ON 2nd NOVEMBER 2018 THE RESPONSE TO THE RCVS EVIDENCE WAS DELIVERED BY THE CAM4ANIMALS TEAM After a huge amount of investigation and due diligence from the CAM4animals team, the response to the RCVS has now been delivered on the anniversary of the statement change. We look forward to continued communication with the RCVS on this matter following many anomalies in their evidence being brought to light. A BIG THANK YOU goes out to all the volunteers who, over the past few months have given large amounts of their time and talents in order to put the response together.
RCVS FAILS TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE USED TO BAN ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS
Credit: Jamie Smith
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) met CAM4animals on 9th May and promised to answer two very reasonable questions that veterinary clients and supporters of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) are asking about the new restrictions on access to alternative treatments. Six weeks on and there has been no action from RCVS. Two simple questions: what evidence did RCVS look at and what is CAM? RCVS says the reasoning behind the ban is poor or insufficient evidence to support alternative treatments. CAM4animals asked to see the evidence that was considered as part of its decision-making process. RCVS was also asked to define CAM and to tell the public clearly what treatments are affected by their November statement. CAM4animals asked for clarification because there is a threat that using an alternative first-line choice could result in action against an animal owner, farmer, therapist or vet on animal welfare grounds. Yet six weeks after the meeting, RCVS has neither clarified these fundamental points nor given any reason why it is unable to do so.
"They told us clearly at our meeting that any delay to conventional medicine in favour of, for instance, a physical therapy such as chiropractic was a welfare issue. This leaves many CAM users worried about their vet's freedom to choose the best available care for their animals and the owner's right to choose." said Sara Kernohan, one of the CAM4animals representatives. "We need answers and further delay is affecting many people and their animals."
"Defining CAM is absolutely vital if vets, practitioners and animal owners are to understand the position statement. If the RCVS has decided that some treatments do not have sufficient evidence to support their use first-line, then it must have considered the evidence. So where is it?"
On behalf of its 21,000 supporters, CAM4animals says evidence of due diligence and proper governance at RCVS should be in the public domain. RCVS is stepping outside its remit as a veterinary body to take this unprecedented step of restricting the clinical freedom of vets and interfering with access to legal treatment options in a private health market.
Press Contact Click to email us - please state 'PRESS' in the subject line.