Titled 'Animal Welfare For The Many, Not The Few' (uh?), the policy proposes appointing an Animal Welfare Commissioner to ensure Government policy across Whitehall is informed by the latest scientific evidence on animal sentience.
The proposed policies in the document include a number of things the Conservatives have already been working on, such as:
Prohibiting the third party sale of puppies. All puppies will need to be sold with their mother on site.
Increasing maximum sentences for those convicted of animal cruelty.
Introducing mandatory CCTV in all slaughterhouses.
Enshrining the principle of animal sentience in law, covering all policy areas to prevent practices that expose animals to cruel and degrading treatment.
Introducing a ban on ivory trading.
However, Labour propose a number of additional ideas which are now open for a public consultation, including:
Improving accessibility to vets for those on low incomes/receiving financial support, working with organisations like the PDSA to explore how access to affordable vet care can be expanded.
Banning the use of animal shock collars, including sale and importation.
Expanding mandatory microchipping to cats.
Consulting with landlords and tenants on the ability for tenants to keep pets as default unless there is evidence that the animal is causing a nuisance.
Ending the badger cull.
Strengthening the Hunting Act, closing loopholes that allow for illegal hunting of foxes and hares.
Banning Foie Gras (which the Conservatives say is impossible under EU rules which Labour has said it wishes to continue following post-Brexit)
Mandatory labelling of domestic and imported meat, including country of origin, method of production and slaughter (stun or non-stun)
Requiring motorists to report accidents where an animal has been injured.
Banning wild animals in circuses.
Sue Hayman MP, Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, said: "Labour is the party of animal welfare. From bringing in the ban on fox hunting to tightening the rules on the transport of live animals, Labour has always been consistent in our leadership on matters of animal welfare.
"Today we’re making proposals for real, long-term progress. Our vision is one where no animal is made to suffer unnecessary pain and we continue to drive up standards and practice in line with the most recent advances and understanding."
Conservative MP Steve Double said: "Labour are belatedly playing catch-up with the huge progress made by this Government on animal welfare.
However, Labour wouldn’t even be able to deliver some of these promises because they want to keep following EU rules after Brexit.
From introducing mandatory CCTV into slaughter houses to increasing the maximum sentence for animal cruelty ten-fold, the Conservatives will continue taking the action needed to ensure animals receive the proper protection they deserve."
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed charges of serious professional misconduct against a veterinary surgeon and former employee of Medivet (Watford).
Tomasz Nazimek, who qualified in Poland in 2001 before starting work in England in 2005, was alleged to have charged for the use of a blood pressure monitor during an exploratory laparotomy on a cat called Mitzi, whilst working at the Watford branch of Medivet in June 2009, when he knew, or ought to have known, it had not been used.
Despite his previous signed statements to the contrary, Mr Nazimek admitted at the outset of the hearing that no blood pressure monitor had in fact been used.
Accordingly, the Committee only had to establish whether Mr Nazimek himself had entered the fee for its use into Mitzi's records and, if so, whether this was done dishonestly.
The alleged incident came to light as a result of a covert investigation into Medivet conducted by the television production company Fulcrum TV in 2008/9, and subsequently commissioned by the BBC and broadcast in July 2010 as part of the Panorama programme 'It Shouldn't Happen at a Vets''.
Former dental nurse Alexandra Lee was employed by Fulcrum TV as an undercover reporter to work as a 'trainee veterinary nurse' at Medivet, in order to record audio and video footage of her experiences there.
The case against Mr Nazimek was based partly on a conversation overheard by Miss Lee following the operation on Mitzi, where she maintained that Guy Carter, a senior Medivet partner and veterinary surgeon, told Mr Nazimek (who was sitting at the practice computer typing up Mitzi's records) not to forget to include a fee for use of the blood pressure monitor.
However, Miss Lee's equipment had not recorded this exchange, due to a fault, and her video diary of that day's events was not put in evidence before the Committee. Miss Lee also accepted in evidence that she had not actually seen who entered the fee into the records, but had assumed it was Mr Nazimek.
Despite giving serious consideration to all of Miss Lee's evidence, the Committee found it of limited value.
The Committee considered the statements signed by Mr Nazimek, but prepared for him by the Medivet senior management in December 2009 and October 2010, which stated that he had used the monitor, consulted Mr Carter about charging for it and then added the fee himself.
The Committee also considered a third statement provided to the College (September 2011), in which Mr Nazimek recalled that Mr Carter had priced up the operation himself, but not asked for his input.
When questioned about the discrepancies in his statements, Mr Nazimek told the Committee that he had confused different operations and now knew his earlier statements to be wrong.
He indicated that he had been under pressure from his then employers to sign the statements, that his attempts to change them were ignored by Medivet's managing partners and that he was depressed and under stress at the time.
He was not told that the statements could be in relation to charges against him, or that he was entitled to legal advice when discussing them with his employers.
The Committee found Mr Nazimek's oral evidence to be persuasive, his manner open and his responses under cross-examination frank.
In the absence of satisfactory and reliable evidence to the contrary, and in view of supportive testimonials provided from his current employer and former colleagues as to his honesty and integrity, the Committee found Mr Nazimek's repeated assertion that he did not make a charge for the monitor "entirely plausible" and believed that he told the truth.
Nevertheless, the Committee emphasised that a charge for the monitor had been entered into the records when no such device had been used, which it regarded as unacceptable.
Speaking on behalf of the Committee, Chairman Professor Peter Lees said: "The Committee is not satisfied by the evidence so that it is sure that [Mr Nazimek] entered into the records for Mitzi a charge for the blood pressure monitor. [It] believes that [Mr Nazimek] told the truth when giving his evidence and the character references support his honesty.
"In these circumstances, it is not necessary to consider the charges further and the allegations against [Mr Nazimek] are dismissed."
Furosoral contains furosemide and is indicated for the treatment of hydrothorax, hydropericardium, ascites and oedema, particularly in animals where these conditions are associated with cardiac insufficiency and renal dysfunction.
Furosoral replaces Dechra’s previous diuretic treatment, Frusedale.
It is available in both 10 mg and 40 mg double-divisable tablets.
The recommended daily starting dose for cats and dogs is 2.5 mg per kg of body weight.
Dechra says careful weighing is essential to ensure accurate dosing, but that the dosage can be doubled initially for severe or particularly resistant cases and adjusted to the lowest clinically effective dose for maintenance therapy if required.
Dechra companion animal brand manager, Charlotte Hill, said: “Furosoral offers a flexible treatment solution where dosage can be adjusted, depending on the needs of the patient and the underlying causes, to give vets more options for treating cats and dogs with fluid retention.
“To ensure it is as appealing to pet owners as it is to veterinary professionals, Furosoral is available in our innovative Smart Tab format, giving owners confidence that they are giving their dog or cat the right dosage and aiding compliance, leading to better outcomes for the animal.”
Furosoral 10 mg and 40 mg tablets are available in blister packs of 100 tablets for quick and easy dispensing. Divided tablets can be stored in the blister pack for up to three days, ensuring no waste.
https://www.dechra.co.uk/products/dog/prescription#/search=furosoral/.
The newsletter will include anaesthesia updates, bulletins and recaps, access to videos and downloadable resources.
Articles in Anaesthesia1ST are being written by Jurox’s technical advisors in collaboration with anaesthesia specialists such as Carl Bradbrook (European Veterinary Specialist in Anaesthesia and Analgesia and an RCVS Recognised Specialist in Veterinary Anaesthesia) and Ian Self (European Specialist in Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia, Associate Professor in Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham).
The first newsletter launched on 15th May and included: ‘Capnography I – not just a load of hot air’, ‘Perspectives on premeds – Alpha-2 agonists’ and ‘What’s new in anaesthesia? Highlights of recent preoxygenation paper’.
Articles in future editions will include: ‘Capnography II – what happened to the elephants?’, ‘Pain, what a pain! Local and regional nerve blocks improve outcomes and welfare of patients’, “The Big Chill – temperature management in sedated and anaesthetised patients’ and ‘Perspectives on premeds – a complete series of articles covering the ins and outs of the different agents, how they compare and recommended use in the different patient types’.
Jurox says that downloadable resources will include a capnography cheat-sheet detailing different traces and their meaning, premedication drugs comparison tables and pre and post rabbit anaesthesia check-lists.
Richard Beckwith, country manager of Jurox (UK) Ltd, said: "We take great pride in our investment in educational initiatives to enable veterinary professionals to deliver best practice anaesthesia to their clients. The new Anaesthesia1ST newsletter further demonstrates our commitment to educational support resources to enable veterinary professionals to attain and maintain 1ST class anaesthesia for all patients."
To sign up to the Anaesthesia1ST newsletter, click here, visit the Alfaxan website – www.alfaxan.co.uk, contact your local Jurox technical sales representative or email Jurox at: info@jurox.co.uk.
The CPD-qualifying webinar is being given by Professor Saul Faust, Professor of Paediatric Immunology & Infectious Diseases at the University of Southampton, and Ian Wright MRCVS, a veterinary parasitologist, Head of ESCCAP UK & Ireland and one of the owners of The Mount Veterinary Practice in Lancashire.
The webinar will reveal the real threat of this disease and its impact on sufferers, and give an insight to the challenges of diagnosing the condition.
Register for the webinar here: https://cloud.mc.zoetis.com/beneath-the-fur-webinar
The Disciplinary Committee heard three charges against Dr Jones.
The first and second charges were that, in March 2018, Dr Jones made signed entries in the passports and made corresponding entries in clinical records of four horses indicating that he had administered an influenza vaccination booster to each horse on 15 March 2018 and in relation to another horse a tetanus booster, when in fact he had administered the vaccination boosters on 21 March 2018, and that his conduct was misleading, dishonest and undermined the integrity of a vaccination process designed to promote animal welfare.
The third charge was that, on or around 21 March 2018, Dr Jones failed to make any entries in the clinical records for a horse in relation to an examination on 21 March 2018.
At the outset of the hearing Dr Jones admitted the facts in the first and second charges, and accepted that his actions were misleading, dishonest and that they undermined the integrity of a vaccination process. However, he disputed certain aspects of the written statements of the College’s witnesses. In particular he wanted his conduct to be taken in the context of the pressures that he was working under on that day, primarily that he was in a stressed state having had to euthanase a valuable stallion at the conclusion of his previous client appointment.
Dr Jones did not admit the third charge, explaining that he did not remember examining the horse on 21 March 2018 as alleged.
Based on Dr Jones' own admissions, the Committee found the first and second charges proven.
Regarding the third charge, the Committee heard evidence from the horse’s owner who said they were present during the examination taking place and the Committee was satisfied that the respondent did examine the horse on 21 March 2018 and that he had a duty to make a brief clinical note on the examination. As Dr Jones admitted that he made no such note, the Committee found the charge to have been proven to the requisite standard.
Having found the charges proven, the Committee then went on to consider whether or not Dr Jones’ proven conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct. The Committee, having considered the aggravating and mitigating factors, found that Dr Jones’ conduct as found proved in relation to both charges one and two, did constitute serious professional misconduct.
However, with regards to charge three, the Committee accepted that the respondent simply forgot that he had examined the horse and, therefore, the Committee was not satisfied that the failure to compile a record entry covering the horse’s examination constituted serious professional misconduct.
The Committee then considered what sanction to impose on Dr Jones in relation to the facts found proven in charges one and two. In doing so it took into account the 78 written testimonials and 4 character witnesses called on behalf of Dr Jones.
Ian Green, who chaired the Committee and spoke on its behalf, said: "The Committee’s decision on sanction has been based on an acceptance that the respondent’s conduct on this occasion was out-of-character, as the evidence of his character witnesses and the contents of the letters submitted in his support by his clients and other veterinary colleagues assert. The Committee also accepts that the respondent self-reported himself to his employer and to the College and has made a full and frank admission of his wrongdoing.
"Consideration was given to whether the sanction of a reprimand and/or warning as to future conduct would adequately reflect the gravity of the misconduct, however, after careful reflection it was concluded that such a sanction could not be justified. The reason is that acts of falsification involve acts of dishonesty by a professional person acting in a professional capacity, and the gravity of the matter arises not simply from the dishonesty but also from the possible consequences of the false certification. It should be clearly understood by members of the veterinary profession that, in appropriate false certification cases, the sanction of removal from the Register is one which may well be imposed."
The Committee therefore decided that suspending Dr Jones from the Register for two months would be the most appropriate sanction.
IVC says this means its UK practices are on track to hit a group target of 5% by 2030, which follows in the footsteps of other IVC Evidensia territories such as Sweden and Norway, which have already reached figures of 4.9% and 5.9% respectively.
To achieve this progress, IVC says it has implemented a number of initiatives:
IVC says there has been a concerted efforts by its vets to become more aware of their own attitudes towards antibiotics and to educate their clients about the dangers of AMR.
One such example is Angharad Thomas, a veterinary surgeon from Fivelands Veterinary Centre in the West Midlands, who managed to reduce the amount of antibiotics prescribed in dentistry by 17.8% between 2022 and 2023:
She said: “Long dental treatments are a great time to chat to vet students, but one day, instead of quizzing them, I was trotting out my thoughts on the decision-making for the case when I reached post-operative drugs.
"Stopping here I asked: ‘What are you taught about this these days?’
"I suppose I wasn’t surprised to hear that antibiotics didn’t feature.
“It was a lightbulb moment: Why was I using post-operative antibiotics for my dental cases?
"I come from the generation of vets who were firmly taught never to give antibiotics to routine surgeries, so why was I continuing to use antibiotics in dentistry?
"All at once I felt terribly old and out-of-touch. I decided it was time for a change!”
“Given that reducing antibiotic usage is now fairly well recognised by the general public, owners have appeared very supportive.
"A day three post-operative check provides reassurance that their pet is healing and allows us an opportunity to intervene if required.”
“Being an ‘experienced’ vet can be a trade-off between textbook clinical decision-making and what we believe would work for our patients and their owners.
"Sometimes we need a paper or two to persuade us to change our ways, but here, going back to basic principles was enough for me.
“Twelve months later, after watching my cases for any mild complications and reflecting on the whether such complications could be attributed to the lack of antibiotics, I am convinced that this change has had no negative effects on my patients.”
https://ivcevidensia.co.uk/positive-pawprint
Dechra Veterinary Products has announced that Intubeaze Oromucosal Spray is now back in stock.
Intubeaze is used for local anaesthesia of the laryngeal mucosa of cats to facilitate endotracheal intubation by preventing the stimulation of the laryngeal reflex.
The product had gone out of stock due to a temporary manufacturing problem which has now been fixed.
Intubeaze is a clear solution containing 2% w/v lidocaine hydrochloride, with 0.1% w/v chlorocresol as an antimicrobial preservative. Intubeaze is now available through all wholesalers.
For further information on Intubeaze please contact Dechra on 01743 441 632 or visit www.dechra.co.uk.
The group won the award in recognition of how it put social media at the heart of the its 80th birthday celebrations, offering employees 80 prizes over 80 days with daily draws broadcast on Facebook Live and uploaded to YouTube. The prizes included a weekend for two in New York, European holidays, festival tickets, a 40” smart TV, an extra week holiday, an Apple watch, a chance to be the MD for the day and more.
The IoIC’s judging panel praised the campaign’s recognition of staff, fun and innovation, as well as saying there was so much to love about the award entry and one even said it brought a lump to their throat.
Justin Phillips, head of marketing at White Cross Vets, said: "Celebrating our 80th birthday, with more than 200 team members spread across the North and Midlands, meant we had to come up with an accessible event, that would bond everyone and reinforce our reputation as the employer of choice within the veterinary industry.
"Broadcasting 80 prize draws in 80 days on Facebook Live ticked every box and was a fantastic spectacle that all our team members engaged with and talked about every day."
"The IoIC awards is one of the marketing industry’s most prestigious events, in a spectacular venue and surrounded by a wide range of global brands. These awards celebrate success, reward endeavour, inspire creativity and nurture best practice within the marketing community. For our campaign to have been recognised and rewarded by our peers is a huge source of pride within our business and has put a spring in the step of every single team member."
VetSurgeon Editor Arlo Guthrie said: "I've always admired the marketing and communications that comes from Justin and the rest of the team at White Cross. I think it's because as well as being fun, it's always sincere, something which is so often lacking in contemporary marketing communications. Anyway, with a little luck IVC will recognise the talent they've taken on, and sprinkle a bit of the White Cross magic across the rest of the group!"
Other category winners included household names like Oxfam, Volkswagen, Barclaycard, Sainsburys, Pets at Home, EDF Energy, Rolls Royce and Carlsberg.
A petition to protect the title Veterinary Nurse has received an impressive 1,285 signatures, including many from veterinary surgeons, and an official response from HM Government.
The petition, which was started by VetNurse.co.uk member Nick Shackleton Dip AVN (Surgical) VN on 6th June last year, explained: "The title veterinary nurse at present is not a protected title. A lot of people who work in practice call them selves veterinary nurses, when they have no theoretical training in such a position. As qualified nurses we feel that this issue should be addressed so that the general public are no longer confused as to the qualification and hopefully make them more aware of the hard work it is to gain the qualification. As we are heading for autonomy within the profession I think it is right and fitting that the title should be protected."
The Government response, whilst predictably noncommittal, did at least seem to recognise the issue: "The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) maintains the Statutory List of veterinary nurses. In order to qualify, nurses must undergo a two-year period of vocational training which is assessed at work and through examination by the RCVS Awarding Body.
On being added to the Statutory List they are entitled to undertake a range of veterinary treatments and procedures on animals under veterinary direction. Only listed nurses are entitled to use the post-nominal letters 'VN'. The RCVS are introducing new arrangements for 'registered' veterinary nurses which provides greater accountability and transparency for those nurses whose names are entered on the register. These arrangements run in parallel with the Statutory List.
Some veterinary practices may employ staff who do not carry out the duties of a veterinary nurse but possibly use that title or wear a uniform which might imply that they are a trained veterinary nurse. We appreciate that there are issues surrounding best practice that the RCVS and the Veterinary Nursing Council to address.
It is generally accepted that the arrangements for regulating veterinary nursing could be modernised. This would, in due course, help provide greater protection for the title of veterinary nurses. Although Defra currently has no plans to undertake a fundamental review of the Veterinary Surgeons Act, we are regularly in touch with the RCVS to better understand its priorities for regulatory reform.
Virbac Animal Health has launched CaniLeish, the first vaccine for canine leishmaniosis in the European Union.
Leishmaniosis is a vector-borne parasitic disease caused by infection with protozoa of the genus Leishmania (L infantum in Europe). Leishmaniosis is transmitted by the bite of infected sandflies. In south-western Europe 2.5 million dogs are believed to be infected1,2 with the parasite and the disease is spreading northwards,3 as more people travel with their dogs or import infected animals from endemic areas.4 So far preventative methods have been limited to reducing the habitat of sandflies, minimising the physical contact of dogs with sandflies and using insecticides on dogs (sprays, spot-ons, repellent-collars, etc).
According to Virbac, CaniLeish's ability to protect dogs was demonstrated in an experimental challenge study, where the benefit of vaccination was still evident after one year.5 In an extreme condition natural challenge trial lasting two years under environmental conditions rarely encountered in reality, 93% of dogs vaccinated with CaniLeish did not develop symptomatic leishmaniosis. CaniLeish provides a fourfold reduction in the risk of developing this fatal disease. 6 Its safety profile has been shown in laboratory testing and field trials.7 In addition, Virbac says it contains no whole parasites that could be virulent in any host.
David McGahie BVMS Bsc (VetSci) MRCVS, Medical Department Manager at Virbac SA, said: "The development of this vaccine is a key milestone in the battle against this challenging disease which is a major problem in many regions of the world. Although in the past it was considered a rather exotic disease here in the UK, the advent of the Pet Travel Scheme means it has become increasingly important as a problem for dogs which regularly travel abroad to endemic regions."
CaniLeish can be given to dogs as young as six months of age: the primary course consists of three injections given over six weeks. Dogs should be re-vaccinated annually, with a single dose administered one year after the third injection and annually thereafter.
References:
The study was part of a research project called VetCompass, through which the RVC, in collaboration with Vets Now, collects anonymised clinical information on over 6 million companion animals under veterinary care in the UK.
The study investigated bitches presented with difficulty giving birth (dystocia) from among almost 20,000 bitches attending 50 Vets Now surgeries. Researchers found that out of 20,000 bitches receiving emergency veterinary care, 3.7 per cent of these were treated because of difficulties encountered giving birth.
The most commonly affected breeds were the French Bulldog (15.9 times more likely), Boston Terrier (12.9 times more likely), Chihuahua (10.4 times more likely) and Pug (11.3 times more likely).
Dr Dan O’Neill, a companion animal epidemiologist within the VetCompass Programme, said: "Giving birth in dogs is not always a benign process and our research shows this risk is especially exacerbated in some common brachycephalic and toy breeds. Prospective owners should bear these welfare costs for high risk breeds in mind when choosing their new puppy."
Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club Secretary, said: 'VetCompass' research will not only enable dog breeders to make responsible breeding choices to improve the health of these dogs, it will help to highlight what puppy buyers need to be looking out for if they are intent on owning one of these breeds. If people are choosing a breed simply for its looks and are not going to a reputable breeder, they are likely to face high vet costs and a lifetime of heartache."
This study builds on previous 'purchasing' research by the RVC which found that appearance is the number one reason why owners purchase flat-faced breeds, even though their large, round, wide-set eyes, and flat rounded faces are linked with a variety of inherited diseases.
Dr Rowena Packer, lead author of the study and Research Fellow at RVC, said: "Potential puppy buyers attracted to the appearance of these breeds should seriously consider whether they are emotionally and financially prepared to take on a breed with high risks of health complications, and consider whether alternative, lower-risk breeds would better fit their lifestyle."
Andrew, who is head of dentistry and oral and maxillofacial surgery at Eastcott Referrals in Swindon simultaneously became an RVCS Specialist in Veterinary Dentistry.
Eastcott Referrals managing director Peter Southerden, who is also a recognised EVDC specialist in dentistry, said: "This is a terrific achievement by Andrew.
"He’s spent six years studying on the EVDC’s training programme which finally culminated in four days of intense examinations.
"He now joins just eight other veterinary dentists in the UK who are recognised by the EVDC."
Andrew is now planning to build on his qualifications. He said: "I aim to start studying again in January when I hope to begin a Fellowship of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons in oral and maxillofacial surgery.
"The Fellowship is overseen by the American College of Veterinary Surgeons (ACVS) and is a post-specialist qualification indicating further specialisation in maxillofacial surgery.
"It’s two more years of study, including the need for publication in an international journal, and then an exam in the US.
"The primary benefit is the continued development of my skills, insuring that, here at Eastcott, we are operating to the highest international standards and can treat patients with the most complex problems.
"Peter is an ACVS Founding Fellow in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, currently the only fellow of the ACVS in Europe, so I’m proudly following in his footsteps to become the first resident of the Fellowship in Europe.
"It shows our commitment to dental and maxillofacial work and we believe we are leading the way with our cutting-edge surgical procedures and innovations within our state-of the-art facilities.
"We are not just one of the foremost centres of excellence for this specialist work in the UK but throughout Europe, too."
For the study1, the authors Lucy Norris, Gina Pinchbeck, Peter-John Noble and Alan Radford, analysed data from electronic health records submitted by veterinary practices participating in the Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network (SAVSNET).
They found that a total of 132 dogs with cropped ears were seen by vets across a sample size of 500 practices between 2015 and 2022, with numbers peaking in 2021.
The breeds most likely to have cropped ears were the American bulldog, Dobermann, Italian mastiff and bulldog.
In more than 60% of the cases, the dogs had been imported from countries where ear cropping is illegal, such as Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, Spain, Poland and Ireland.
The authors acknowledge that the findings of their research are likely just a small snapshot of the true scale of the ear cropping problem: figures from the 2022 PDSA PAW Report suggest that the true numbers of dogs imported with cropped ears could be as high as 26,000.
RSPCA Head of Companion Animals Samantha Gaines said: "The study provides strong evidence to refute arguments for ear cropping to prevent ear infections, as the breed types identified in Norris and colleagues’ study are not generally predisposed to such infections.
"Rather, this finding adds weight to anecdotal evidence suggesting that the motivation for ear cropping in many dogs is driven by appearance rather than any perceived health benefits.
“It is also possible that some dogs were cropped illegally in the UK using legal importation as a smokescreen for this activity.
"Indeed, it is the RSPCA's experience that many dogs stated as being cropped outside of the UK have histories that would make this highly unlikely.”
Vet Record editor-in-chief Suzanne Jarvis said: “One solution to the importation problem is proposed in the Kept Animals Bill, which is currently stalled in parliament.
"Although there could be potential for fraud around grandfather rights initially, a ban on such importations would ultimately mean that the sight of a dog with cropped ears becomes a thing of the past in the UK.”
https://www.bva.co.uk/take-action/ear-cropping-campaign
Reference
Mr Antonovs faced three charges.
The first was that in September 2020 whilst in practice at Beverley Vets4Pets, he attended work when under the influence of alcohol.
The second was that between September and December 2020, whilst at Peel Veterinary Clinic, he attended work on two occasions when under the influence of alcohol.
The final charge was that between February 2021 and February 2023, Mr Antonovs failed to respond adequately to requests from the RCVS regarding concerns raised about his conduct and/or health.
Mr Antonovs admitted the facts of the charges and the Committee decided that the facts amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee therefore decided, in the particular circumstances of this case, to impose a reprimand and warning as to his future conduct on the basis that it would be proportionate in order to maintain public confidence in the profession and uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour.
The full details of the hearing and the Committee’s decision can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
The strange phenomenon was spotted by Veterinary Vision's clinical director Chris Dixon when he examined Dachshund called Margo, which had been referred for the treatment of a corneal ulcer and fungal infection.
Chris said: “I was assessing Margo’s eye and was very surprised to see a face smiling back at me.
"It perhaps doesn't bear quite the same resemblance as the Turin Shroud. Still, I've never seen anything like it before.
"The good news is that it does not appear to have affected her vision at all.”
Apparently the smiling face is still there, even after Chris performed a corneal graft.
Chris added: "I think we can safely say that Margo is a very happy dog, both inside and out!"
Zesti comprises three ranges:
The Spirit range is a more standard looking scrub, manufactured from Alsi-Flex. The ‘Mode’ range looks a little more figure hugging, with an exclusive colour palette, and the Power range has a more sporting look.
Greg Houlston, General Manager, said: “Our healthcare workers need clothing that is practical and comfortable above anything else, yet our market research showed us that when it comes to scrubs with stretch, choice is limited in the UK compared with other markets such as the US.
“Veterinarians in particular need workwear that is especially hard wearing as the nature of their work means their clothing can be especially susceptible to rips, tears and soiling.
“We set out to create a brand that answered the need for more flexibility while challenging the perception that workwear should be dull and boring, and Zesti was born – a vibrant and contemporary range of garments, sustainably designed, to inspire confidence and positivity.”
Sara Catanzaro, Design Manager, added: “Our tailored garments offer exceptional attention to detail while being strong, hard wearing and resilient.
"They can be laundered domestically or industrially up to 60 degrees which is ideal for infection control.
"We’re already witnessing considerable demand as we believe we’ve hit the perfect balance between function and fashion.”
For more information, visit www.zesti.co.uk
Nebojsa Petrovic faced eight charges, although charge four was withdrawn at the start of the hearing.
At the outset of the hearing, Dr Petrovic admitted a number of allegations, including:
Charge 1 - that in November 2021, he falsely represented to the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) that blood samples he submitted in respect of four horses were from the same horses as the samples he submitted on 1 November 2021.
Charge 2 – that in November 2021, he told APHA’s Veterinary Head of Border Control that he had checked the microchips and/or passports of the four horses when he hadn’t done so;
Charge 3 – that in November 2021, he signed Export Health Certificates for the four horses, in which it was stated that blood samples taken from these horses on October 2021 had been submitted to the Veterinary Laboratories Agency laboratory, Weybridge, with a negative result for Leptospirosis when in fact those samples had tested positive;
Charge 5 – that he failed to send the APHA’s Centre for International Trade, within seven days of signing, certified copies of the export health certificates;
Charge 7 – that in January 2022, he told an APHA officer that he was satisfied that he had properly identified the horses for which you had submitted the two samples when he had not done so;
Charge 8c – that he risked undermining government procedures designed to promote animal health and international relations in relation to the charges he admitted; and
Charge 9 – that in February 2022, he failed to have in place any or any adequate Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII).
Dr Petrovic, who was at the time of all the allegations carrying his duties as an Official Veterinarian on behalf of the APHA, denied charge 6 – that in November 2021, he failed to take sufficient steps to prevent the four horses being exported to Serbia, when he had been informed that there were concerns and/or doubts about whether those horses had tested negative for Leptospirosis.
He also denied charge 8 – that in relation to the allegations relating to his submitting the blood samples to the Veterinary Laboratories Agency on 8 November 2021, certification of the Export Health Certificates on 16 November 2021 and his subsequent conversations with members of APHA staff regarding both sets of documentation he had acted in a misleading (Charge 8a) and/or dishonest (Charge 8b) way.
The Committee considered evidence presented by the College including hearing from APHA staff witnesses called by the College and also hearing from a witness and character evidence presented by Dr Petrovic. Dr Petrovic also gave evidence to the Committee.
It found most charges proven with the exception of Charge 6, and also found that Dr Petrovic had not acted dishonestly in submitting the blood samples or certifying the EHC’s as alleged in charges 1 and 3.
The Committee concluded that Dr Petrovic had acted in a dishonest and misleading way in his conversations with the APHA staff as detailed in charges 2 and 7.
The Committee then considered whether the individual proven charges amounted to serious professional misconduct, determining that, with the exception of charges 3 and 5, all proven charges amounted to disgraceful conduct.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “In the Committee’s judgement, the respondent’s position as an Official Veterinarian also meant that he had a responsibility to ensure that the trust which was delegated to him was not breached.
"In his role, the respondent was acting in a position of trust, as a representative of the government, and the Committee found that he had breached that trust…. It took these matters into account when determining that the respondent’s behaviour cumulatively amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”
Regarding the sanction for Dr Petrovic, the Committee considered his request that it consider suspension, rather than removal, from the Register.
In terms of aggravating factors – the Committee found that Dr Petrovic had acted without integrity, recklessly and without regard for the APHA’s systems relating to the export of animals.
In mitigation, it took into account: the fact that no animal was harmed by his conduct, albeit there was risk of harm; his long and unblemished career in the UK since 1994; admissions he had made to the APHA and Disciplinary Committee at the first day of the hearing; had remediated his lack of professional indemnity insurance by putting in place a retrospective policy; the significant amount of time that had elapsed since the conduct; and six positive character references from experienced fellow veterinary surgeons who held him in high regard.
Paul Morris added: “The Committee took into account that the respondent had continued to work as a veterinary surgeon with no subsequent complaints and that he had a previous long and unblemished record and there was support by several positive character references.
"The Committee also took into consideration the pressures of Brexit and the pandemic which the respondent had faced at the time, but which were unlikely to occur again.
“The Committee had concluded that the respondent was unlikely to repeat similar behaviour or to pose a risk to animals, particularly because he was no longer involved in certifying animals for export.
"Furthermore his admissions to most of the matters it had found proved showed that he had some insight.
"The Committee was also satisfied that the respondent had a genuine concern for the welfare of animals and it noted that the Respondent did not require any further training to continue in practice as a veterinary surgeon.
“The Committee therefore concluded that a suspension from the Register was the proportionate sanction in this case taking into account the seriousness of the conduct it had found proved but also all of the mitigating factors.”
The Committee recommended that Dr Petrovic be suspended for six months to reflect the seriousness of the conduct and the damage it could do to public confidence in the profession, while meeting the public interest and sending a clear message of deterrence.
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
Ms Mulvey faced a number of charges relating to the treatment of a cat called Spooky: that she failed to provide Spooky’s owner, Mrs Parsons, with either Spooky’s lab results or an adequate explanation as to why they could not be provided; that she failed to respond adequately or at all to communications from Mrs Parsons; that she failed to respond to requests from the College for information relating to Continuing Professional Development (CPD), her professional indemnity insurance (PII), and her correspondence with Mrs Parsons.
At the beginning of the hearing Dr Mulvey admitted the facts to all the charges, and accepted that they constituted disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. The Committee had been provided with written evidence from Mrs Parsons, her husband, and four College staff, namely Gemma Crossley, Maria Fearon, Robert Girling and Michael Hepper.
Mrs Parsons provided a statement in which she spoke of how, in August 2016, she had taken Spooky to CornYard Veterinary Centre for a skin irritation where she was seen by Dr Mulvey.
Dr Mulvey decided to take blood tests and send them to the laboratory, but they agreed to defer them actually being tested until Mrs Parsons gave permission. Mrs Parsons then returned to the practice with Spooky to take said samples, after which followed a series of attempts to contact Dr Mulvey for the test results. Finally, in October, she demanded a refund, after which she began a small claim in County Court.
Mr Parsons went to the practice at the beginning of December 2016 and obtained the refund. At this point Mrs Parsons made a complaint to the College. The Committee received information from Mr Parsons, who corroborated the facts of the complaint, and from College staff who confirmed the many attempts to contact Dr Mulvey, starting with requests for documents by Ms Crossley and Ms Fearon, repeated requests for CPD and PII information from Mr Girling, and finally a hand-delivered letter by Mr Hepper, during which he learnt that her PII had lapsed at the beginning of 2017.
The College submitted that Dr Mulvey’s conduct fell far below the standard expected of a veterinary surgeon. It submitted that failing to provide the test results and communicate with the Parsons could have had a negative impact on animal welfare and damaged the reputation of the profession, while having PII is a fundamental obligation of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct. Finally, not responding to the College about the concern raised, CPD or PII compromised the College’s ability to maintain public confidence in its regulatory processes.
The Committee considered that no harm had actually come to Spooky and that there were problems with the testing laboratory which slowed down the process. In addition, some of the lack of communication was due to a receptionist not following protocol, and Dr Mulvey was going through a particularly difficult part of her life and was clinically understaffed. The Committee heard from four different character witnesses, and were given 16 more written testimonials.
The Committee heard that in 2013 there had been complaints from three separate clients, all of which concerned Dr Mulvey’s failure to communicate and to process insurance claim forms, after which she agreed to participate in the Performance Protocol and entered into undertakings with the College.
The Committee having considered all the facts and background circumstances found that Dr Mulvey’s conduct was disgraceful in a professional respect.
The Committee went on to consider what sanction was appropriate. In reaching its decision the Committee took into account a number of aggravating factors, namely that there was a slight risk to the health of Spooky and that the disgraceful conduct occurred over a prolonged period of time. The Committee also considered that there was blatant disregard of the role of the RCVS and the systems regulating the profession.
In determining the sanction the Committee also considered mitigating factors, including that Dr Mulvey, apart from those previous concerns, had a long and unblemished career and that she’s made a huge difference to the health of the animals within her care. She also admitted her shortcomings, and had very impressive references.
The Committee therefore determined to postpone its decision on sanction for a period of one year on condition that Dr Mulvey enter into the following undertakings:
To agree to the appointment of a veterinary surgeon as a work place supervisor by the College and meet with them at least once every month
Allow the supervisor access to all aspects of running of the practice and to implement any recommendations made by the supervisor relating to the administration of the practice and the provision of out of hours’ cover.
To allow the supervisor to provide a report in relation to the matters set out in 2 above to the RCVS at least one month before the resumed hearing of this case.
To appoint within two months an experienced Practice Manager (who does not need to be full time).
To enrol in the voluntary Practices Standards Scheme and to achieve the Core standards of the Scheme within the next 12 months.
To submit a plan to the supervisor of CPD for the next twelve months within one month of agreeing to these undertakings. The plan should then be implemented and shall include aspects of practice management.
To pay all of the costs of complying with the undertakings, with the exception of the costs associated with the appointment and performance of the supervisor.
Ian Green, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee recognised that Dr Mulvey has been subject to undertakings before and yet committed the disgraceful conduct the subject of this inquiry. But it bore in mind the context of that conduct and it observes that the undertakings previously imposed in reality address a particular aspect of her practice.
"This Committee hopes that when the matter is relisted before it, the Respondent will be able to demonstrate that she has finally been able to address her administrative shortcomings. If she cannot do so, she will know that the Committee that sits on her case at the resumed hearing is likely to have more restricted options for disposal of her case."
Dr Pete Down, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Education in UCLan’s School of Veterinary Medicine, said: “We recognise the multifaceted challenges the profession is facing at the moment, but many of us have spent significant time out in practice and recognise that it can be a fantastic career.
“Additionally, first-opinion vets provide essential services to the pet-owning public, equine, and farming industries.
"Our curriculum focusses on the provision of contextual-care and encourages vet students to see general practice as a fantastic career in and of itself.
"Also, whilst diversity in the profession has traditionally been a challenge, our student recruitment practices support an inclusive approach, recruiting students from a wide variety of backgrounds.”
The practically focused curriculum is ‘hands-on’ from year one and the university says it uses innovative digital technologies from the outset: its students will be among the first in the country to use specialist Anatomage vet tables.
Dr Heather Bacon OBE, Dean of UCLan’s School of Veterinary Medicine, said: “It’s a landmark day for the University as we’ve welcomed our first cohort of veterinary medicine students through the door.
"The demand for places on the first year of our BVMS course was huge and I’m thrilled we’ve been able to enrol so many enthusiastic student vets on to our programme.”
https://www.uclan.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/veterinary-medicine-surgery-bvms
Zoetis has launched a 4ml vial of the antibiotic, Convenia.
Zoetis says Convenia gives veterinary surgeons control by providing an assured injectable treatment course, relieving clients of the burden of daily dosing. This avoids missed or mistimed doses, lost tablets, or courses stopped too soon, thereby eliminating a major reason for treatment failure, non-compliance. Poor compliance is also a significant factor in the development of antimicrobial resistance.
Convenia is licensed for skin, soft tissue and urinary tract infections in dogs and cats, as well as severe gingivitis/periodontitis in dogs (as an adjunct to mechanical or surgical periodontal therapy). A 4ml vial can treat up to 40kg of bodyweight, making it appropriate for treating cats and smaller dogs.
Zoetis says that the launch of the new vial demonstrates its commitment to the 'Respect Antibiotics' campaign launched last year. The Respect Antibiotics campaign encourages careful and informed selection of appropriate antibiotic therapies for the treatment of dogs and cats.
Product Manager, Andrew Page, said; "We are committed to encouraging responsible antibiotic usage, and reducing the incidence of antibiotic resistance. Non-compliance plays a key role in the development of antibiotic resistance and we hope that by making Convenia more accessible through the introduction of a 4ml vial we can help alleviate compliance issues."
For further details about Convenia please contact your Zoetis Account Manager.
The BSAVA says there has been a real resurgence in the number of people keeping backyard poultry for a self-sufficient supply of food and because they often become part of the family, owners have come to expect a standard of veterinary care akin to that available for their cat or dog. Yet many veterinary surgeons are unfamiliar with consulting on and treating these birds.
The BSAVA Manual of Backyard Poultry Medicine and Surgery has been written by an international selection of specialist authors. It covers everything from husbandry and basic clinical techniques to medical and surgical treatment of conditions, and more advanced practices such as endoscopy and post-mortem examination.
The manual covers chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese, guinea fowl, ornamental pheasants and peafowl. The BSAVA says it is hoped that the manual will make treating backyard poultry more interesting and rewarding, and therefore encourage more practitioners to see feathered patients.
One of the editors, Guy Poland said: "We are very proud of the valuable contributions made by all the authors to the manual. We hope that their hard work will provide a useful resource for veterinary practitioners unfamiliar with poultry medicine to deliver improved care for their patients and maybe inspire an interest that they develop further."
BSAVA Manual of Backyard Poultry Medicine and Surgery is available in a printed edition (£85; £55 to BSAVA members) and online edition (£70.83+VAT; £45.83+VAT to BSAVA members).
The awards are based on more than 11,000 pet owner reviews submitted to VetHelpDirect.com over the past 12 months.
The reviews cover 2,500 veterinary practices around the UK, with awards given to the practices with the highest number of four and five-star reviews from customers.
Tracey Morley Jewkes, Managing Director of Willows, said: “I am so proud of our team here and it’s fantastic to have won such a prestigious award based on client reviews.
"It was fabulous to receive such wonderful feedback as part of this award process. Our team at Willows is one of the best in the world, and we continue to strive for excellence in all that we do, providing the very highest standards of veterinary care to our patients, their owners and our referring vets."
Susie Samuel, managing director of VetHelpDirect.com, said: “The Best UK Vet awards are now in their eighth year and are a fantastic way to illustrate the strength of veterinary care in the UK.
“The awards are based on real-time customer reviews written over the past calendar year and recognise the very best veterinary practitioners.
“For animal owners, choosing a vet can be an anxious time, having access to reviews from other owners cuts down that anxiety. A vet who has been positively reviewed a number of times by different owners is clearly trusted and we know this provides peace of mind for new customers.
"The awards are categorised by geographical region, and also by type of practice and we have been delighted by the diversity of practices reviewed positively by their customers this year."
The silver award went to St Anne's Veterinary Group and the bronze award winning practice was Mayow Veterinary Surgery.
Photo: Toby Gemmill, Willows clinical director, Deputy Mayor of Solihull, Councillor Flo Nash, Tracey Morley Jewkes, managing director of Willows and Susie Samuels, founder and CEO VetHelpDirect
Apoquel chewable tablets were approved by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) in November 2021.
Apoquel Chewable contains the same active ingredient, at the same dosing regime, for the same indications as original Apoquel, but in a palatable formulation which, in a field-study of client-owned dogs, was found to have a 91.6% acceptance rate.1
Dr Carly Mason, President of the British Veterinary Dermatology Study Group (BVDSG), said: “The new chewable form of Apoquel provides owners with a means of controlling itch using a tablet that can be given like a treat or mixed with a meal, making it much easier for owners and more acceptable to their pet.
“In many cases, the chewable formulation will be the obvious first-line Apoquel for veterinarians to prescribe to control canine itching while the underlying cause of allergic dermatitis is investigated.”
The new tool uses aggregated data from Banfield Pet Hospital medical records to identify whether a dog has a high, medium, or low risk of having PD based on the breed size1,2,3,4,5, age, and body condition the owner has stated3,4.
It also makes oral care recommendations based on the dog's history (e.g., diet, previous extractions, halitosis), clinical signs (e.g., bleeding gums) and current dental routine (e.g., tooth brushing).
Global Petcare R&D VP at Mars Pet Nutrition, Dr. Elise Malandain said: “This new risk assessment tool will help indicate to pet owners what level of risk their pet is at for developing this disease to help inform conversations with veterinary professionals about prevention or treatment.”
https://www.uk.pedigree.com/gum-disease-risk-checker
References