No on AB 1399: protect your pets, not out of state profits

OPINION – What’s really behind Assembly Bill 1399 by Assemblymember Laura Friedman (D-Glendale) currently making its way through the State Capitol?

It’s high stakes competition between more than a dozen out-of-state companies focused on gaining market share at the expense of California consumers.

The bill expands the use of televets by abolishing California’s Veterinarian-Client-Patient Relationship (VCPR) minimum standard requiring a veterinarian to physically examine an animal prior to recommending treatments and prescribing medications. The bill will simply allow the televet to treat and prescribe medication without ever seeing the pet in person.

The supporters of this misguided legislation, online pet product retailer, Chewy, whose annual revenue soared from $3.53 billion in 2018 to $8.9 billion in 2021, and out-of-state online vet service company, Dutch, are committed to a business model of signing up as many pet owners as possible for televet services. This is a volume business that relies on short interactions between televets and pet owners.

This bill will help the profitability of televet companies while resulting in substandard care for pets and problems for California veterinarians saddled with the consequences of televet veterinary practice gone wrong.

As a 17-year veterinarian practicing in Woodland, California, I urge the Legislature to consider the following facts before embracing the dangerous policy advanced by AB 1399.

Establishing a personal connection between a veterinarian and a pet is an essential component of veterinary care. Unlike human patients, pets cannot speak to tell their doctor what is wrong. In fact, instinctually they often hide symptoms. Veterinarians are trained to use sight, sound, smell, and touch during a physical exam to help determine what is wrong with an animal patient.  Televet consultations lack this personal touch, which drastically diminishes quality of care. The absence of direct physical contact hinders the veterinarian’s ability to develop a complete understanding of the pet’s unique needs and personality.

Veterinarians are trained to use sight, sound, smell, and touch during a physical exam to help determine what is wrong with an animal patient.  Televet consultations lack this personal touch, which drastically diminishes quality of care.

While telemedicine can be useful in many situations, particularly where follow-up care is at issue, basic standards governing the permissible use of telemedicine are needed to protect pets and their owners.

Televet conversations with pet owners do not work in many scenarios and is not the same as human telemedicine. To provide quality care, veterinarians rely on hands-on examination techniques to evaluate an animal’s health, assess vital signs, and detect subtle abnormalities. Without the ability to physically interact with the pet, a crucial aspect of accurate diagnosis may be compromised. Televet encounters cannot replace the necessity of listening to heart and lung sounds or observing physical cues, all essential in determining a pet’s condition.

Veterinary hospitals possess a wide range of specialized diagnostic tools, including X-ray machines, ultrasound devices, and laboratory equipment to aid in diagnosing pets. These tools are not readily available for use during televet consultations, limiting the veterinarian’s ability to conduct comprehensive tests and compromising the accuracy of diagnoses, potentially leading to incorrect treatment plans or delays in identifying serious health conditions.

Pets often exhibit subtle behavioral changes that can indicate underlying health issues. These cues, including changes in appetite, grooming habits, or overall demeanor, may be difficult to capture through a telemedicine consultation.  Veterinarians rely on observing these behavioral cues during an in-person examination to gather essential information about the pet’s health. The absence of this can lead to misinterpretation of symptoms or missed opportunities to detect underlying conditions.

In emergency situations, time plays a critical role in saving a pet’s life. Telemedicine consultations may introduce delays, especially if immediate action is required. Quick decision-making, prompt intervention, and physical examination are vital during emergencies, and the inability to provide these services remotely can hinder timely care. In such cases, pet owners need access to in-person veterinary services to ensure the best chances of a positive outcome.

While telemedicine can be useful in many situations, particularly where follow-up care is at issue, basic standards governing the permissible use of telemedicine are needed to protect pets and their owners.

Don’t be fooled by the propaganda, AB 1399 is an out-of-state cash grab and legislators should vote NO unless the bill is significantly amended to protect consumers and pets.