24 Apr 2026
The planned analysis has been broadly welcomed despite claims by an industry group that more animals could be left unprotected if reforms are pursued.
Allister Webb
Job Title
Image © tsuguliev / Adobe Stock
More animals could be left unprotected if a new review leads to tighter restrictions on the availability of pet flea and tick treatments, an industry group has warned.
NOAH leaders have urged caution over potential reforms as veterinary professionals were called upon to have their say in a new Government review ordered in response to growing environmental concerns.
The process has been broadly welcomed by clinicians and campaigners, despite claims that a case for tougher action can already be made. The review will consider whether the availability of parasite products currently sold over the counter (AVM-GSL) should be restricted to vets, pharmacists and other suitably qualified professionals.
Vet and academic Rosemary Perkins, a member of the Producing Rational Evidence for Parasiticide Prescription group at Imperial College London, described the process as “a positive step forward”.
She added: “We welcome the indications that the VMD is prepared to seriously consider the evidence and take the necessary steps to address it.”
The RSPCA has also backed the review, arguing it was important to “move away from blanket preventative treatment” for most pets, unless dealing with cases of known allergy or where they live with immunosuppressed people.
However, NOAH suggested any changes could exacerbate the affordability and transparency concerns raised by the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) investigation of veterinary services.
Chief executive Dawn Howard argued the present designation offered “a convenient and effective route” to protection – particularly for pets that are not registered with a veterinary practice.
She said: “While we support a thorough and transparent review, it is essential that decisions are grounded in sound science and a full understanding of the real-world impacts on animal health and welfare.
“Any move that increases costs or reduces access risks leaving more animals unprotected.”
European Scientific Counsel Companion Animal Parasites director Ian Wright urged clinicians to have their say during the current call for evidence, which is open until 11 June, to highlight the importance of professional advice when flea and tick treatments are sold.
He said: “The misapplication and washing off of fipronil and imidacloprid spot-ons due to lack of owner advice at point of sale is a huge problem, both in terms of adequate flea control and limiting waterway contamination with these compounds.”
But fellow vet Martin Whitehead questioned the extent to which professional advice would change how the products are used by the public.
He said: “It is important to address how the products are being applied, but it is disappointing that the VMD is not taking the massive over-use of companion animal parasiticides more seriously, as they have done for antimicrobials.”
Meanwhile, the Pesticide Action Network UK, which has previously advocated an outright ban on the use of active pesticides in veterinary treatments, said it hoped “serious restrictions” would follow the review, despite officials already ruling out a full sales ban.
Policy manager Nick Mole said: “Having been banned for use in agriculture due to their harmful environmental impact it makes no sense to allow them to continue to contaminate the environment via other exposure routes.”