23 May 2025
Dan O’Neill argues profession had “abdicated” its responsibility on canine health for decades – and calls for consensus among vet and rescue groups.
Allister Webb
Job Title
Dan O’Neill.
A leading vet and academic has warned the veterinary sector must “step up and have a voice” against the continuing demand for extreme conformations in dogs.
Dan O’Neill argued the profession had “abdicated” its responsibility on canine health for decades during a hard-hitting session at the Animal Welfare Foundation’s annual discussion forum.
The event, held on 19 May in London, was told that latest research suggested there may be health benefits from cross-breeding brachycephalic types with others.
But Dr O’Neill, associate professor in companion animal epidemiology at the RVC, argued it was “lunacy” that extreme breeding was still being enabled.
He called for a consensus among veterinary and rescue groups on what he regarded as the biggest current welfare problem, telling delegates: “I don’t think we’re stopping it. We’re just following on from 100 years of suffering.
“I would have to say I feel the veterinary profession has abdicated our responsibility on dog health.”
Responding to suggestions that greater engagement with organisations such as The Kennel Club was also necessary, he acknowledged they would need to be part of the conversation and that officials within the organisation also recognised the need for change.
But he added: “Their job isn’t to protect health – it’s ours. The veterinary profession needs to step up and have a voice.”
A more encouraging message was provided by Dr O’Neill’s RVC colleague Rowena Packer, as she outlined current research indicating that two pug cross-breeds – the Jug and puggle – were more likely to be classed as clinically normal under the Respiratory Function Grading Scheme (RFGS) than pure-bred pugs.
A separate analysis also suggested less extreme examples of brachycephalic dogs were perceived more favourably by members of the public, although it was also less likely they would be considered as pure-bred.
Dr Packer argued there was a need for public education on cross-breeding and called for The Kennel Club to follow the need of authorities in Finland and Sweden in promoting and registering cross-breeds.
She said: “We have a really strong evidence base that there is better health in cross-breeds than pure-bred.”
But concerns were also raised about a lack of enforcement of existing regulations, as clinicians were urged to alert their clients to the law related to breeding.
An updated analysis from the Legal Advisory Group on Extreme Dog Conformation, published last December, argued that keeping dogs for breeding purposes that are classed as either grade 2 or 3 under the RFGS were likely to be committing welfare offences.
That prompted questions about how clinicians could report concerns without affecting their relationships with clients, while IVC Evidensia group animal welfare advisor Dave Martin asked whether the professions should move towards a mandatory reporting stance.
Dr O’Neill was doubtful over whether such a system would be effective, but insisted the sector could “act as advocates”.
Meanwhile, asked what charities should do about rehoming brachycephalic dogs, he acknowledged rescue groups were being put in an “invidious” position.
But he added: “We should probably be moving to no charity rehoming animals with extreme conformations.”
He also argued that euthanasia was “highly valuable as a welfare tool” when animals were felt to be unable to live a good life and should be discussed more frequently.
The latter point was echoed from the floor when a former charity official described facing a “battle” within her former organisation when advising that euthanasia was necessary.
