THE COUNCIL for Docked Breeds has slammed the British Veterinary Association for refusing to carry an advertisement in the Veterinary Record from the Council of Docked Breeds (CDB) despite it being initially accepted and full cost agreed, due to its alleged "political nature".
The CDB’s advertisement drew readers’ attention to a page on the CDB’s website where they could read two comprehensive critiques of the "Edinburgh Study (circa 1985)"
"The BVA recently instructed members to write to their MP's and to quote the seven year study at the University of Edinburgh Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies as ‘scientific evidence’ which it is not," declared CDB Secretary Ginette Ellott. "We were simply trying to draw the vets attention to the two recent critiques. Neither the Veterinary Record nor the BVA had disputed the findings of either critique or published them for the Veterinary profession to make their own evaluation, so we tried to and were gagged".
The Veterinary Record dismissed claims of bias, pointing out that it had a long-standing policy of not accepting advertisements that were ‘political’ on nature, or for campaigns.
Editor Martin Alder said that the Veterinary Record’s rules applied "whatever the cause", adding: "Had those opposed to docking wanted to place a similar advertisement we would not have carried that either."
His comments got short shrift from Mr Elliott who said: "Clearly the BVA do not wish to see their last vestige of 'Scientific' evidence presented by their members to MP's blown away. It is little wonder that particularly the younger end of the profession show little or no understanding of the process when their professional organisation suppresses available information. There is a word for this, it’s called censorship."