed to respond on 5 August 2016 to concerns from Marnie’s owners about her condition while she was recovering from a surgical spay and also all the allegations relating to Dr Kristin’s admission of Marnie to the practice on 9 August on the basis that it was not satisfied so as to be sure that Dr Kristin had been the veterinary surgeon who admitted Marnie on that day. 

The Committee found proven the remaining charges and found he breached the following parts of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons: making animal health and welfare the first consideration when attending to animals; keeping within area of competence and referring responsibly; providing appropriate and adequate veterinary care; responsible prescribing, supply and administration of medicines; communication with colleagues to ensure the health and welfare of the animal; being open and honest with clients and respecting their needs and requirements; communicating effectively with clients and obtaining informed consent; keeping clear and accurate clinical records; and working with the veterinary team to coordinate the care of animals.

Of the proven charges, the Committee determined that his failure to adequately assess Marnie’s health, to obtain a clinical history, to undertake blood tests and recognise that she was seriously ill, amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect and led to “Marnie’s underlying condition going undetected and undoubtedly contributed to her eventual death two days later”. 

The Committee also found that Dr Kristin’s decision to hospitalise Marnie without adequate overnight care, place her on IV fluids without monitoring the treatment or her condition, and failure to obtain adequate informed consent – among other things – amounted disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.

Stuart Drummond, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "As a direct result of Dr Kristin’s acts and omissions, Marnie was left alone overnight on fluids when those fluids had nowhere to go. Had he done his job properly he would have known that and Marnie could have avoided the prolonged suffering caused by the chosen course of treatment that did not address the underlying condition. Every element of Dr Kristin’s behaviour was catastrophic for Marnie, and yet he took no personal responsibility for her welfare and just went home.” 

Following its findings on disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, the Committee then went on to consider its sanction for both Dr Navarro and Dr Kristin.

In respect of Dr Navarro, the Committee considered the mitigating factors including previous good character, admissions to some of the facts of the case from the outset; genuine insight and remorse into the seriousness of the actions; his youth and inexperience; and relevant and good-quality testimonials from colleagues. The Committee noted that the testimonials were universally positive and demonstrated that Dr Navarro had reflected on his conduct, had become more mature and confident in his practice and made efforts to rectify the areas in which he had fallen below standards. 

Stuart Drummond said: “Although the consequences for Marnie and her owners were clearly devastating, the Committee considered that Dr Navarro’s part in her demise has to be seen in the context of all the evidence. In light of the extensive mitigation, including significant evidence of insight and remediation, the Committee was able to conclude that Dr Navarro did not represent a future risk to animals or the public. In such circumstances, the Committee considered that it was not necessary to restrict Dr Navarro’s registration and that a reprimand was the appropriate and proportionate sanction in his case.”

In relation to Dr Kristin, the Committee took into account positive character evidence from Mr Karel Daniel, a semi-retired veterinary surgeon and Vice-President of the Czech Republic Veterinary Chamber, a similar body to the RCVS in that country, as well as other testimonials on his behalf. In mitigation, the Committee considered Dr Kristin’s previously unblemished career, the fact that it was a single case involving a single animal; some development of insight into his conduct; no evidence of repetition; expressions of remorse; the impact of a family bereavement during the course of proceedings; and his financial position.

However, the Committee also took into account aggravating factors including a lack of candour from Dr Kristin when he was giving evidence, demonstrated by a tendency to blame others rather than take responsibility, as well as his recklessness in suggesting a third operation on Marnie that was not in her interests, rather than referring her into specialist care.

The final decision of the Committee on the sanction for Dr Kristin was that, given the seriousness of the misconduct, it was satisfied that this warranted a six-month suspension period. However, given the mitigating factors, the Committee decided that four months was appropriate and proportionate. 

Commenting on the sanction Stuart Drummond said: “The Committee determined that it was important a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and not to be tolerated. It brings discredit upon the respondent and discredit upon the profession and, most importantly, caused harm to Marnie and great distress to her owners.

"The Committee did consider whether to remove Dr Kristin from the Register. However, in light of the mitigation in this case, the fact that this was a single case in an otherwise unblemished career, together with the unlikelihood he would repeat his disgraceful conduct, the Committee decided that, in all the circumstances, to remove him from the Register would be disproportionate.

"The Committee therefore decided to order that the Registrar suspend Dr Kristin’s registration…. The Committee was satisfied that a period of four months was appropriate and proportionate in all the circumstances."

The full facts and findings from the case can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary 

Xperior Farm Health, one of the bidders for the government contracts to provide TB testing, has announced that it mounted a legal challenge to the procurement process, but has now withdrawn that challenge in the face of the 'aggressive' timeframe in which Defra demanded that it submit its case.

Xperior says it was made aware last month that all five Delivery Partner contracts would be awarded to members of the same veterinary group (XL Vets), which it felt would both compromise competition and make Defra overly reliant on one service provider.

In addition, Xperior said it believed the successful bids were unfeasibly low, which presents a potentially devastating threat to the viability of many rural vet practices and a seriously reduced quality of TB testing service to farmers.

Xperior says it initially notified a formal query to the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA - the executive agency of Defra responsible for awarding the contracts) during the pre-announcement consultation period, and believes other bidders may have done likewise. The query was dismissed, as a result of which the company issued legal proceedings.

Xperior's Veterinary Director, Phil Elkins said: "We are concerned that proposed payment rates for TB testing are considerably lower than those proposed by other bidders, and at a level which questions the viability of practices continuing to provide TB testing services to their clients.

"The consequence would be either unfairly low payment rates for official veterinarians (OVs) who conduct TB testing, or an influx of inexperienced vets, potentially from other countries, into low paid positions. The loss of TB testing income would also challenge the viability of some rural veterinary businesses and the relationships held with their clients.

"Either way, this is contrary to a key tenet in the pre-tender documentation that Delivery Partners are expected to maintain a flow of TB testing work and revenue to contribute to the capability of the veterinary profession in rural areas to support food security and the rural economy."

Meanwhile, an APHA spokesperson said they were limited in how much they could say before the formal announcement of the award, except that: “APHA is confident in the robustness of the procurement process and that the selected bidders are the best candidates to deliver this vital service in the most effective way.”

VetSurgeon.org understands that now the legal challenge has been dropped, an official announcement of the winner will likely be made within days. However, it also seems likely that the payment rates for OVs will remain confidential even after the announcement of the award, so it may be some time before the prospects for OVs become clear.

Hertfordshire-based, multi-specialist veterinary referral centre Davies Veterinary Specialists' new pro bono scheme has saved the life of a young German shepherd dog twice in fortnight.

'Apollo' first impaled himself on some broken fence panels whilst playing. A splinter of wood, which was around 5cm long and 1.5cm wide, became lodged between his heart and lungs. However, because he initially had no symptoms and there was no obvious puncture wound, his owner Sam Russell from Leighton Buzzard wasn't aware that anything was wrong. It was a week later when the dog suddenly became very anxious, uncomfortable and was struggling to breathe, that Sam rushed him to her local vet practice, Heath and Reach in Bedfordshire.

Hannah Johnston's initial diagnosis was that the dog had some foreign material lodged internally that was causing an infection. Without an urgent CT scan and surgery his chances of survival were minimal, but his owner was uninsured and had no means of affording the treatment. Hannah had recently read about a pro bono scheme introduced by Davies Veterinary Specialists and believed that Apollo's case fitted the criteria.

She said: "It was heart wrenching to think that a young dog, with such a caring owner, was very likely to lose his life and I was determined to do anything I could to help. I couldn't help shedding a tear when DVS agreed to treat him, as I knew Apollo now had a chance. His owner had recently had an awful spate of bad luck and was so deserving of DVS's help."

Manuel Jiménez Peláez, European Veterinary Specialist in Surgery at DVS, who operated on Apollo, said: "A CT scan showed a large, fluid-filled cavity, a partially collapsed lung and a sharp, thin, elongated structure, lodged between Apollo's lungs and his heart. We drained the cavity and successfully removed the foreign body. We also had to remove most of the irreparably damaged left lung."

Apollo was in hospital for two weeks, five days of which were spent in intensive care in a critical condition. Sam was thrilled when she was eventually able to take him home, but two days later disaster struck again. Apollo was diagnosed with gastric dilation volvulus. He needed surgery within six hours to survive the condition and DVS once again stepped in to operate as an emergency, free of charge.

Apollo has made a full recovery is now back at home with the Russell family. Sam Russell said: "Apollo has always been so determined and full of life. Even when he was dangerously ill and in intensive care he wouldn't give up and tried to rouse himself to come home with me. For Davies Vet Specialists to save my dog once is nothing short of amazing but for them to save him twice makes me speechless with gratitude. To be shown such kindness after a dreadful run of bad luck would leave anyone stuck for words."

All first opinion practices are eligible to apply for the DVS pro bono scheme, which will allow an average of one patient per month to receive free treatment. Requests will be based on advocacy from the clinical head of the referring practice and on genuine need. To find out more visit http://www.vetspecialists.co.uk/ or call Dr Clive Elwood, Managing Director, on 01582 883950.

Researchers from Ghent University (UGhent), Austria Veterinary Medicine School (Austria VetMed) and the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) have published the first systematic review of the evidence for the efficacy and safety of all anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) in feline epilepsy.

The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and adverse effect profile of each individual AED by analysing all available data published and then evaluating how reliable it was.

The researchers gathered, screened and assessed all the information published in peer-reviewed journals and publications. The individual studies were then evaluated based on the quality of evidence, study design, study group sizes, subject enrolment quality and overall risk of bias, as well as the efficacy and safety outcome measures.

Lead-author, Marios Charalambous from Ghent University, said: "We recruited systematic methods to combine, compare and summarise the results of independent studies and, therefore, create more objective and reliable conclusions based on the current evidence. It was a time-consuming, demanding and challenging process, and we hope we provided the clinicians now with essential information which they can use for daily practice." 

The researchers found that much of the evidence for the medical treatment of feline epilepsy was based on below-par reporting of efficacy and adverse effect, worse than what was formerly reported in dogs.

The lack of good quality evidence led authors to conclude that it would be: "...rather inaccurate to make definite statements on which one [AED] should be considered as a first or second choice in terms of both efficacy and safety profile. However, if clinicians focus on AED’s efficacy, phenobarbital can be used as first-choice monotherapy and if they focus on AED’s safety, imepitoin or levetiracetam can be used." 

Holger Volk, Head of the Department Clinical Science and Services and Professor of Veterinary Neurology and Neurosurgery at the RVC, said: "Not only does this study offer a new perspective on the management of feline epilepsy, but also highlights the importance of the need for trials which provide high quality evidence in order to have more reliable and objective results about the efficacy and safety of the AEDs in feline epilepsy."

The study was published in BMC Veterinary Research (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-018-1386-3).

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has restored a veterinary surgeon who had previously been convicted of fraud to the Register, after finding him fit to resume practising.

Matthew Morgan had pleaded guilty to four counts of fraud in July 2013 having fraudulently claimed over £200,000 in pet insurance claims between November 2009 and December 2012. In August 2013 he was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, for which he served 12 months and was then released on licence.

Following his conviction and sentence, his case was brought to the RCVS Disciplinary Committee in February 2014 where it was decided to strike him off the Register. When his licence period expired on 18 August 2015, Mr Morgan applied for restoration to the Register.

During the course of the hearing, the Disciplinary Committee heard evidence from Mr Morgan, who accepted the findings of the Committee, describing the evidence as ‘fair’ and acknowledging the seriousness of his actions.

The Committee felt that Mr Morgan’s criminal conduct was very grave, as reflected in his custodial sentence and the fact that, as an Australian citizen, he had been issued with a deportation notice by the Home Office. It also felt that his crime had struck at the heart of public confidence in a profession for which honesty and integrity is expected.

However, the Committee considered that Mr Morgan, if restored, would pose few risks in respect of protection of the public, having no concerns about his competence as a veterinary surgeon, and accepted that there was little future risk to animal welfare if he were to be restored.

The Committee also considered that, since his release from prison, Mr Morgan has taken extensive steps to rehabilitate himself, has undertaken continuing professional development and has been working as a veterinary care assistant at two veterinary practices to keep up-to-date with current practice.

Furthermore, the Committee was satisfied that there was public support for Mr Morgan continuing as a veterinary surgeon given the references and testimonials submitted on his behalf.

In coming to its conclusion the Disciplinary Committee reiterated the seriousness of Mr Morgan’s criminal offending, saying that it had caused it “the greatest concern”. However, it also felt that issues of rehabilitation needed to be considered.

Professor Alistair Barr, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee cannot emphasise enough the fact that veterinary surgeons who commit acts of fraud in the exercise of their practice can expect severe consequences, both in the criminal courts and within their own College and there can be no doubt that the decision to remove the applicant from the Register was a proper reflection of the seriousness of his offending.

“Given all of the matters referred to above, however, the Committee considers that the applicant has demonstrated sufficiently that he has learned the lessons required and is now fit to be restored to the Register.”

TVM UK, the maker of veterinary medicines, hygiene products and supplements, has changed its name to that of its parent company, Dômes Pharma.

Jonathan Hill (UK Country Manager) said: “I’m delighted to announce that TVM UK is changing its name to Dômes Pharma.

"This will align with the other operating companies within the group.

"TVM UK has always been owned by the Dômes Pharma group, and since the start of our journey in the UK market we have been synonymous with expertise and outstanding levels of customer service in selected speciality segments of the animal health market and this won’t change.”

“Under the Dômes Pharma name we will continue to build and grow on this very strong foundation.

"I’m looking forward to working with the entire Dômes Pharma team as we increase our presence as a leading specialty pharmaceutical company, bringing our ethos to new speciality segments with innovative products and solutions for vets in the UK.

"Dômes Pharma remains a family-owned business, and the culture of the company really reflects this and we live by our values of kindness, boldness and responsibility.”

https://www.domespharma.com 
https://www.tvm-uk.com

Researchers at the University of Liverpool are asking veterinary surgeons to take part in a survey to explore the reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs).

It is hoped the survey will capture the experiences vets have had reporting ADRs, as well as identifying barriers to the current process which could be used to improve the ease with which ADRs are reported in the future.

PhD student Heather Davies (pictured right), who is leading the research project, said: "The survey is an important opportunity to gain insights into the issues that vets  face when dealing with ADRs.

"We want to make the process easier in order to improve the safety of veterinary medicines, and ultimately, we need the help of professionals on the front line in order to do that."

She added: "The survey is relatively short and can be completed anonymously. 

"We’re really keen to gather as many of your experiences as possible so we’d like to encourage veterinary professionals to complete it."

The research is being carried out as part of a PhD project funded by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) in collaboration with the Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network (SAVSNET), based at the university.

The survey is now open and you can take part here: https://liverpool.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/adrs-vet

Any questions about the survey can be addressed directly to the researchers: Heather Davies (PhD student): H.H.Davies@liverpool.ac.uk and/or Dr David Killick (Supervisor): David.Killick@liverpool.ac.uk.

Vets Now Ltd, the provider of out-of-hours emergency vet care has announced the acquisition of Salus Quality Partnerships (QP), a Health and Safety service provider to the veterinary profession in the UK.

Vets Now says this acquisition will extend the range of its services aimed at improving the quality of life within the profession and supporting practices to run more efficiently.

Vets Now currently runs 50 emergency clinics throughout the country including two referral hospitals in Scotland and the South West of England. In recent years Vets Now has extended its offering to the profession to include business services aimed at supporting vet practices. These services include Lifelearn (Client Education & Compliance), Staff Training Services, RCVS Practice Standards support and Practice Web services.

Salus QP, which has been running for over 18 years, offers veterinary practices information and services to help them comply with Health and Safety legislation and an anaesthetic monitoring service.

Richard Dixon, Founder of Vets Now said: "Our core purpose at Vets Now has always been to improve the lives of vets and pets, and the recent addition of Salus QP will help to do exactly that. The Salus QP team, led by Mark Enright and Alison Clark, have extensive knowledge in their field and crucially they fully understand the issues as they specifically apply to veterinary practices. With Salus QP our aim is to keep it simple and practical, helping practices fulfil their obligations without letting the Health and Safety tail wag the practice dog. I am very much looking forward to working with both Mark and Alison in the future as we take a fresh and common sense approach to Health and Safety in our profession."

Mark Enright said: "Salus QP and Vets Now both share a strong commitment to the veterinary profession and I truly believe that together we will be greater than the sum of our parts.  I look forward to a future of innovations and benefits for all, and to continue to form quality partnerships within the veterinary profession."

There has been a notable change to the RCVS council elections this year: candidates are now required to answer a number of insightful questions so that voters can better understand what they would bring to the party if elected. 

In previous years, candidates were only asked to provide manifestos, which often contained information that wasn't especially relevant to whether or not they should be elected to Council. 

Now, they are asked to share their reasons for wanting to be elected, what they can bring to Council and what experience they have. 

That should make it much easier for voters to pick the right candidates, which is no bad thing because there are 20 vets standing this year, a record since electronic records began in 1997 and 1 more than the previous best in 2014.

This year’s candidates are:

Louise Allum MRCVS
Sam Bescoby MRCVS
Andrew Clemence MRCVS
Tshidi Gardiner MRCVS
Reginald Godwin MRCVS
Paddy Gordon MRCVS
Danielle Greenberg MRCVS
Gerard Henry MRCVS
Richard Hillman MRCVS
Benjamin Kennedy MRCVS
Darren Partridge MRCVS
Martin Peaty MRCVS
Alison Price MRCVS
Peter Robinson MRCVS
Jennifer Simmons MRCVS
Sadie Spencer MRCVS
Mary Thomas MRCVS
William Wilkinson MRCVS
Lara Wilson MRCVS

and the inevitable Tom Lonsdale MRCVS.

The full biographies and election statements for each candidate are available to read at www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote25.

The four candidates who get the most votes will take up their four-year terms on RCVS Council at the College’s Annual General Meeting on Friday 4 July 2025.

Simon Wiklund, Assistant Registrar and Returning Officer for both elections, said: “We are glad to see such a large number of veterinary professionals putting themselves forward as candidates for this year’s elections.

"It is worth noting that any future governance changes, including RCVS and VN Councils becoming all-appointed bodies, are contingent on new legislation and, until that happens, we will continue to hold our annual elections.

“You may have also noticed some differences with this year’s elections, particularly in terms of the candidate statements.

"This is thanks to a change to our election scheme, which provides greater flexibility about how we run our elections, and the information that we can ask the candidates to submit.

“This means that, rather than asking candidates for a broad manifesto statement, we’ve asked them to answer key questions that are relevant to the role of a Council member, including what skills and experiences they can bring to the table.”

Ahead of the elections, RCVS will be running its ‘Quiz the candidates’ initiative in which veterinary surgeons can submit questions to the candidates standing in their respective elections, in order to better understand them and their views.

However, due to the additional information now included in each of their statements, this year candidates will only answer one question of their choice each.

Before submitting questions to the candidates, please note the RCVS will only accept one question per person. Offensive, defamatory and inaccurate questions will be rejected by the Returning Officer and not be passed on to candidates.

Veterinary surgeons can submit a question to the RCVS Council candidates by emailing vetvote25@rcvs.org.uk.