DCVMA

dcveterinarymedicalassociation@gmail.com


The DC Inaugural Inter-professional Networking Event on Sep. 26, 2024 was a Success!

Next one likely to be planned for January 2025... stay tuned!

advocacy & legislative update ~ oct. 4, 2024

DCVMA Statement in Support of the DC Pet Housing Amendment Act 2024 (B25-0827)

Dear DC Council: 

The District of Columbia Veterinary Medical Association (DCVMA) supports the DC Pet Housing Amendment Act 2024 (B25-0827), a legislative initiative aimed at enhancing the welfare of pets and their owners throughout the District. As veterinary professionals dedicated to promoting the health and well-being of both animals and people, we understand the essential role that secure, pet-friendly housing plays in maintaining the overall wellness of companion animals and their human families. We also see a valuable opportunity within this legislation to highlight the need for responsible pet ownership and to provide the necessary support to enable responsible pet ownership to set pet owners, housing providers, and social service agencies up for success.

Promoting Animal Welfare

Pets are cherished members of countless households in the District of Columbia, contributing to the physical and mental health of their owners by providing emotional support and companionship. The DC Pet Housing Amendment Act of 2024 represents a step forward in ensuring that all residents, regardless of income or housing status, have access to safe and stable homes with their pets. By acknowledging the importance of the human-animal bond, this legislation helps prevent the separation of pets from their families, protecting animals from being unnecessarily surrendered to shelters, abandoned, or needlessly euthanized.

Supporting Public Health

The positive impact of the human-animal bond on public health is well-documented, with benefits including reduced stress, increased physical activity, and enhanced mental well-being. The DC Pet Housing Amendment Act of 2024 supports these public health benefits by ensuring that pet owners are not forced to choose between housing and their pets, thereby mitigating housing instability, unnecessary stress, and the known negative health outcomes associated with such challenges. This legislation promotes a more inclusive community where the advantages of pet ownership are accessible to all, contributing to a healthier and more resilient society.

Encouraging Responsible Pet Ownership

The DC Pet Housing Amendment Act of 2024 has the potential to enable responsible pet ownership by empowering residents to make informed decisions about pet care with the confidence that they will not face undue housing challenges as a result. In order to safeguard public health, and for the implementation and outcomes of this legislation to be successful, it is recommended that the DC Council provide guidance and recommendations, as well as accessible opportunities, for pet owners to obtain preventative veterinary care, such as annual pet vaccinations, internal and external parasite control, animal behavior management and education, and dog bite prevention education. 

Conclusion

In conclusion, the DCVMA supports the DC Pet Housing Amendment Act of 2024, as it aligns with our mission to advocate for the health and welfare of animals while supporting the public health and the well-being of our community. We feel if the appropriate responsible pet ownership measures, and respective accessibility, are included, this legislation has potential to contribute to enhanced public and animal welfare throughout the District.

The DCVMA is committed to working with the Council, housing providers, and the community to effectively implement this Act and to ensure that it achieves its intended goals of promoting animal welfare, supporting public health, and fostering a compassionate and inclusive community. We commend the DC Council for introducing this forward-thinking legislation and urge its passage to ensure that the District of Columbia continues to be a place where pets and their owners can live and thrive together.

Sincerely,

DCVMA Board of Directors 


advocacy & legislative update ~ sep. 23, 2024

DCVMA Recommendations for DC Board of Veterinary Medicine re: Cosmetic Procedures

Dear DC Board of Veterinary Medicine:

As an organization that supports animal welfare, we applaud the DC Veterinary Licensing Board for taking a
stance on cosmetic procedures in companion animals. However, the DCVMA recommends that the Board
reconsider its intention to regulate which procedures veterinarians can and cannot perform. Any procedure
performed by a veterinarian should follow humane and ethical standards as outlined in the veterinary practice
act, which includes the provision of pain control when necessary. Regardless of whether cosmetic procedures
are medically necessary or not, we do not feel it is in the best interest of animal welfare that licensed
veterinarians who are trained in surgical techniques, pain control, and humane care should be restricted in
performing certain procedures. The decision should be left to the discernment and judgment of the
veterinarian operating within the veterinary-client-patient relationship to determine if they will perform such
procedures.

The DCVMA recommends that the Board not develop regulations pertaining to cosmetic procedures. Rather, in
alignment with the AVMA’s recommendations, the DCVMA recommends that the Board encourage
veterinarians to counsel owners about the risks and lack of medical benefits before agreeing to perform these
procedures when utilized solely for cosmetic reasons.1

Alternative approaches to address the concern can be better accomplished through non-regulatory means,
such as public service announcements and educational campaigns directed at the general public, outreach to
veterinary clinics and breeders, and direct advocacy to eliminate ear cropping and tail docking from breed
standards.

Sincerely,
DCVMA Board of Directors 


advocacy & legislative update ~ sep. 20, 2024

DCVMA Recommendations for DC Board of Veterinary Medicine re: Establishment of the VCPR

Dear DC Board of Veterinary Medicine:

The DCVMA is appreciative of the DC Veterinary Licensing Board for establishing rules and regulations pertaining to veterinarians’ utilization of telehealth and establishment of the veterinarian-client-patient relationship (VCPR). The DCVMA recommends that an in-person physical exam or premise visit be required to legally establish a VCPR. More specifically, it is recommended that the language in the current DC Municipal Regulation 17-2814 (most recently amended in 2021) be more explicit to specify that in order to have established a VCPR, “the veterinarian is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the patient by virtue of a timely in-person examination of the patient by the veterinarian and/or by medically appropriate and timely visits by the veterinarian to the premises where the animal(s) are kept.”

In addition, it is recommended that the Board of Veterinary Medicine consider the following as they update the language of the regulations:

1. Provide for an emergency provision that, in the case of an emergency, there is an exception for advice given until that patient can be seen by a veterinarian.
Ref: https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/avma-policies/telemedicine

2. State that these regulations provide exception for emergency teletriage, including poison control services.
Ref: https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/avma-policies/telemedicine

3. Include a statement that eligibility to provide veterinary medical advice by telemedicine should be limited to those who are also legally authorized to practice veterinary medicine in the District.

Sincerely,
DCVMA Board of Directors 


advocacy & legislative update ~ dec. 21, 2023

DCVMA Testimony re: DC Council Health Occupations Revision General Amendment Act of 2023

Dear Council Member Henderson & The DC Council:

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments regarding the Health Occupations Revision General Amendment Act of 2023. The DC Veterinary Medical Association (DCVMA) applauds the Council for updating health occupation standards and regulations to make medical care more accessible. DCVMA strongly supports the use of telemedicine in general, however we are opposed to the use of telemedicine to establish a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, or VCPR, virtually. Once the VCPR is established with an in-person physical exam, DCVMA supports the use of telemedicine, as appropriate, for follow up visits, management of chronic conditions, and consults with specialists as coordinated by the doctor(s) primarily managing the patient.

The federal government regulates veterinary medicine and animal drugs very differently than it does human health care and drugs intended for human use. This is, in part, because veterinarians are key to maintaining a healthy, safe, and wholesome food supply and because they also play an important role in overseeing the judicious use of antimicrobials in animals. One important difference between human and veterinary medicine is that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has authority under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) over the the use of animal drugs and human  drugs by veterinarians, and the authority to define how a VCPR is established for certain uses of animal and human drugs.

Use of animal and human drugs by veterinarians that violates the federal VCPR parameters set forth in the FDCA and its implementing regulations results in the drug being statutorily deemed unsafe for the use. The federal VCPR applies to any use of an FDA-approved human drug in animals, including over-the-counter human drugs. It applies to any use of an FDA-approved animal drug in any manner that differs from its approved labeling, such as a different frequency of administration, different dose, different medical indication for its use, different route of administration, or use in a different species. It also applies to the use of compounded drugs by veterinarians. The FDA defines a VCPR to require an in-person examination to establish the relationship, and allows maintenance of such relationship via telemedicine.

Veterinarians must comply with the federal VCPR in each of the circumstances in which it applies, irrespective of whether state law defines it differently. Conflicting state and federal VCPR definitions have the potential to cause significant confusion, as veterinarians must comply with the federal VCPR requirements where they apply, regardless whether state laws are more lax.

DCVMA requests that the Council exclude veterinarians from this Act, and that the District maintain the
current VCPR definition as set forth in DC Municipal Regulation 2814, most recently amended in 2021.

Thank you again for the opportunity to provide input on this legislation. As the organization representing veterinary medicine in the District, the DCVMA is a source of expertise regarding veterinary medicine, animal health, and public health. Please do not hesitate to reach out to us with any questions, as well as any legislation that might impact these areas.

Sincerely,
DCVMA Board of Directors


Opinion ~ Nov. 3, 2023

Honoring One Health Day Through Collaborations in the District

Every year, the world celebrates One Health Day on November 3rd. This year, the DC Veterinary Medical Association and the Medical Society of DC are collaborating to highlight the value of One Health coordination at the local level, here in Washington, DC.

One Health is an integrated approach, which recognizes that the health of humans is closely linked and interdependent with the health of animals, plants, and the environment. Effective One Health approaches mean we communicate, collaborate, and coordinate across these sectors. And, there are multiple benefits and reasons why veterinarians, physicians, and other health and social service professionals in the DC area should work together to address health challenges.

Animals as Sentinels for People

Just over 38% of households in DC own pets and this number is likely to rise. But, not only do pets and people live close together, in the DC area people and wildlife live in surprisingly close quarters. Just last year, multiple people on Capitol Hill were impacted by a rabid fox, and the rat population in DC poses on-going concerns for other zoonotic diseases, such as hantavirus. A zoonotic disease is one that can be transmitted between animals and people.

Local wildlife and zoo veterinarians, companion animal veterinarians, and physicians can work together to streamline data sharing and concerns of any increase in diseases with zoonotic potential. With awareness of these shared health concerns, physicians and veterinarians can work together to emphasize the importance of pet vaccinations and avoiding wildlife.

Moreover, with changing climate patterns, certain vector-borne diseases are spreading into areas not previously seen before. For instance, locally-acquired malaria was recently identified in Maryland and more ticks than usual were expected in DC this past summer. Veterinarians may very well be on the front lines of an uptick in tick and mosquito-borne diseases in the area as these might show up sooner as a problem in pets and wildlife than people. If local veterinarians begin noticing higher numbers of tick-borne diseases or novel disease patterns, they can alert health authorities to share that information with physicians and their patients. Similar to when West Nile Virus was first identified in the U.S. in 1999, communication between veterinarians and human health professionals is essential to identify a potentially shared health threat before it spirals out of control.

Animals can also be sentinels for environmental health concerns. Health effects from environmental toxins or contaminants, such as lead-contaminated water, can sometimes be elusive and often linger a long time before a proper diagnosis is made. But, veterinary offices have the opportunity to thoughtfully take the time to record thorough patient histories and listen with public health in mind to offer a chance of catching an environmental health risk in pets before it has severe impacts on communities at large.

Pets are Both a Bridge & Barrier to Care

In addition to diseases of mutual concern, veterinarians and physicians should talk with each other more as pets are becoming an essential part of many people’s family — occasionally, the only family member they have. Many pet owners would benefit greatly from close collaboration between their veterinary office and their medical providers. Veterinarians can be in direct conversation with their clients’ health professionals when pet health recommendations might be in direct conflict with the physical, mental, or emotional health realities of their clients.

These conversations are even more important in times of pet owner crisis. For instance, those working on the front lines of human and pet health indicate there is a need for temporary pet foster services so people can get medical treatment they have been delaying out of concern for neglect or loss of their pet. Veterinary clinics have the potential to build on the client-patient-relationship to treat the pet in the context of their family dynamic and offer possible resources for pet owners going through a crisis. To ignore the pet as an essential part of the family can be detrimental to human health, as studies have shown the benefits of pet ownership on mental, emotional, and physical health, which is even more important for those marginalized and without robust social support systems.

For those who are traditionally less able to access health services — those experiencing homelessness, in domestic violence situations, or struggling from the limitations of poverty — offering services for their pets can often be a bridge to connecting them with services for themselves. While traumatized individuals can often be distrustful of institutions and human health care professionals, trust in veterinarians’ concern for their pets can be a gateway to eventually connect the pet owners with health services for themselves, whether that be social services, mental health treatment, medical treatment, housing, etc.

Both veterinarians and physicians value offering quality and accessible care. A key piece of ensuring care is inclusive means recognizing pets as legitimate members of the family for those who rely on them as such. Through collaboration, communication, and coordination, veterinarians, physicians, and other health professionals can create innovative care solutions that decrease barriers, increase equitable access, and offer improved outcomes for both people and pets.

Veterinarians & Physicians Face Similar Challenges

In addition to better serving our patients, collaboration and communication between veterinarians and physicians is paramount because our professions have similar challenges. Both veterinarians and physicians are facing a mental health crises, including burn-out and concerning rates of suicide. Both professions are also grappling with workforce shortages, adding even more strain on both how well we can serve our patients and our own personal well-being. Working across sectors, we can share information about what is working, what is not working, and creative solutions to these critical problems.

The list of reasons for improving communication across sectors does not end there. There are plenty of other ways veterinarians and human health professionals can collaborate, including on advocacy and policy proposals that can protect human and animal health, such as the Combating Illicit Xylazine Act.


So, how are we going to support continued and enhanced collaboration, communication, and coordination amongst veterinarians and physicians in the DC area? We are beginning communication efforts in the hopes of sparking multiple smaller conversations. Our two professional medical societies are committing to working together to host joint webinars, extending cross-sectoral invitations to our associations’ meetings, and seeking avenues for hosting joint continuing education and information sessions. We hope to plan joint health events to reach both people and pets in one venue, as well as sharing stories, data, and cross-sectoral health ideas all in one place.

All of this will take time, as nurturing lasting relationships usually does. But, please, hold us accountable. Let your health care providers know if you have a pet and how caring for that pet might impact your own health decisions. Let your veterinarians know if there are concerns you have about being able to follow through on their recommendations and request your health care providers work together as collaborative teams. Creating effective collaborative teams at the primary care level is a hard thing to ask and, while there will be many nuances to sift through, it is worth the challenge. Committing to the One Health approach can improve health outcomes across sectors — the time is right to act now.


Leslie Brooks, DVM, MPH

DCVMA Executive Director

Advocacy & Legislative update ~ Dec. 2022

 DCVMA Comments re: District of Columbia Proposed Regulation 3805 

Dear Director of the Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE), Pesticide Regulations: 

The District of Columbia Veterinary Medical Association (DCVMA) is a non-profit professional association representing the veterinarians who serve the needs of the Washington, D.C. area. The mission of the Association is to enhance veterinary medical science, maintain the highest professional and ethical standards, provide professional enrichment, and represent the interest of the veterinary profession in the District of Columbia. On behalf of our members, the DCVMA respectfully submits these comments on District of Columbia Proposed Regulation 3805, which would make any use of 183 listed pesticides subject to additional burdens. We have serious concerns with the effect that this change would have on public health and animal health. The DCVMA joins the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and its 100,000 members to request the proposed regulations be amended to (1) ensure that veterinarians continue to access, administer and dispense EPA registered products (e.g. flea and tick control and control of other parasites) without further restriction; and (2) ensure EPA-registered “over-the-counter” products to control external parasites (e.g., flea and tick control) intended for individual animal application continue to be available to the public. 

As we read it, the proposed rule would redesignate and restrict access to a number of specific pesticide ingredients used in products registered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and labeled for individual animal use for the control of external parasites such as fleas, ticks, and mites. Options for how veterinarians and animal owners could obtain products labeled for individual animal use containing imidacloprid, pyrethrins, permythrin, tetramethrin, and phenothrin would be restricted. The rule would further require that the products be applied by a certified applicator instead of a veterinarian or animal owner. Together these proposed changes will harm public health and animal health in the District of Columbia by decreasing, or in some cases eliminating, the availability and use of products that are important to the control of common external parasites. 

ANIMAL HEALTH 

Animal health has been greatly improved by access to safe and effective pesticides to help protect against external parasites, such as fleas, ticks, and mites. Treating external parasites helps prevent and control important parasite-borne diseases. Data from the Companion Animal Parasite Council (CAPC) shows that in the Maryland and Virginia areas abutting the District of Columbia, about 1 in 30 dogs tested are positive for a tick-borne disease agent, such as Lyme Disease or Ehrlichiosis.1 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has guidance on the importance of talking to your veterinarian about flea and tick control products that are right for your pet. Furthermore, it is recommended that owners treat their pets for fleas year-round in order to kill adult fleas and prevent new ones from hatching.2 Adding an unnecessary extra burden will prevent owners from obtaining critical parasite control products and veterinarians could be limited as to which products they can administer or sell directly to pet owners in the District of Columbia. This will lead to higher rates of infection or force pet owners to seek care and products outside the District of Columbia. Animal welfare certainly will suffer as a result of the proposed changes to PR 3805. 

PUBLIC HEALTH 

Infestations of biting fleas, ticks, and mange mites, for example, can cause itching to both animals and humans leading to skin infections and serious allergic reactions. Fleas, ticks, mites, and other external parasites are known to carry organisms causing diseases that are detrimental to public health. Some of the diseases that fleas and ticks, for example, can transmit from animals to humans (zoonotic diseases) include Lyme disease, Ehrlichiosis, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, bartonellosis, and others.3 

EPA RECOGNIZES THE NEED FOR UNRESTRICTED VETERINARY ACCESS 

The EPA has long recognized veterinary training and the important role that veterinarians play in the control of external parasites and associated animal and public health implications. EPA regulations exempt veterinarians from the commercial applicator certification requirement when using restricted use pesticides in the course of their professional practice. 40 CFR § 171.103(e)(2). EPA regulations also exempt veterinarians from the private applicator certification requirement when using restricted use pesticides in the course of their professional practice. 40 CFR § 171.105(i)(2). Additionally, EPA regulations exempt veterinarians from the requirements for direct supervision of noncertified applicators who are their employees. 40 CFR § 171.201(f)(2). EPA recognizes the need for veterinarians to prescribe and dispense pesticides in the course of 

their practice, and will exercise enforcement discretion for veterinarians who dispense these products in the course of their professional practice. 44 Fed. Reg. 62941 (Nov. 1, 1979) 

We urge the district to also recognize the extensive training of Doctors of Veterinary Medicine and the important role veterinarians play in the protection of animal health and public health. 

In summary, the proposed rule change would unnecessarily impede access to EPA-registered products that effectively and safely prevent and control external parasites on animals, risking animal health and public health. We ask that you modify the proposed changes to prevent these negative consequences by exempting veterinarians using restricted use pesticides from any certification requirements when using EPA-registered restricted use pesticides in the course of their professional practice. We also request that EPA-registered “over the counter” pesticides labeled for individual animal application to prevent and control external parasites continue to be generally available to animal owners in the district. We welcome a dialogue to discuss further, if needed, to ensure the District of Columbia’s companion animals and their owners are not negatively impacted. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

1 https://capcvet.org/ (see CAPC parasite prevalence maps from laboratory testing data) 

2 https://www.cdc.gov/fleas/avoid/on_pets.html 

3 https://www.avma.org/resources/pet-owners/petcare/safe-use-flea-and-tick-preventive-products