You may have heard of the vets' strike for tomorrow, November 6th, and thought it was just another case of professionals trying to saveguard their incomes. We went to our vet today for annual jabs and he pointed out several things:
Firstly, it's going to be massively inconvenient. Under the new law vets are only going to be allowed to issue certain antibiotics, if the vet decides that another injectable antibiotic is the one that will work he has to fill out a prescription, you take it to the pharmacist (after having put your animal back in the car etc), get the drugs, go back to the vet, wait to be seen with a possibly stressed animal who is back in its least favourite place for the second time in a day and if you're unlucky you'll get charged for a second visit too.
We spent nearly three months this summer going to the vet three times a week with a dog who nearly lost his leg due to a flesh eating bug and I can't think of how much worse an already nightmareish situation would have been if we'd kept on having to go to the pharmacist too, to say nothing of the distress caused to poor Flynn who found having his leg bandaged and re-bandanged very uncomfortable.
Secondly; it seems a pointless complication. After all the vet is the one who has examined the animal and decided on its treatment, why involve a third party?
Thirdly; the reason behind this proposal is apparently the desire to cut down on vetinary prescriptions (nothing to do with pharmacists making money out of issuing animal prescriptions of course). Our vet said that in countries where pharmacists have started doing this the use of antibiotics for animals has gone up not down.
If you feel uneasy about this proposed law think about signing this petition here;
If you sign it you'll get sent a confirmation email to click on, this is to make sure no one says the vets are just adding their client lists to the petition!
Please share this as much as possible. I'm also going to post this on the cats group.
Please be aware that a Breton farmer friend who has a turkey and chicken business was taken to court for buying treated feed etc from Spain, where it's much cheaper, than in France. He got off after a lot of hassle but there are lots of of protected interest groups.
Thank you for posting this - I had no knowledge of the change in law, nor the vet being on strike tomorrow. Can you perhaps suggest some links where I can read about the change in drug administration? Will Google, but perhaps you have found an informative site?
Our vet said that there's evidence that prescribing has gone up in places where it's restricted. And if there really is a problem with livestock prescribing isn't this law using a sledgehammer to crack a nut? Vets see an awful lot of animals that aren't in the food chain.
I read about proposed French law this over the weekend.
There is concern within French Politics (and in French scientific circles) that the veterinary profession are over-prescribing antibiotics to livestock animals, to the extent that animal's long-term resistance to infection could potentially be reduced and therefore impact the agricultural food-chain.
According to the French Media, the planned new implementation either has not been communicated well - due to the clandestine manner in which it is being progressed through the French Law machine- or - in the view of the vets - there are some serious gaps in the proposed new prescribing process, especially in emergencies and where risks to animal welfare are concerned.
This is why the Veterinary profession are going on strike on the 06/11/13.
I think the restrictions are mainly on antibiotics for humans which can also be used for animals (like the one which saved Flynn's leg which is the only drug in the world which is effective against the bug he got). Some human drugs can be more effective than the vetinary versions (as well as a lot cheaper!), that was certainly the case with our epileptic dog who did much better on human phenobarbitone than the canine version.
Thank you for posting this Victoria! I actually hadn't heard of the strike tomorrow (and we're off to the vet this afternoon in fact). I don't understand the logic behind this. So vets will be permitted to issue some antibiotics but not others? What's the difference? As you say, why make the whole thing more traumatic for the animal involved having drug A issued at one location, having to go to the pharmacie for Drug B, then return to the vet so they can administer it? Surely if an antibiotic is specifically for animals, it should be available at the vets, not the 'human' pharmacie. And how far will this extend? To their annual shots? I repeat, I don't understand the logic and it will over-complicate matters again.