A new study carried out by researchers at the Yale School of Medicine and Yale Cancer Center, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, has found that human cancer patients who use alternative medicine are up to 5.7 times more likely to die early than those who use conventional medicine.

Researchers studied 840 patients with breast, prostate, lung or colorectal cancer. 280 patients that had received only alternative medicine were matched to 560 control patients who chose conventional cancer therapy.

Overall, cancer patients who used alternative medicine were 2.5 times more likely to die within a 5 year period than those who chose conventional cancer therapy.

However, people with breast cancer were 5.7 times more likely to die in the same period if they used alternative medicine rather than conventional medicine.

This evidence flies in the face of the British Association of Veterinary Homeopathic Veterinary Surgeons' claim that homeopathy cures cancer.

But more importantly, one of the main reasons why practitioners in both human and veterinary medicine so often acquiesce to their patients' use of alternative medicine is because of the perception that they do no harm. After all, homeopathy is only water, right?

This study provides perhaps the first evidence that the reverse may be true. That if you do not actively deter clients from using discredited forms of alternative medicine, you may be allowing them to sentence themselves, or rather their dog, to an early death.

Northwest Surgeons has changed its name to Northwest Veterinary Specialists (NWVS), following what it describes as a significant investment into its facilities and people.

The referral centre recently extended its floor space at its base in Cheshire to support a major expansion of the services being offered, which include orthopaedic, soft tissue and spinal surgery and internal medicine; with specialist support in anaesthesia and pain management, a diabetes clinic, intensive care, cardiology, diagnostic imaging, neurology (medical and surgical) and oncology.

Liz Cousins, hospital manager at Northwest Veterinary Specialists, said: "The success of NWVS is down to the dedication of our highly skilled clinical, nursing and support teams.

"Our clinicians are well respected specialists in their chosen disciplines and it’s fantastic to be able to offer new services to pets and first opinion vets.

"The hospital is home to 88 colleagues and the change of name now reflects the growth and dedication by everyone here at Northwest Veterinary Specialists since opening in 2002."

Northwest Veterinary Specialists provides specialist veterinary services to veterinary practices in north west England and north and mid Wales.

Liz added: "At Northwest Veterinary Specialists we treat pets from as far apart as Carlisle, North Yorkshire and Staffordshire.

"The facilities are state-of-the-art, demonstrating a quality of service both for our clinicians and our clients, but most importantly the pets that we treat."

Ceva has launched Salmoporc, a salmonella vaccine for pigs, in the UK and Ireland.

Salmoporc gives protection against Salmonella Typhimurium and its monophasic variants. It is administered orally to piglets and through subcutaneous injection in sows. 

According to the company, Salmoporc is the only live, attenuated salmonella vaccine licensed for pigs in the UK and Ireland.

Ceva says salmonella in UK and Irish herds is the highest in the EU, with a prevalence of 19.5% and 17.5% respectively. It is particularly difficult to control in outdoor herds since the bacteria can survive in soil for a year, even longer in dried dung and has been detected in fields two years after being vacated by pigs.

Outdoor bred, or reared, pigmeat accounts for 12% of retail sales and the majority of this is processed.

Dr Rike Schmelz from Ceva said: "Salmonella is an increasing problem on pig farms and the bacteria are transmitted through breeding pyramids which eventually supply finishing pigs. Clinical cases of diarrhoea often occur after weaning and tend to be treated with antibiotics."

Rike added: "The monophasic variant of S. Typhimurium is already multi-drug resistant and vaccinating pigs can help farmers to substantially reduce their use of expensive antibiotics. In addition, with the removal of zinc oxide at therapeutic levels from the feed in mid-2022, salmonella and other enteric diseases are likely to become more apparent."

Ceva says that by immunising their pigs against S. Typhimurium, farmers will gain an economic benefit from lowered mortality and improved daily liveweight gain (DLWG) among their pigs.

In independent trials at the University of Ghent in Belgium, between three and 29 weeks, vaccinated piglets from three herds gained between 30g and 39g, significantly more per day than unvaccinated controls.

Trials in Germany have shown that, with vaccination of sows and gilts at the top of the breeding pyramid, combined with a competent hygiene programme, it is possible to eliminate salmonella from the supply chain.

The Government has announced plans to introduce introduce tougher dog breeding licensing rules in what is being described as the biggest reform of the pet trade in 20 years.

The new rules will make it illegal to sell puppies younger than eight weeks and require anyone breeding and selling three or more litters of puppies a year to apply for a formal licence.

Those needing a licence, including online sellers, will also be required to display their permit in any advertising, and to give owners information about the five welfare needs that owners must meet under the Animal Welfare Act.

The penalty for breaking the new law will be an unlimited fine and/or up to six months in prison.

The plans also cover how pet shops, boarding houses and riding stables are licensed, introducing a single 'animal activities licence' to improve the process and make enforcement easier.

Environment Secretary Andrea Leadsom said: "Everyone who owns a pet or is looking to introduce one into their life will want to know that the animal has had the very best start to life. Yet for thousands of puppies born each year to irresponsible breeders, from smaller operations to larger puppy farms, their first weeks are spent in cramped and squalid conditions without the care and attention they need. That is why we are cracking down on the worst offenders by strengthening the dog breeding licence and giving councils the power they need to take action.

With more and more pet sales now taking place on the internet, it’s right that this market is subject to the same strict licensing criteria as other breeders and pet shops so that consumers are not misled. The plans announced today will help people choosing new family pets to be confident the animals have been properly bred and cared for from birth and are ready to move safely to their new homes.

Gudrun Ravetz, President of the British Veterinary Association, said: "This is a significant step in the right direction to improve the welfare of puppies and dogs in the UK, an issue our members are extremely concerned about as increasing numbers of poorly bred puppies are brought into veterinary practices.

"Poorly bred and badly socialised puppies cause terrible health and welfare problems for dogs so it is right that Defra has made irresponsible dog breeding a priority. We particularly welcome the move to make the sale of a puppy under eight weeks illegal, the reduction in the number of litters bred requiring a formal breeder’s licence, and the moves towards a single animal activities licence. In the future we would also like to see that anyone breeding from a dog should be required to register with their local authority.

"For these new measures to work in practice local authorities must have the necessary resources and support to fully enforce the legislation, supported by local veterinary expertise.

"We hope the new legislation will encourage owners to stop and think about where they’re getting their puppies from to tackle irresponsible breeding both at home and abroad. Prospective owners should do their homework and always use the puppy contract and information pack to make sure they ask breeders the right questions for a happy, healthy puppy."

The Kennel Club and Dogs Trust have welcomed the announcement.

Dogs Trust Veterinary Director, Paula Boyden said: "As the UK’s largest dog welfare charity, Dogs Trust welcomes the Government’s review of animal establishments licensing in England and the range of measures it sets out.

"We are particularly pleased that it will be illegal to sell a puppy below the age of 8 weeks and that there will be tighter licensing rules which will require sellers of pets to display their licence when advertising. We also applaud the move towards a risk based single licensing system which will incorporate those breeders that have gained UKAS approval rather than exempting them.

We believe that Local Authority Inspectors need support to enforce these tighter licensing rules. As such, moves to mandate the use of Model Conditions and for inspectors to be offered training and standards to be set is most welcome."

The BVA has published new results from its Voice of the Veterinary Profession survey which found that 63% of veterinary surgeons worked when they didn’t feel well enough in the last year, something which the Association warns could have a longer-term impact on vets' wellbeing.

The survey, which received over 1300 responses, found that the problem is more noticeable amongst locum vets (69% have worked when they’ve not felt well enough) and employees (64%) but is also an issue amongst partners and the self-employed (57%). It’s more common for vets in clinical practice (65%) than in non-clinical roles (51%). In all of these sectors over half of vets reported working when they were unwell.

18% of the vets surveyed said they do not take sick leave because they feel uncomfortable doing so. This is more common amongst younger vets (25% of under 35s compared to 19% of 35-54-year olds, and 8% of over 55s) and female vets (21% compared to 11% of male vets).

The main reasons given for not taking time off when sick are concerns about the impact on colleagues and worries about "letting the team down". One respondent said: "Because I would leave the practice understaffed and the remaining vets would have to work a lot harder and longer as a result." Another said: "Being ill is not an option. The practice is short staffed."

Members also reported a perceived culture of working through sickness. One said: "The veterinary industry on the whole has a 'phone in dead' policy ie don't call in sick!" and another said: "[I] feel that I am judged for taking time off, even when I lost my voice and was unable to consult."

A small number of responses (36 of the 450 vets who commented) mentioned that they did not receive sick pay or only received limited sick pay, so they avoided taking sick leave for financial reasons.

The BVA is reminding all vets that they have a legal right not to attend work when they aren’t well enough do so and that any concerns should be discussed with managers. The free BVA legal helpline is available to members to provide further guidance on taking sick leave.

BVA President Daniella Dos Santos said: "We know that veterinary workplaces are under enormous pressure from staff shortages, and none of us wants to feel like we are letting our colleagues down, but presenteeism only stores up more problems for the future.

"Working when you are ill puts your own health and wellbeing at risk longer term and can also put your colleagues, clients and patients under your care at risk. 

"It’s particularly worrying that some of our colleagues feel pressure to work when they feel unwell, especially younger members. As a profession we have made huge steps forward in recognising the issues around mental health and supporting one another and being physically unwell should be the same.

“Anyone who is concerned should speak to their manager and remember that BVA members can always get free advice and support via the BVA legal helpline. Ultimately, it’s important to create a workplace culture that supports the entire veterinary team to prioritise their own physical and mental health."

Photo: Javier Brosch / Shutterstock

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has ruled that whilst the care given to a diabetic dog by Paul Roger MRCVS fell short, it did not amount to serious professional misconduct. 

Mr Roger faced three charges: that he had failed to provide adequate care, failed to communicate with the owner adequately and failed to keep adequate clinical records for Honey, a Shiih Tzu dog who, it transpired, had hypergycaemia.

At the initial consultation, Mr Roger took a blood sample which showed that there was an elevated blood glucose, an elevated white blood cell count, an elevated ALT and an elevated ALP (which Mr Roger took to be indicative of liver damage secondary to infection).

Mr Roger prescribed a cholagogue (ursodeoxycholic acid), an antibiotic (Synulox) and a diuretic (Frusemide).

In its findings of fact, the Committee found it likely that Mr Roger would have realised that Honey had a potential diabetes mellitus diagnosis with an elevated blood glucose of 28.

However, Mr Roger explained that he had believed the elevated blood glucose was due to the stress Honey had undergone in taking the blood samples.

The Committee therefore accepted that Mr Roger’s actions did not indicate a complete failure by him to notice the elevated blood glucose because he had explained he believed at the time it was due to stress.

Honey’s owner took her back to the veterinary practice that Mr Roger worked at three days later.

A different veterinary surgeon examined Honey and flagged that her blood sugar was high and that her liver was damaged.

She was taken to an alternative veterinary practice for follow-up but died later that day.

Mr Roger admitted failing to ask Honey’s owner if there was a history of diabetes mellitus, failing to take repeat blood glucose tests or carry out urine analysis or carry out additional blood tests, failing to communicate adequately with Honey’s owner about the significance of the hyperglycaemia and the options for investigation/management and failing to keep adequate clinical records in regard to Honey’s blood glucose levels.

The Committee found the admitted facts proved.

The evidence presented to the Committee included the clinical notes taken during Honey’s consultations, emails sent from Honey’s owner to the RCVS outlining the complaint, and evidence from experts in small animal veterinary practice.  

Although the Committee found some matters not proved, it did find proved that Mr Roger had failed to recognise and/or pay adequate regard to Honey’s elevated blood glucose levels, had failed to manage Honey’s hyperglycaemia either by treating it or by documenting an appropriate plan to do so and had failed to communicate adequately with Honey’s owner about the significance of her elevated glucose and the reason for it.

Having reached its decision in relation to the facts, the Committee went on to consider whether the facts it had found proved either individually or cumulatively amounted to serious professional misconduct.

Judith Way, Chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf said: “The Committee found that the charges and particulars it had found proved did not amount to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect either individually or cumulatively.

"In its judgment, the conduct found proved fell short of the standard to be expected of a reasonably competent veterinary surgeon but not far short of the standard which is expected of the reasonably competent veterinary surgeon.”

As a result of the Committee finding that Mr Roger was not guilty of serious professional misconduct on any of the proven charges, either individually or in any combination, the hearing did not proceed further.

The BVA has launched a flowchart designed to help veterinary surgeons in England know when and how to report suspected cases of illegal pet imports to relevant authorities.

The flowchart, which was produced in partnership with the National Animal Health and Welfare Panel (NAHWP) and with support from Dogs Trust, outlines what vets should consider when a client presents an animal with a pet passport and aim to help them navigate client confidentiality, how to report concerns of illegal imports, and an overview of how local authorities are likely to respond.

The Association says that in recent years, vets have mentioned finding it 'difficult' or 'very difficult' to report concerns to Trading Standards in the BVA Voice of the Veterinary Profession surveys. Other concerns included breaching client confidentiality, a lack of proof or sufficient evidence to investigate, a perceived lack of interest from local authorities if a case was reported, and uncertainty about whom to contact and how to report suspicions. 

Findings released by Dogs Trust earlier this week show broadly similar concerns about reporting suspected illegal pet import cases.

BVA and NAHWP have issued the following advice for vets: 

1. Report any suspicions that the animal in your care does not comply with Pet Travel Scheme requirements to your Local Authority Animal Health Function – either Trading Standards or Environmental Health Services. 

2. Find out how to contact your local authority via a pre-agreed number for your practice. Find a direct contact number for your local Trading Standards or call Citizens Advice Consumer Helpline on 03454 04 05 06, who will refer you directly to the relevant local authority.

3. Note this number down on the joint BVA and NAHWP compliance flowchart and put up the poster in visible locations around your practice for staff to refer to.

BVA is also in talks with local authority forums in Wales and Scotland and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in Northern Ireland to launch similar guidance and compliance resources for vets in the devolved administrations.

BVA President Daniella Dos Santos said: "Veterinary teams can often be the first to suspect that an animal may have been illegally imported when an owner takes their pet for its first check-up. But our surveys have identified a compelling need for clearly defined routes and mechanisms for vets to more easily report suspected cases of illegal import.

"Our flow chart and supporting guidance aim to empower vets to report any such cases, thus helping to tackle the scourge of illegal importation and protecting animal welfare, both of the imported dogs and the larger canine population in the UK.

"I would encourage veterinary teams to put up the poster in their practices and use it to help report any suspicions to relevant authorities with ease."

The flowchart is available as a pull-out poster in this week’s Vet Record and can also be downloaded along with accompanying guidance notes here:  www.bva.co.uk/illegalimportguidance

CRC Press has published a new book which explores the ethical dilemmas facing veterinary surgeons today, and challenges a lot of the current orthodoxy.

With contributions from 26 leading lights edited by Tanya Stephens, Eddie Clutton, Polly Taylor and Kathy L. Murphy, 'Veterinary Controversies and Ethical Dilemmas - Provocative Reflections on Clinical Practice' is pitched as being designed to 'stimulate undergraduate thought and discussion', and as a reference for practitioners coming to terms with life in a post-truth era.  

That, however, is a massive undersell of the importance and value of this book, which should be required reading for everyone in the profession; not just veterinary surgeons, but nurses, regulators and RCVS Councillors, teachers, pharma companies, practice managers (including corporates) and veterinary receptionists, all of whom would benefit from an informed understanding of the most important issues facing the profession today. 

There are too many subject areas in the book to list here, but some of the most eye-catching include the questions of:

• Overdiagnosis and treatment, including the harms of overdiagnosis
• The ethics of surgery which might better be described as experimentation
• Evidence-free veterinary medicine, such as alternative medicine, supplements and 'therapeutic' foods. 
• Anthropomorphism - the rise of the 'pet parent' and some of the harms of anthropomorphism
• Corporatisation, veterinary education, euthanasia and more ... 

It would be wrong to say that the veterinary profession is at a turning point. It has already turned. The question is whether it's heading in the right direction. This book provides a timely opportunity for everyone to reflect on that.

More practically, general practitioners should find this book hugely helpful in informing and shaping their own ethical positions on a variety of subjects, and to be able to express them to clients with more confidence, potentially with a real benefit to animal welfare. 

The book is available direct from the publisher: https://www.routledge.com/Veterinary-Controversies-and-Ethical-Dilemmas-Provocative-Reflections-/Clutton-Murphy-Stephens-Taylor/p/book/9781032579863

Or from Amazon and all good bookstores: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Veterinary-Controversies-Ethical-Dilemmas-Provocative/dp/1032579862 

Photo: A gripping read.

AB Science, a young Paris-based biotech company, has announced the pan-European commercial launch of its veterinary anticancer drug, Masivet

Masivet was approved in November 2008 by the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) for the treatment of dogs with non-resectable grade 2 or 3 mast cell tumours. Masivet's active pharmaceutical ingredient is masitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Masitinib, discovered and developed by AB Science, belongs to a therapeutic class of drug known as targeted therapy that is, according to AB Science, revolutionising the treatment of cancer in humans.

Alain Moussy, CEO of AB Science said: "Masivet is the first product ever registered as a cancer treatment in veterinary medicine. AB Science is a dynamic and very entrepreneurial biotech company, and is proud to have introduced a drug that can extend the life of dogs suffering from cancer ahead of the large pharmaceutical companies".

The company says Mastocytoma can be an aggressive cancer with a poor prognosis, and represents up to 20% of all cutaneous canine tumours. Some breeds are particularly susceptible, among them Golden Retrievers, Labradors and Boxers. Cancers have the same prevalence in dogs as in humans (1 dog in 4 will suffer from cancer during its lifetime) but surprisingly, no drugs developed for veterinary medicine with a demonstrated efficacy and safety have ever been approved until the arrival of Masivet.

The company claims two main benefits of the new treatment:

• Masivet increases the survival rate of dogs suffering from mast cell tumours
  Masivet demonstrated efficacy and safety with a placebo controlled study involving 202 dogs in Europe and the USA. The median survival time of dogs treated with Masivet was increased by 300 days in comparison to the placebo. After 2 years of treatment, the survival rate in dogs treated with  Masivet was 2.5 times that of the dogs receiving the placebo (40% versus 15%). Efficacy was also demonstrated in the ability of Masivet to prevent the progression of the tumours (an average gain of 100 days).
  
  Mr Malcolm Brearley, Principal Clinical Oncologist at The Queen's Veterinary School Hospital at the University of Cambridge said: "The launch of Masivet is a major breakthrough in cancer and paves the way for an exciting period of new development of targeted therapies, used alone or in combination with standard chemotherapy. Masivet is able not only to increase the survival of dogs with cancer but also to improve their quality of life, which is after all the ultimate goal of any treatment against cancer and offers tremendous value for the pet's owner".
  
   
• Masivet is a user-friendly anticancer drug
  Unlike chemotherapies, Masivet is delivered orally in tablet form and can be administered everyday directly by the owner, albeit under strict monitoring from the veterinarian. Masivet is available on prescription at two doses (50 or 150mg) in bottles of 30 tablets.

AB Science is a biotech company specialising in developing targeted drugs for high need indications, such as cancers, chronic inflammatory diseases and neurodegenerative disorders. Masitinib is the most advanced drug in the pipeline. Now being marketed in veterinary medicine, masitinib is also under development in humans, with phase 3 clinical studies in pancreatic cancer and in gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST).

Alain Moussy said: "This registration in veterinary medicine is good news for the future success of masitinib in humans, for whom we are aggressively developing it in cancers and other indications with high morbidity or pain.

"It is very unusual to develop such an innovative product simultaneously in veterinary and human medicines, and even more so that the product is registered in veterinary medicine first. There is no doubt that experts in human oncology will be watching Masivet's future very closely from now on.. However, people will have to wait a while before benefiting from masitinib because it is unlikely to be available to man before 2012".

For more information, see www.masivet.com and www.ab-science.com

New research conducted by the Royal Veterinary College (RVC), which shows that French bulldog bitches are 15.9 times more likely to suffer from difficult births (dystocia) than crossbred bitches, has been published in the Veterinary Record today.

Furthermore, the research found that among female dogs that had problems giving birth, French bulldog bitches are then 2.4 times more likely to undergo invasive caesarean sections than crossbred dogs.

This compared to brachycephalic bitches in general, which the RVC researchers found are 1.54 times more likely to need a caesarean compared with their longer-nosed pure breed or crossbred counterparts.

As part of the research, academics studied 20,000 bitches that required emergency treatment at 50 Vets Now veterinary clinics between 2012 and 2014.

Their findings, published in two papers in The Veterinary Record, highlight the substantial risks that bitches and their puppies face during the birthing process. 

According to the first paper¹, 3.7% of female dogs suffer from dystocia. Alongside French bulldogs, other pure breeds such as Boston terriers, chihuahuas and pugs, are also particularly at risk of birthing problems. Compared to crossbred bitches, Boston terriers are 12.9 times more likely to face birthing issues, pugs 11.3 times more likely and chihuahuas 10.4 times more likely.

The second paper², which is available open access, examines the effects of difficult births more closely. It found that on average, 25% of puppies and 1.7% of the bitches do not survive problem births. Apart from the risk of death, problem births also mean that many bitches have to undergo painful and invasive surgery, with 48.6% of problem births needing caesarean surgery.

Bulldogs (also known as British Bulldogs), border terriers and golden retrievers were the top three breeds at risk of caesarean section once they have difficulty giving birth. Bulldogs are 7.6 times more likely, border terriers are 4.9 times more likely and golden retrievers are 4.1 times more likely to need the procedure compared with crossbreeds.

RVC veterinary epidemiologist and VetCompass researcher Dr Dan O’Neill said: "This new research is another piece of evidence suggesting that mankind may have gone too far in modifying dog breed shapes towards extreme conformation that can interfere with basic biological functions. We all need to fall back in love with dog-shaped dogs and move away from the current fascination with extreme-shaped dogs."

References

1. O'Neill, DG., O'Sullivan, AM., Manson, EA., Church, DB., Boag, AK., McGreevy, PD., Brodbelt, DC. (2017) Canine dystocia in 50 UK first-opinion emergency-care veterinary practices: prevalence and risk factors Veterinary Record 181, 88.

2. O’Neill, DG., O’Sullivan, AM., Manson, EA., Church, DB., McGreevy, PD., Boag, AK., Brodbelt, DC.(2019) Canine dystocia in 50 UK first-opinion emergency care veterinary practices: clinical management and outcomes Veterinary Record Published Online First:04 February 2019. doi: 10.1136/vr.104944.

Vet AI, which launched Joii, its remote veterinary consultation service earlier this year, is claiming that vets who diagnose common dermatological conditions remotely are as accurate as those who see the patient in person.

The company is making the claim based on a £20,000 study it conducted with three dermatology specialists from three different clinics, in different parts of the country.

Trevor Hardcastle, Vet-AI’s chief data scientist said: "We have undertaken a small-scale trial of remote diagnosis of dermatology conditions by veterinary dermatology specialists in canine patients, which has resulted in almost perfect agreement. No significant evidence was found that veterinary dermatology specialists are measurably compromised in their ability to accurately diagnose common dermatology conditions by being remote from the patient."

Strangely, given the strength of the claim, its importance and Vet AI's obvious vested interest in the result, there was no other information contained within the company's press release. No mention of who the specialists were, nothing about the study design, and nothing about the basis on which the claim is made.

However, presuming the company meant Specialists not specialists, it would be very unusual if they had agreed for an announcement of this importance to be made without the evidence being reasonably robust. So it's probably worth suspending judgement until the study is published in full. 

Meantime, the company also says its own research into online diagnosis amongst pet owners has shown that more than 50% of people have avoided taking their pets to the vet for cost reasons, yet more than 65% have tried online self-diagnosis. Again, Vet AI doesn't reveal how many pet owners were asked, or how they were sampled. 

Vet-AI co-founder Sarah Warren said: "Things like dermatological issues are beautifully aligned to remote consultation because they’re visual so we can gain a wealth of information from images and distribution maps and easily recommend treatments.

"This needs to happen in a regulated, ethical and correct way with a view to improving animal welfare.

"The RCVS has a chance to ensure that people have access to quality vet help online in an effective way. They can do this, or they can allow them to continue accessing poor-quality advice. As a profession, it’s vital we respond to the needs of pet owners."

This morning, VetSurgeon.org published an April Fools fake news story, to the effect that the RCVS planned to increase retention fees by 150%.

I had hoped that the increasing absurdity of the reasons given for the rise might have tipped everyone off to the fact that the story was a spoof.

The idea that the College would ask its members to fund some glitzy, showy, award-winning designer headquarters along the lines of London’s City Hall? C’mon. London City Hall employs 1000 staff, whilst the Royal College employs less than 100. And let's face it, the RCVS has no record of having showy offices. On the contrary, it has managed to operate out of a sardine can now for a great many years. Have you ever been in the lift at Horseferry Road? You need to breathe in.

Or that the College had set aside £6M to recruit and pay 20 veterinary surgeons as short term contracted OVs to help in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Let’s say a flight from Delhi to London costs £500, give or take. Twenty vets. That’s £10,000 to get them here. Let's say they’re here for 6 months. That’s £299,500 per vet. You really think the College is going to ask you to pay more than a quarter of a million pounds to fly in a single vet for 6 months? Or that 20 recruits would solve the predicted OV shortage?

Lastly, the quote, supposedly from an Indian vet, but one with a name that doesn’t really sound like a name (still less an Indian one), but does sound strangely like it may be an anagram of April Fool.

There have been a small number of reports of people being really upset by this story. I guess they must have skim read, or only read the headline.

To them I want to say sorry, I genuinely didn’t mean to upset anyone.

In fact, I thought it might cause some reflection on what good value the RCVS really offers. It maintains the register and thereby your ability to practice, it runs the disciplinary process (an essential component of maintaining public trust), it oversees and sets educational standards, it awards Fellowships, Diplomas and Certificates, it runs the Practice Standards Scheme.

All that, and more for £340 per annum?

Honestly? I think it would be cheap at half the price.

Photo: Truth is that the RCVS has operated out of a sardine can for years.
By Rl - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link