Government Response to Marsh: NOAH welcomes support for cascade

The National Office of Animal Health has welcomed the Government's formal response to the Independent Review of Dispensing by Veterinary Surgeons (the Marsh Report). In particular, it is pleased that the Government has rejected the proposal that would have allowed veterinarians to prescribe human medicines for companion animals in place of a properly authorised animal one. The Government believed that "the increased risk to target animal safety and the added disincentive to the development of new animal medicines outweighs the possibly reduced costs".

Building on the many positive points of the Interim Government Response made in December 2001, the formal response continues to suggest positive and practical recommendation to improve how animal medicines are made available to animal owners. Although to some extent overshadowed by the ongoing European Veterinary Regulatory Review and the Competition Commission (due to report in January) which affect 5 of Marsh's original conclusions, the Government has agreed with 8 points made by Marsh and rejected the suggestion to scrap the cascade for companion animals.

Philip Sketchley, NOAH chief executive said: "We are particularly pleased with the support given by the Government to the authorisation system for animal medicines. Cats and dogs have just as much right to properly researched and specifically formulated animal medicines as food producing animals. The regulatory system is there to protect animals, and it would have been unfair to the nation's pets to abdicate that responsibility and say that using unauthorised products (which is what human generics are in a veterinary context) would have been as good - it is not."

However, it is very important to differentiate between veterinary generics (which are perfectly legitimate, and already come at the "top" of the cascade where the vet chooses the most appropriate authorised veterinary product from those available) and human generics; the latter are often, confusingly, simply referred to as "generics" - indeed they are in Recommendation 8.

"Human products may have the same active at the same concentration - though this is often not the case with tablets, leading to risks of incorrect dosing - but the excipients used may not be suitable for all animal species.

"Most members of the public would be reluctant to use animal medicines on themselves, and we should continue to offer the same safeguards to our animals," said Mr Sketchley.

In addition, freedom to use human medicines would present a barrier to companies developing new animal medicines. "There is little incentive for a company to conduct research into new animal medicines if it knows that human generics could be used with impunity as soon as its licence had been granted and used under the dosage recommendations established by a veterinary manufacturer. We are pleased that the Government has rejected this proposal and have made the same points to the Competition Commission," said Mr Sketchley.

NOAH also welcomes the support given to farm health plans and the recognition that all sectors of the animal medicines distribution chain have their part to play in the development of these. This support gives further weight to the European Parliament’s recent vote on the Veterinary Regulatory Review in favour of a proposal which would allow the UK PML distribution system to continue.  

Mr Sketchley said: "We support the need to work together to improve farm animal health and reduce the need for animal medicines. This approach echoes the work already being done by the RUMA Alliance in developing guidelines across the species for responsible medicine use."

He added: "We also look forward to discussing with DEFRA in more detail the Government thoughts on disposal of farm waste, including medicinal waste. We welcome acknowledgement that farmers' and professional organisations should be involved and suggest that it is vital that the manufacturers of animal medicines, through NOAH, should also be included. We have already asked to be involved with the Agricultural Waste Stakeholders' Forum and look forward to finding out how this grouping, and the discussions outlined in the Government response to Marsh, will link together."

17 December 2002

Notes for Editors

1. For further information contact Phil Sketchley or Alison Glennon at NOAH, tel. +44 (0)20 8367 3131, or visit the NOAH website.

2. The National Office of Animal Health was formed on 1 January 1986 to represent the UK companies which research, develop, manufacture and market licensed animal health products. The association has 36 corporate members and 12 associate members. In 2001 NOAH's members accounted for around 95% of the £359 million UK animal health market, with additional valuable exports.

3. The Government's formal response to the recommendations contained in the Report of the Independent Review of Dispensing by Veterinary Surgeons of Prescription Only Medicines was published on 10 December and is available from the VMD and on its website www.vmd.gov.uk. 

4. The effect of accepting the 8 Marsh recommendations will be to:

• encourage veterinary surgeons to issue prescriptions for Prescription Only Medicines and to improve their business practices

• encourage farmers and veterinary surgeons jointly to introduce farm health plans, which should lead to improved flock/herd health and a reduction in the amount of medicines used 

• improve the availability of training for those employed in the care of animals

• increase the range of medicines available to treat minor species

• increase the number of outlets authorised to dispense cat and dog wormers classified as PML

• increase the number of medicines available to treat horses not intended for human consumption