Legends in Veterinary Medicine feature

The new monthly JAVMA News feature Legends in Veterinary Medicine¹ is very timely, not only as a part of the celebration of the founding of the veterinary profession and its role in one health, but also in relation to the North American Veterinary Medical Education Consortium (NAVMEC) initiative.² A recent book³ by John B. Tasker is a well-written compilation of the contributions of veterinary medicine to the advancement of human and animal health. Titled “On the Shoulders of Giants,” it is an interesting read of the veterinary profession's involvement in and contribution to the science of one medicine.

The NAVMEC initiative has produced a template for needed changes in the educational process for veterinarians. However, our future as a profession concerned with the health of all species can only be ensured through the education of veterinary medical scientists. As pointed out by Dr. Marshak in his recent commentary in the journal⁴ and the following letter to the editor,⁵ veterinarians are not competitive in funding for basic science research, and there is a critical need to ensure the scientific basis of the veterinary education process. Only through a true understanding of the basics of human and animal health and disease can veterinarians be equipped to contribute and participate fully in the future of human and animal health.

This is not a negative comment on clinical specialists or tracking in veterinary education or practice, so long as these do not come at the expense of the scientific basis of veterinary education and its application.

John Welser, dvm, phd

Naples, Fla

Retired Vice President of Agricultural Research Pharmacia & Upjohn Bridgewater, NJ

Former Dean

College of Veterinary Medicine

Michigan State University

East Lansing, Mich

Debate continues on horse welfare issue

We agree with the statement by Dr. Tom Lenz, as reported in a recent JAVMA News report,¹ that veterinarians have a responsibility to make sure good decisions are made on animal welfare. However, we disagree that continuing horse slaughter for human consumption is a necessary or acceptable practice. According to the report, Dr. Lenz in his keynote presentation at last year's American Association of Equine Practitioners' Annual Meeting stated that “[a] … survey by the Unwanted Horse Coalition found the main reasons horses become unwanted is because they are old, have incurable lameness problems, are unmanageable or dangerous, or fail to meet their owner's expectations.” However, we do not believe that most horses being sent to slaughter are infirm, dangerous, or no longer serviceable. In fact, recent reports^2,3 suggest that 92% of horses arriving at slaughter plants in recent years have been deemed to be in “good” physical condition, suggesting that they likely were not lame and were suitable for activities.

The horse slaughter industry currently profits from processing healthy horses and purposely seeks out such animals. For example, by comparing the number of retired Thoroughbred racehorses that are slaughtered each year⁴ with annual foal crop figures,⁵ we estimate that approximately 65% of Thoroughbred racehorses end their lives on a slaughterhouse floor. Without slaughter, we believe that many of these horses could have gone on to valuable second careers.

Some propose that horse slaughter or the lack thereof is necessary to avoid equine abandonment and neglect. However, studies have never demonstrated a link between horse slaughter and adverse equine welfare in the field.⁶ Instead, equine abuse and neglect rise and fall in concert with the economy. When the economy is weak, as at present, horses are neglected or abandoned with greater frequency.

In addition, those advocating horse slaughter often fail to mention that sending a horse to slaughter is still legal in the United States at this time. The only change has been the location of the plants, and the number of horses being slaughtered today is the same as it was before the US slaughter plants closed. What actually determines the rate of slaughter is the demand for horse meat overseas. At one time, when US horse slaughter plants were still operating, horses were imported from Canada to meet quotas.^7–9

If Dr. Lenz believes that there are too many unwanted horses, it would make sense to pursue responsible (ie, less) breeding much more aggressively than is currently being done. As Dr. Lenz says, “If we find we're doing something wrong, we need to stop and change, even if we've done it forever.” We are doing something wrong by not paying more attention to overbreeding while allowing the inhumane practice of horse slaughter to continue. The time for change is now. Dr. Lenz comments that he hopes the industry will decrease the number of horses being sent to slaughter. Hoping the industry is going to change isn't going to change anything. The veterinary profession needs to be much more proactive on this issue.

Nicholas H. Dodman, bvms, dacva, dacvb

Department of Clinical Sciences

Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine

Tufts University

North Grafton, Mass

Nena J. Winand, dvm, phd

Groton, NY

Clarification on language barriers during an outbreak investigation

I read the JAVMA News report¹ entitled, “Postmortem given on equine piroplasmosis” tonight and was surprised by a statement attributed to Dr. Mike Short, identified in the article as the equine program manager in the Division of Animal Industry at the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

According to the article, Dr. Short said in regard to an investigation into an outbreak of equine piroplasmosis in the Ocala, Fla, area in 2008 that the primary language spoken on the farms was Spanish, making it difficult to obtain valid information from the farm owners.

I do not believe this statement should go unchallenged, as it can be taken to mean either that no one in the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services could speak Spanish in 2008, which would seem odd given the large Hispanic population in Florida, or that the Spanish-speaking workers on the farm were not capable of giving valid information when asked.

In the United States today, we depend on foreign workers to perform many labor-intensive agricultural practices. Our fruit and vegetable orchards and fields would be unharvested and many milking parlors would be seriously understaffed if we did not have the Spanish-speaking laborers from Central and South America who come to do these jobs.

I would dare say that in non-English-speaking countries, if they were investigating a disease outbreak, one would never see the statement “[t]he primary language spoken on the farms was English, making it difficult to obtain valid information from these farm owners.” Thus, I wonder what Dr. Short really meant to say?

Tony Beane, dvm

Department of Veterinary

Science Technology

State University of New York at Canton

Canton, NY

Dr. Short responds:

Thank you for your letter to the editor, which allows me to clarify my statement. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services certainly recognizes and appreciates the contributions that the Hispanic community makes every day to Florida agriculture.

My choice of the word “valid” may be misleading and was not meant to state or imply that “… no one in the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services could speak Spanish in 2008 …” or that “… the Spanish-speaking workers on the farm were not capable of giving valid information when asked.” My statement reflects the fact that during the investigation, most of the premises that were investigated had farm personnel who were primarily or exclusively fluent in Spanish and that because the Division of Animal Industry did not employ a large number of field personnel who were fluent in Spanish, gathering timely and accurate information was a challenge. The outbreak investigation required division employees to perform numerous tasks on multiple premises each day, including testing of horses, taking inventory of animals, quarantining and releasing animals from quarantine, and conducting farm interviews to gather information that could assist in the investigation. Because the investigation involved a large number of premises that were located throughout the state, Spanish-speaking division employees were not always readily available for communication with farm staff, which at times complicated the investigation.

Mike Short, dvm

Equine Programs Manager

Division of Animal Industry

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

Tallahassee, Fla