The High Stakes of The AVMA Presidential Election

Hello 👋

Welcome to Weekend Rounds! Whether you are reading this from the AVMA Convention or out there in the wild world, we salute you for getting ready for another week.

Here is what is on tap today:

🗳️ The AVMA Presidential Election
💉 A National Strategy to Combat Xylazine Deaths
🐦️ Revenge of the birds
🧬 mRNA Vaccines and Meat
🚀 Quick Hits

🗳️ The High Stakes of The AVMA Presidential Election

The AVMA presidential election has big stakes this year. As VIN reported this week, the election is a three way race between two candidates representing the status quo and an outsider looking to make big changes.

Let’s meet the candidates:

1. Dr. Arnold Goldman, who owns a small animal practice in Canton, Connecticut

2. Dr. Sandra Faeh Butler, an executive at National Veterinary Associates

3. Dr. Robert Murtaugh of Thrive Pet Healthcare, a specialist who aims to radically alter the AVMA's stance on remote care and increase the nation's supply of veterinarians.

The vote for 2022-23 president-elect took place on July 14 in Denver by the AVMA House of Delegates, a policymaking body of representatives from every state and more than a dozen allied groups. A central theme of the race is whether the presidency should be used to effect policy changes at the AVMA or support existing policies. As you could likely tell from the descriptions above, Murtaugh is pushing for change while Faeh Butler and Goldman, who are longtime AVMA leaders, support the status quo.

Most notably, Murtaugh supports two changes that contradict current AVMA policy:

1. The development of a veterinary midlevel practitioner, which would fill a role comparable to a nurse practitioner in human medicine; and

2. Eliminating a long-held requirement that veterinarian-client-patient relationships (VCPRs), which are necessary to diagnose and treat health conditions, be established in person. Allowing VCPRs to be established remotely would be a big step forward for telemedicine advocates.

Outgoing AVMA President, Dr. Lori Teller, spoke at the AVMA convention this week and penned her own opinion piece on the AVMA news service, which speaks in direct opposition to the policies proposed by Dr. Murtaugh.

Dr. Teller discussed the misinformation that has circulated widely over the past few years and how the AVMA has been working on research and modeling to ensure accurate data to inform decisions that will affect generations of veterinarians, patients, and clients. She emphasized the need to be careful that proposed “fixes” don’t derail the future health of the profession.

Some circulating estimates for workforce needs substantially overestimate demand and underestimate supply. These numbers are being used to support claims of a future shortage of companion animal veterinarians and are based on faulty math. She states that these erroneous numbers are being used to justify proposed long-term changes to the profession that place profits ahead of animal health and safety. These proposals include introducing an unnecessary midlevel position, inappropriately expanding the scope of practice of non-veterinarians, and dangerously relaxing VCPR requirements, the AVMA suggests are all under the guise of expanding access to care.

The results of the election have not yet been released, however, whether Dr. Murtaugh wins or not, the idea of the mid-level practitioner and the conversations around telemedicine and the VCPR are not going anywhere any time soon.

Where do you stand on the mid level practitioner or telemedicine guidelines? Respond to this email to let us know!

💉 The U.S. Plan to Combat Xylazine Deaths

The White House has unveiled a national strategy aimed at addressing the surge in deaths caused by xylazine, the veterinary sedative increasingly being implicated in drug overdose cases.

The strategy aims to tackle this issue through six pillars of action, including testing, data collection, prevention, supply reduction, scheduling, and research. It emphasizes enhancing coordination and information sharing among law enforcement agencies, public health departments, and veterinary professionals to better understand and respond to the problem. This collaborative effort will help identify emerging trends, collect data, and establish early warning systems.

While some of us are thinking about the possible implications this could have in restricting access to the drug for proper veterinary use, U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials said they wanted to balance making sure the drug is still available in a veterinary setting while allowing law enforcement to take “decisive action.”

Send it ‘round

If you’ve been enjoying Weekend Rounds, consider sharing it with friends and colleagues. They’ll appreciate you. We’ll appreciate you. You will be appreciated.

🐦️ Revenge of the Birds

It is yet another example of the natural world outsmarting us measly humans…

It would appear that some birds have learned how to incorporate anti-bird spikes, designed to protect statues, balconies, and benches from unwanted bird nests, into their nests.

While the use of human objects in nests is nothing new, a study from the Naturalis Biodiversity Center and the Natural History Museum Rotterdam argues that the specific placement of the spikes suggests that Magpies are taking it a step further. The placement of the spikes in an outward dome seems to be evidence that the birds are using them a a strategic defensive mechanism, thereby maximizing protection.

The Proactive mRNA Vaccine PR Campaign

As of right now, the use of mRNA vaccines in the livestock that we eat is limited. But a professor at the University of Guelph's Ontario Veterinary College (OVC) is worried that the fears and disinformation around the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines might be conflated with the mRNA technology.

As there is now an approved mRNA vaccine available in Canada for swine, it’s very possible that and increasing number of livestock will be treated with the mRNA vaccine. Shayan Sharif, a professor at OVC is looking to get ahead of any similarities to the pandemic.

Compared to the traditional vaccines currently being used in livestock, mRNA vaccines are easier to make, can be made more quickly, and can be updated for new variants of pathogens more easily, subsequently saving more livestock. Public backlash to vaccines in our meat could threaten our food security. Without vaccines we would see more livestock deaths, resulting in lower supply and higher prices at the grocery store.

What do you think? Should the veterinary community be leading a proactive PR campaign to help usher in a new era of mRNA vaccines in livestock?

🚀 Quick Hits

Pets do not significantly benefit the emotional health of owners with severe mental illness, study shows [Phys.org]

Gene therapy shows promise as feline spay alternative [AVMA]

Rabbit hemorrhagic disease’s spread appears to be slowing [AVMA]

Time for veterinary professionals to take back vet med [DVM 360]

Lucy Hale partners with Pet Smart to Promote Adoption [DVM 360]