This is incredible to watch from the human side of medicine, Eric. I am astounded at the low level of training as proposed. And as you rightly point out, there are HUGE subsidies for human care (in addition to Medicare financing our training). I will be watching and keeping my fingers crossed for you.
Appreciate your thoughts Stacy, it is truly shocking what they are proposing. The fate of this bill (and potentially our profession) is now up to the voters of Colorado 🙏🤞
I thank you for the insight. May I ask a favor (but don’t feel obligated) could you post a poll amongst your colleagues? Yes or no-do you think veterinary medicine should introduce mid-levels? Interested to see what way this support leans. If you do poll can you also ask permission to screenshot the result and share with veterinarians who are curious? Would it be ok to share the poll results with me?
Thank you so much for your review! It is horrible to think of donors well meaning dollars going to political lobbyists, paying groups to source signatures (conflict of interest much? Do the people being payed to harvest these signatures really believe in the proposal or do they just see an easy paycheck 🤔). If I was a large donor (or even small) I would be furious and immediately stop all financial support. Apryl Steele doesn’t even address extremely important information such as the CACVT being opposed to this, her own employees being opposed to this, how we pay this new position, how this will appeal to and retain people in this position to serve in rural communities (especially if there is are veterinarians practicing there). Apryl knows that many who are employed by her are against 129, and she doesn’t care to hear their voice because of the extreme tunnel vision she has (I would not be surprised if this may be in part bribery, you can get a lot of people to dance for the right amount of money). She projects herself in a way that persuades the reader to believe that she cares for animals yet is completely satisfied with 65 online credit hours to cut open the animals she cares for so much. I love that you pull up and compare what is required to be a PA in the state 129 is being pushed and PAs only study one species and do not perform surgery. Working HQHVSN your eyes are opened wide to the MANY variables of anatomy even for a “routine” male cat neuter. I have witnessed either personally or while assisting another veterinarian testicular/scrotal tumors that require scrotal ablation, surprise cryptorchid (retained testicle that requires to surgically open the abdomen to find it due to lack of normal development), surprise testicular torsion, surprise hermaphrodite, surprise microorchidism of the testicle (one testicle being abnormally small, sometimes EXTREMELY small, think the size of a pepper corn ), abnormal bleeding, accidentally tearing the spermatic cord while autoligating (this requires finding the spermatic cord to stop hemorrhaging that can lead to patient death, the testicular artery does branch right off the aorta if you didn’t know so this bleeding can be SIGNIFICANT), distal urethra accidentally being incised requiring placement of a urinary catheter, and this is not an extensive list. And what can vary from the normal for a spay, don’t even get me started this list is even longer. So unless there is a core understanding of the embryology and anatomy beyond the reproductive tract or single body system, I would never have that individual cutting into me, cutting into my child, or cutting into my pet. This is seriously a welfare issue. I cannot wrap my head around the fact that Apryl Steele, a colleague, sees no issue with this! And you also need to have extensive understanding in pharmacology and pathophysiology and anesthesiology to be able to intervene should there be issues while the animal is under general anesthesia, having a reaction to the medication or codes. Don’t lie to the public to push your agenda, do better. Support veterinarians and veterinary technicians, vote no. The solution we already partially have, our hugely overlooked veterinary technician role, a licensed individual that should be supported to specialize (the VTS that already exists). And if you feel there are gaps or short falls in the veterinary curriculum (such as hours of surgical time, or dental curriculum), push to fix those first!
Thank you for providing so many great examples of complications and pitfalls that highlight the importance of robust training. Like I pointed out in my post last week, with some vet schools going to a truncated 3-year curriculum and no required internships/residencies, our current training is *already* closer to a PA than a physician in length, despite packing in information about multiple species! Bananas.
When I click that link I'm able to see everything. Perhaps this is a browser issue? Or I may be misunderstanding the problem. Can you tell me a little bit more about what the issue specifically is?
This sets a new precedent: corporations with lobbyists and complicit politicians use the ballot initiative to enable seizing control and practice of an established licensed profession while holding the professionals and their professional societies with the authority of expertise at arms' length. What is being done now to veterinarians in Colorado enables doing it in this state to any profession with statutory recognition in licensing, certification, or registration.
Corporate monopolies and takeovers are rarely good for consumers, clients, or the professions.
I have my beefs with the corporate consolidation in vetmed, but I don't think they are all bad. From what I can tell digging into open source records, corporate donors are not a major funder of Prop 129. It really does seem like this is coming from the "true believers" in the non-profit and shelter side. I don't doubt the sincerity of their beliefs, I just think their proposal is misguided and poorly-designed.
First, thanks for a good article and the response above.
This was touted and sold to petition signers as a way to reduce the skyrocketing costs of pet care, but it seems far more than that. It seems to give the green light to any corporation with deep enough pockets to fund a ballot initiative to take over a profession that has been deemed sufficiently important to grant it statutory licensing, registration and certification. In this case, the profession is veterinarians.
Those endorsing the Proposition follow.
Virtual Veterinary Care Association (VVCA) Sponsored by the Mars holding company behind monopolies of veterinarian services https://vvca.org/our-sponsors/ See "chewy" link below about virtual veterinary care under Animal Policy Group.
Animal Policy Group Colorado Voters for Animals (CVA) : "We are a group of varied volunteer advocates who share the same passion: to educate about, and advocate for, Colorado animals and humane welfare issues." They list legislators and grade them on advocacy.
Karen McCormick is an elected Colorado representative and licensed veterinarian who openly opposes Prop 129, but is rated by this organization A++ in educating and advocating for animals. It seems inconsistent for them to be doing both at once.
CVA's Link directed me to a Vote Smart site that would not find the legislator in Colorado who is also a veterinarian. Went around the VVCA hijacking trap directly to Vote Smart and easily found her at https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/180213/karen-mccormick Her profile on the non-partisan Vote Smart web pages seems very positive too, just like her rating at CVA.
ASPCA: They have been under the scope for years as a charity collecting vast amounts of donations but little of it getting to the destinations grassroots donors like us are led to believe it does. They are heavily funded by corporations, with their largest sponsor being Subaru. Googling of "ASPCA + scam" and adding a search criteria "past year" will bring the latest information from investigation by reputable news sources. They are not the same as the organizations that run shelters under names that include The Humane Society.
These are not scientific professional by a long shot.
In contrast, the endorsers of the opposition to Proposition 129 at the https://keepourpetssafe.com/ site seem to have that credibility and real credentials.
I agree that not all corporations are bad, but unregulated ones that that seek to control a profession that already has oversight with statutory licensing by essentially setting up a lesser qualified group to do the profession's work are serving up something I am not yet willing to buy into.
This sets a dangerous precedent. After this passes, I would not be surprised to see a similar movement of veterinarians from Colorado as we are seeing with gynecologists from Idaho. If I had my own independent practice, I would be thinking about what it might be worth in 4-5 years.
This is incredible to watch from the human side of medicine, Eric. I am astounded at the low level of training as proposed. And as you rightly point out, there are HUGE subsidies for human care (in addition to Medicare financing our training). I will be watching and keeping my fingers crossed for you.
Appreciate your thoughts Stacy, it is truly shocking what they are proposing. The fate of this bill (and potentially our profession) is now up to the voters of Colorado 🙏🤞
I thank you for the insight. May I ask a favor (but don’t feel obligated) could you post a poll amongst your colleagues? Yes or no-do you think veterinary medicine should introduce mid-levels? Interested to see what way this support leans. If you do poll can you also ask permission to screenshot the result and share with veterinarians who are curious? Would it be ok to share the poll results with me?
Thank you so much for your review! It is horrible to think of donors well meaning dollars going to political lobbyists, paying groups to source signatures (conflict of interest much? Do the people being payed to harvest these signatures really believe in the proposal or do they just see an easy paycheck 🤔). If I was a large donor (or even small) I would be furious and immediately stop all financial support. Apryl Steele doesn’t even address extremely important information such as the CACVT being opposed to this, her own employees being opposed to this, how we pay this new position, how this will appeal to and retain people in this position to serve in rural communities (especially if there is are veterinarians practicing there). Apryl knows that many who are employed by her are against 129, and she doesn’t care to hear their voice because of the extreme tunnel vision she has (I would not be surprised if this may be in part bribery, you can get a lot of people to dance for the right amount of money). She projects herself in a way that persuades the reader to believe that she cares for animals yet is completely satisfied with 65 online credit hours to cut open the animals she cares for so much. I love that you pull up and compare what is required to be a PA in the state 129 is being pushed and PAs only study one species and do not perform surgery. Working HQHVSN your eyes are opened wide to the MANY variables of anatomy even for a “routine” male cat neuter. I have witnessed either personally or while assisting another veterinarian testicular/scrotal tumors that require scrotal ablation, surprise cryptorchid (retained testicle that requires to surgically open the abdomen to find it due to lack of normal development), surprise testicular torsion, surprise hermaphrodite, surprise microorchidism of the testicle (one testicle being abnormally small, sometimes EXTREMELY small, think the size of a pepper corn ), abnormal bleeding, accidentally tearing the spermatic cord while autoligating (this requires finding the spermatic cord to stop hemorrhaging that can lead to patient death, the testicular artery does branch right off the aorta if you didn’t know so this bleeding can be SIGNIFICANT), distal urethra accidentally being incised requiring placement of a urinary catheter, and this is not an extensive list. And what can vary from the normal for a spay, don’t even get me started this list is even longer. So unless there is a core understanding of the embryology and anatomy beyond the reproductive tract or single body system, I would never have that individual cutting into me, cutting into my child, or cutting into my pet. This is seriously a welfare issue. I cannot wrap my head around the fact that Apryl Steele, a colleague, sees no issue with this! And you also need to have extensive understanding in pharmacology and pathophysiology and anesthesiology to be able to intervene should there be issues while the animal is under general anesthesia, having a reaction to the medication or codes. Don’t lie to the public to push your agenda, do better. Support veterinarians and veterinary technicians, vote no. The solution we already partially have, our hugely overlooked veterinary technician role, a licensed individual that should be supported to specialize (the VTS that already exists). And if you feel there are gaps or short falls in the veterinary curriculum (such as hours of surgical time, or dental curriculum), push to fix those first!
Thank you for providing so many great examples of complications and pitfalls that highlight the importance of robust training. Like I pointed out in my post last week, with some vet schools going to a truncated 3-year curriculum and no required internships/residencies, our current training is *already* closer to a PA than a physician in length, despite packing in information about multiple species! Bananas.
I tried to open but cannot read the whole document on the link you have above. Am I missing something? It’s like a footnote
https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Proposition_129,_Veterinary_Professional_Associate_Initiative_(2024)
When I click that link I'm able to see everything. Perhaps this is a browser issue? Or I may be misunderstanding the problem. Can you tell me a little bit more about what the issue specifically is?
Thanks for the update.
You are very welcome!
This sets a new precedent: corporations with lobbyists and complicit politicians use the ballot initiative to enable seizing control and practice of an established licensed profession while holding the professionals and their professional societies with the authority of expertise at arms' length. What is being done now to veterinarians in Colorado enables doing it in this state to any profession with statutory recognition in licensing, certification, or registration.
Corporate monopolies and takeovers are rarely good for consumers, clients, or the professions.
https://pestakeholder.org/news/antitrust-enforcement-and-consolidation-in-veterinary-medicine/
I have my beefs with the corporate consolidation in vetmed, but I don't think they are all bad. From what I can tell digging into open source records, corporate donors are not a major funder of Prop 129. It really does seem like this is coming from the "true believers" in the non-profit and shelter side. I don't doubt the sincerity of their beliefs, I just think their proposal is misguided and poorly-designed.
First, thanks for a good article and the response above.
This was touted and sold to petition signers as a way to reduce the skyrocketing costs of pet care, but it seems far more than that. It seems to give the green light to any corporation with deep enough pockets to fund a ballot initiative to take over a profession that has been deemed sufficiently important to grant it statutory licensing, registration and certification. In this case, the profession is veterinarians.
Those endorsing the Proposition follow.
Virtual Veterinary Care Association (VVCA) Sponsored by the Mars holding company behind monopolies of veterinarian services https://vvca.org/our-sponsors/ See "chewy" link below about virtual veterinary care under Animal Policy Group.
Animal Policy Group Colorado Voters for Animals (CVA) : "We are a group of varied volunteer advocates who share the same passion: to educate about, and advocate for, Colorado animals and humane welfare issues." They list legislators and grade them on advocacy.
Karen McCormick is an elected Colorado representative and licensed veterinarian who openly opposes Prop 129, but is rated by this organization A++ in educating and advocating for animals. It seems inconsistent for them to be doing both at once.
CVA's Link directed me to a Vote Smart site that would not find the legislator in Colorado who is also a veterinarian. Went around the VVCA hijacking trap directly to Vote Smart and easily found her at https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/180213/karen-mccormick Her profile on the non-partisan Vote Smart web pages seems very positive too, just like her rating at CVA.
ASPCA: They have been under the scope for years as a charity collecting vast amounts of donations but little of it getting to the destinations grassroots donors like us are led to believe it does. They are heavily funded by corporations, with their largest sponsor being Subaru. Googling of "ASPCA + scam" and adding a search criteria "past year" will bring the latest information from investigation by reputable news sources. They are not the same as the organizations that run shelters under names that include The Humane Society.
Animal Policy Group:
This is a lobbyist group under Mark Cushing that advocates for enabling corporations to practice virtual veterinary care . Cushing figures prominently in questionable activities that face legal hurdles. See https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/24/chewy-connect-with-a-vet-regulatory-hurdles-skepticism.html
These are not scientific professional by a long shot.
In contrast, the endorsers of the opposition to Proposition 129 at the https://keepourpetssafe.com/ site seem to have that credibility and real credentials.
I agree that not all corporations are bad, but unregulated ones that that seek to control a profession that already has oversight with statutory licensing by essentially setting up a lesser qualified group to do the profession's work are serving up something I am not yet willing to buy into.
This sets a dangerous precedent. After this passes, I would not be surprised to see a similar movement of veterinarians from Colorado as we are seeing with gynecologists from Idaho. If I had my own independent practice, I would be thinking about what it might be worth in 4-5 years.