BVA to review parasiticide policy

The BVA has outlined plans to review its policy on the use of parasiticides amid the recent growth in concern about potential environmental harms linked to them.

A senior official urged professionals to “learn from each other” as the move was revealed during the annual BVA Live event in Birmingham.

But delegates were also told the profession should “get its act together” on the subject, despite concerns about the breadth of current scientific analysis.

Blanket treatment

The BVA’s current policy, published in conjunction with the BSAVA and BVZS four years ago, urged clinicians to avoid blanket treatment and assess animals’ individual risks.

But it also said combination or broad-spectrum products can be used if there is perceived to be a need to treat multiple parasites or where such an approach poses a lower risk of environmental harm.

Senior vice-president Anna Judson told the 13 June discussion the review would consider whether the existing stance needed to be changed in light of the latest research.

‘Work together’

Officials later told Vet Times there was no confirmed timetable for the process at this stage.

But, responding to fears expressed about the risk of developing acrimony on the subject, Dr Judson warned delegates: “We can only move forward if we work together and learn from each other.”

Ahead of the debate, the congress heard a suggestion that clients were collectively spending hundreds of millions of pounds a year on regular treatments that were “probably doing very little”.

Vet Martin Whitehead, whose presentation called for the adoption of risk-based rather than regular parasite treatment, stressed there was nothing wrong with practices offering health plans to their clients.

‘Promotes overuse’

But he added: “I don’t think any medicine should be supplied by subscription plans because it just promotes overuse. That is irresponsible.”

The debate was told that one major care provider is considering offering testing in its health plans, while former BVA president Robin Hargreaves said the schemes were developed to tackle a compliance issue that was now largely resolved.

He argued that meant clinicians could now monitor for signs of a problem and “hit it hard” if one occurs.

But concerns were raised about both the potential consequences of such an approach in areas of known parasite risk, with lungworm in south-east England highlighted as an example, and some of the current science which one critic suggested was “written for the headline”.

One health

Jodie Bartels, a policy assistant for the industry group NOAH, called for more research to be carried out from a one health perspective and argued that usage decisions could not be based on environmental considerations alone.

But researcher Rosemary Perkins, whose work has been at the heart of the recent debate, said environmental considerations had been neglected and the veterinary sector had to “get its act together” as a first step towards change.

RSPCA chief vet Caroline Allen argued the profession itself had created the norm of regular treatment with products of known toxicity.

Although she stressed she would prescribe the products in areas of known risk, she said: “It’s the blanket that is uncomfortable.”