The Daily Mail yesterday published a 'shocking exposé' which portrays the veterinary profession as one that 'puts pets through painful and unnecessary treatments to fleece their trusting owners'.
The story is based on an interview with ex-vet Matthew Watkinson to promote his new book: 'On The Destiny Of Species'.
In the interview, Mr Watkinson claims the veterinary profession is to blame for much of the animal suffering in the UK, and that 'money - not the welfare of the animal - is often at the forefront of the vet's mind'.
In the interview, Mr Watkinson
The RCVS issued a swift response, which you can read here.
Later in the day, Mr Watkinson appeared on Radio 5 Live opposite ex BVA President, Nicky Paull. The interview can be heard for the next 6 days on BBC iplayer here.
It is not yet clear the degree to which the Daily Mail might have sensationalised Mr Watkinson's interview. In his blog, he claims it did, but defiantly defends his main argument that the profession is fighting natural selection, and thereby harming animal welfare.
Seems to me that some aspects of Mr Watkinson's argument are perhaps worthy of debate, but they've been obscured by the glare of the critical headline, and the Daily Mail's predictable preoccupation with the sensational but unrepresentative. So I'm delighted to see that whilst writing this story, Mr Watkinson has joined us in the VetSurgeon forums to put forward his case.
Brave man.
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
He hasn't responded to my challenge to name and shame the veterinary surgeons he claims are guilty of unethical practices
Wynne
The article was obviously meant to be inflammatory and get everybody's backs up, but he succeeded in his goal very well in our practice. The accusations and sweeping generalisations he makes are horrendous. I would like to see his response to being offered euthanasia as the only option if he was to injure a leg or develop cancer himself as this seems to be his chosen course of action in pets. He seems to suggest that any attempt to treat these animals is against animal welfare. I hope that the readers of his article have not taken what he says as the truth as it will make the rest of our jobs harder than they already are. Any form of surgery or medical treatment is relying on the fact that the animal will benefit from what we are doing, and as human beings with the benefit of foresight i think we are in our right to offer these sorts of choices. I do not think there are any vets out there that would put an animal through procedures that they did not hope would benefit the patient in the long run. All i can hope is that the Daily Mail did exaggerate and sensationalise what was actually said.
Maya