Written by Jeff Pang, BSc, JD
Borden, Ladner, Gervais, LLP
www.blg.com

As artificial intelligence, or “AI,” becomes increasingly prevalent, from dedicated AI assistants to AI-enabled household devices, it is also being used more frequently in healthcare settings. The practice of veterinary medicine is no exception. This article provides a brief summary of the current regulatory landscape and offers practical guidance to veterinarians looking to implement AI tools in their practices.

Artificial Intelligence

Although AI appeared to surge in public awareness in 2022 with the rise of ChatGPT, it is a branch of computer science with a long history of machines simulating human cognition, including learning, reasoning, problem-solving, perception, and creativity, by training on large datasets to identify patterns. For example, in both human and veterinary medicine, AI software can learn from databases of patient records that list symptoms alongside corresponding diagnoses. By examining these records, AI can detect patterns and suggest which illness or condition may correspond to certain symptoms. Accordingly, veterinarians should understand the AI tools they use by reviewing their design, the training data used in their development, and the tool’s outputs, in order to assess reliability and to identify and mitigate bias.

AI tools being used

Veterinarians today often use AI tools to assist with clerical tasks, such as keeping medical records up to date, transcribing conversations, and sending communications and reminders to clients. However, an increasing number of AI tools are also being made available to guide veterinarians toward making diagnoses, including AI assistants and AI-enabled stethoscopes and other tools developed based on the datasets described above. These tools can be valuable because they may improve access to veterinary care by streamlining appointments, but they are not without risk. AI-fueled hallucinations, which occur when generative AI models generate confident, convincing, yet inaccurate or fabricated medical information, diagnoses, or references, remain a significant concern across the AI tool landscape. Bias is also a concern, as AI tools, particularly chatbots, may be steered toward the tendencies or preferences of its users.

Regulatory landscape

In human medicine, AI tools are treated as “Software as a Medical Device” and require Health Canada approval for use in clinical settings. Veterinarians should note, however, that veterinary platforms based on human systems are not always translatable to animals. At present, no regulatory process exists for AI tools used in veterinary practices, creating a regulatory gap in which veterinarians may incur personal liability if they are not discerning about how, and which, AI tools they use in their practices.

The Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (the “CVMA”) has issued a position statement urging that scientific rigor be applied to the development of AI tools through an effective national policy framework and recognized standards, in order to mitigate risk to patients and reduce liability exposure for veterinarians. The CVMA also states that AI tools should be delivered to veterinary professionals in accordance with the policies of the applicable provincial or territorial veterinary regulatory body and urges these bodies to develop policies and standards for AI applications used in veterinary medicine. The stated objective is to mitigate risk to professionals, clients, and patients by supporting accuracy, transparency, and good practices.

With respect to regulatory bodies, the College of Veterinarians of Ontario (the “CVO”) is the only provincial regulatory body that has issued substantive guidance on this topic. The CVO emphasizes that, as previously discussed, other than medical devices that use forms of energy (such as imaging and laser equipment), no medical device for use in animal health care is subject to oversight or approval by Health Canada. The CVO also stresses that once a veterinarian chooses to use AI, they remain responsible for responding appropriately and potentially carrying out the AI’s recommendations.

The CVO further advises that, when assessing an AI tool, veterinarians should ensure its purpose, function, and relevance are clearly defined and justified. Veterinarians should also evaluate the quality and source of the data underlying the tool, identify any inherent biases, and understand how those biases are addressed. In addition, veterinarians should weigh the potential risks and benefits the tool may bring to animal care and consider how it could support their professional competence. The data used by the tool should be accessible and manageable for veterinarians, with privacy and security safeguards and clear policies governing ownership and use. Finally, the device should be updated regularly and properly maintained to support effective and timely veterinary care.

Best practices

Veterinarians should keep in mind that the use of AI tools does not absolve them of their professional responsibilities to their respective governing bodies, to the profession, or to the public. Their reputations and licenses remain at stake when employing AI, which should function as an aid rather than a replacement for professional judgment. AI tools commonly disclaim liability and emphasize the need for professional oversight. Accordingly, veterinarians retain full responsibility for decisions made in their practices. This principle will likely persist even if a regulatory framework is introduced, underscoring the importance of careful and discerning use of AI in veterinary medicine. Veterinarians should always disclose their use of AI tools to their clients as a matter of obtaining clients’ informed consent to do so. Veterinarians may also wish to develop acceptable AI-use policies for their practices. As a fundamental tenet of professional responsibility, veterinarians are responsible for the actions of their auxiliaries, and the use of AI tools should be approached in an informed manner.

If you have any questions or would like further guidance on implementing AI tools in your veterinary practice, please feel free to reach out to us. We would be pleased to support your efforts to help ensure the safe, effective, and responsible use of technology in veterinary care.

In Canada, veterinary teams already know the reality: more clients are struggling with costs, more difficult conversations are happening in exam rooms, and more care decisions are shaped by finances than by medicine alone. A new national report conducted by Gallup in partnership with PetSmart Charities of Canada now puts numbers behind those daily experiences.

“State of Pet Care Study: Veterinarian Perspectives on Canadian Veterinary Care,” surveyed 369 companion-animal veterinarians across the country in September 2025. The findings paint a picture of a profession deeply committed to patient welfare, while working inside a system strained by affordability pressures, emotional burden, and evolving expectations around access to care.

For veterinarians and veterinary technicians, the message is clear: financial barriers are no longer an occasional obstacle. They are now a defining part of practice.

Cost is the dominant barrier to care

Among all of the reasons that clients decline recommended treatment, cost was by far the most common.

According to the survey:

• 96% of veterinarians said clients’ financial limitations sometimes or often affect their ability to provide care;
• 76% said cost is often or almost always a reason that clients decline care; and
• Cost and financial limitations far exceeded other factors such as a pet being too old (39%), concerns about invasive procedures (24%), or distance to treatment or specialists (15%).

This finding is significant because it cuts across practice models and geography. Whether respondents worked in corporate, private, or nonprofit settings—or urban versus rural communities—cost remained the leading obstacle.

For clinic teams, this likely confirms what many already experience daily: medical recommendations are increasingly filtered through the lens of household budgets.

When medicine meets money

The study also highlights a tension many professionals feel but may rarely articulate openly: where does responsibility for affordability lie? When veterinarians were asked to choose between two statements, the split in how they responded revealed an important fault line in the profession:

• 57% agreed more that people should not own pets if they cannot afford care at current market rates; and
• 43% agreed more that the veterinary industry should be responsible for making care affordable.

On one side is the economic reality of running clinics amid rising wages, staffing shortages, equipment costs, rent, inventory expenses, and inflation. On the other is the welfare reality that pets still need care even when families are financially strained. Many teams are living in the middle of those competing truths.

Spectrum of care is known—but not always fully practised

One of the most encouraging findings in the report is that the concept of “Spectrum of Care” has broad recognition.

The survey defined “Spectrum of Care” as an approach in which recommendations are tailored to:

• the needs and resources of the client,
• the attributes of the pet, and
• the capabilities and experience of the veterinary team.

A striking 93% of veterinarians said they were familiar with the concept.

However, awareness did not always translate into consistent implementation. After completing a physical assessment,

• 72% said they typically present multiple options and allow the client to choose;
• 19% said they first try to understand the client’s goals, then recommend the most appropriate option—even if it is not the most advanced; and
• 9% said they start with the most medically advanced plan and adjust only if concerns arise.

This suggests that while flexibility is increasingly accepted, many appointments still begin with medicine-first frameworks rather than context-first conversations.

For technicians and CSRs, this may represent one of the greatest opportunities for practice improvement: understanding goals, limitations, and expectations earlier in the visit.

Financial conversations are still happening too late

The study found that many veterinarians do address affordability—but often only after recommendations for treatment have already been made. When asked when they explore financial concerns,

• 21% said before making recommendations,
• 51% said after making recommendations, and
• 28% said only if the client asks about cost or declines care.

The timing matters. When cost discussions happen late, clients may feel embarrassed, overwhelmed, or forced into declining a plan they never had a realistic chance of accepting. Teams, in turn, may experience frustration after investing time in diagnostics or treatment planning that cannot proceed. Earlier agenda-setting and proactive budget discussions may reduce these disconnects while improving trust.

Education gaps remain

Many clinicians appear to be learning affordability communication on the job rather than in school. The survey found that

• 75% of veterinarians said their education prepared them only a little or not at all to talk with clients about financial barriers; and
• 49% said their education prepared them only a little or not at all to offer a spectrum of care.

This has major implications for the profession.

Veterinary training traditionally emphasizes diagnostics, pathology, surgery, pharmacology, and gold-standard treatment planning. But modern practice increasingly requires skills in

• financial communication,
• shared decision-making,
• treatment prioritization,
• emotionally charged conversations, and
• balancing ideal versus achievable care.

These are learned skills—and increasingly essential ones.

Why some clinicians hesitate to offer lower-cost options

The report also explored why veterinarians may hesitate to present lower-cost or minimum-level options. Among respondents,

• 47% said this did not apply because they always offer a full range of options,
• 36% cited aiming for the best possible outcome,
• 28% cited recommendations from education or continuing education,
• 25% cited liability concerns, and
• 22% cited malpractice concerns.

This is an important nuance.

Reluctance is not necessarily about unwillingness to help. Often it reflects legitimate concerns, such as these:

• Will the pet suffer if we compromise?
• Will the client misunderstand the risks?
• Will peers judge the decision?
• Could I face professional consequences?

At the same time, 92% agreed that trying something—even if not ideal—is better than doing nothing. This suggests many veterinarians are philosophically open to pragmatic care, even if operational or emotional barriers remain.

Declined care affects teams emotionally

Perhaps the most powerful section of the report concerns emotional toll. When clients decline care,

• 98% of veterinarians worry the patient’s condition will worsen or become chronic,
• 91% worry about the emotional impact on the family, and
• 48% said inability to pay sometimes or often leads to euthanasia.

Most strikingly,

• Nearly three in four veterinarians said euthanizing a pet because the owner cannot afford treatment is one of the hardest parts of the job,
• 79% said it is difficult to see clients struggle to pay for care, and
• 44% said they feel frustrated when clients decline care because of cost.

These findings likely resonate beyond veterinarians alone. Technicians, assistants, CSRs, and managers often absorb the same moral distress, especially when they are the ones discussing estimates, witnessing tears, or supporting euthanasia appointments.

What practices can do now

While no single clinic can solve national affordability challenges, the study points toward some practical steps:

1. Normalize financial conversations early: Discuss budget ranges before diagnostics and treatment planning begin.

2. Train the whole team: CSRs and technicians can help identify concerns, explain options, and support communication consistency.

3. Use tiered treatment plans: Present essential, recommended, and comprehensive options when medically appropriate.

4. Make payment pathways visible: Many clients may not know financing exists unless it is proactively discussed.

5. Support staff wellbeing: Moral stress around declined care should be acknowledged, debriefed, and managed as a team issue—not a personal weakness.

The bigger picture

This report does not depict a profession lacking compassion. It depicts a profession carrying compassion inside an increasingly difficult economic environment.

Veterinary teams are trying to protect animal welfare, sustain viable practices, support staff, and serve clients whose financial realities may be changing faster than clinic economics can adapt. That tension is now one of the central stories of Canadian veterinary medicine.

The take-home message for veterinary teams

Affordability is no longer a side issue—it is a clinical issue, a communication issue, and a wellbeing issue.

For veterinarians and veterinary technicians, the path forward likely lies not in abandoning standards, but in expanding flexibility: earlier conversations, clearer options, stronger teamwork, and systems that allow more pets to receive some level of care rather than none.

Because in today’s practice environment, access to care is not separate from quality care. It is part of it.

Source

Gallup and PetSmart Charities of Canada. “State of Pet Care Study: Veterinarian Perspectives on Canadian Veterinary Care,” 2026.
https://www.gallup.com/analytics/659123/gallup-petsmart-charities.aspx

Written by Dr. Ernie Ward, DVM, CVFT

Most pet owners who tried to help their dog or cat lose weight said the effort didn’t work. In a new survey from the Association for Pet Obesity Prevention (APOP), only 1 in 4 dog owners and fewer than 1 in 5 cat owners reported that their pet reached and maintained a healthy body condition. The findings, based on owner-reported assessments, point to a troubling gap between effort and outcomes and raise questions about whether pet owners are getting the tools and guidance they need.

The gap between effort and outcome isn’t a motivation problem. The barriers are biological, psychological, and systemic, and most weight-loss plans don’t come close to addressing all three. 

“Pet obesity is a disease, not a discipline issue,” said Dr. Ernie Ward, APOP founder. “When 4 out of 5 cat owners say they can’t reach a healthy weight for their pet despite trying, the failure isn’t theirs. It’s a sign that calorie restriction alone doesn’t account for the biological complexity of weight regulation.”

Three barriers driving the gap

The survey identified three compounding barriers to achieving and maintaining a healthy body condition.

1. Food measurement is less precise than owners assume

Weighing dry pet food on a kitchen scale is the most accurate way to control portions, because kibble size and density vary across brands and formulas, making standard measuring cups unreliable. Yet only 3% of cat owners and 16% of dog owners reported weighing their pet’s food. Most rely on visual estimation, and even 5–10 extra kibbles per meal can add up over time, reducing the intended calorie deficit.

One survey participant described weighing individual kibble pieces and freeze-dried treats just to calculate an accurate per-piece count. Most owners aren’t doing that, and the gap between that level of precision and a rough cup measure is often the difference between progress and a plateau.

1. Economic pressure is reshaping care decisions

Forty percent of pet owners report that current economic conditions are affecting how they manage their pet’s health. For some, that means switching to lower-cost foods that are often higher in calories. For others, it means skipping weight-check visits altogether, which are the appointments most likely to catch early gains before they become harder to reverse.

1. The most effective clinical tools remain underused

Therapeutic weight-loss diets are specifically formulated to work with the body’s metabolic response to calorie reduction, the same response that causes most weight-loss efforts to plateau. But only 22% of dog owners and 35% of cat owners in the survey had used one. The survey also found growing owner interest in medical interventions for pet weight management, a trend APOP plans to track in future research.

Encouraging the conversation

The data point with the most immediate implications isn’t about food or exercise. It’s about communication.

Ninety-five percent of veterinary professionals recognize obesity as a disease. Yet 87% report at least one instance where concern about a client’s reaction influenced how they approached a weight conversation. Most pet owners surveyed reported being receptive to these discussions. But a single uncomfortable encounter, a client who appears embarrassed or responds with frustration, can shape how a veterinary professional handles every conversation that follows.

The result is a consistency gap. Seventy percent of veterinary teams report scoring body condition at every wellness exam. But only 21% do so at most other visits. That’s a problem, because a dog presenting for a cruciate tear or a cat coming in for poorly regulated diabetes is still a patient whose weight and nutrition matter. When scoring only happens at wellness checks, obesity gets treated as just a lifestyle issue instead of the clinical disease it is.

One participant said they never considered their cat overweight, assuming he was simply a big cat, until a family member suggested a vet visit. That owner wasn’t defensive. They were waiting for someone to say something.

“There’s a perception gap, and it can be self-reinforcing,” said Dr. Ward. “The clinical knowledge exists. The willingness exists. But one difficult conversation can quiet a dozen necessary ones. The data tells us most owners are ready to hear it. The challenge is giving veterinary teams the confidence and consistency to keep saying it.”

Full survey results and study enrollment are available at www.petobesityprevention.org.

Ernie Ward, DVM, CVFT graduated from the University of Georgia College of Veterinary Medicine and has spent his career blending healthy lifestyles and medicine. He is the founder of the Association for Pet Obesity Prevention. He is internationally known for improving veterinary medical standards, creating a higher quality of life for animals, and promoting healthier habits for people and pets. Dr. Ward has been a leader in the area of pet nutrition and weight loss, establishing diagnostic test protocols and evolving pet technologies, promoting the special needs of senior dogs and cats, and advancing veterinary practice standards and veterinary staff training.

He has authored and coauthored numerous books and publications, including “Chow Hounds: Why Our Dogs Are Getting Fatter”, “The Clean Pet Food Revolution: How Better Pet Food Will Change the World”,  “Better You, Better Dog, Better Life: 30 Days to Happiness with Your Best Friend”, “Approaching Obesity on a Pet-Specific Basis,” and “Communicating with Pet Owners About Obesity: Roles of the Veterinary Health Care Team”.

Dr. Ward is currently the Chief Veterinary Officer for Vertical Vet in Charlotte, North Carolina. Dr. Ward is a media personality, speaker and lecturer and the host of a popular weekly podcast, “The Veterinary Viewfinder” (iTunes, Spotify, Android, Stitcher, TuneIn).

When he is not with family and pets, and contemplating solutions for pet patients, pet parents and the planet, he can be found doing endurance athletics, surfing, and paddling.

Website: www.DrErnieWard.com

About APOP
The Association for Pet Obesity Prevention is a nonprofit dedicated to research, education, and advocacy on pet obesity through evidence-based resources and professional collaboration. APOP’s 2025 Pet Obesity and Nutrition Opinion Survey drew on responses from 265 participants across 45 states, including 174 pet owners and 84 veterinary professionals.

Positioning your practice as an environmentally conscious leader
By Judith Samson-French, DVM MSc

Extending compassion beyond a lifetime

Veterinarians are in the business of care—care that spans prevention, healing, and often, helping clients say goodbye. Increasingly, pet owners are asking a new question: Can my pet’s final care be as gentle on the planet as it was on their life?

This shift reflects a broader societal trend—one where environmental values are no longer an afterthought but an expectation. In response, aquamation—also known as alkaline hydrolysis or water cremation—is emerging as a sustainable, respectful alternative to traditional cremation.

For veterinary practices, this isn’t just an aftercare decision—it’s an opportunity to lead.

What Is Aquamation?

Aquamation is a water-based process that accelerates natural decomposition. Using warm water, alkaline salts (typically potassium hydroxide), and a gentle flow, the body breaks down into its basic elements over 6–8 hours.

What remains is sterile liquid and bone minerals, which are processed into a fine, white powder similar in appearance to cremated ashes. Unlike fire cremation, aquamation operates at lower temperatures (200–300°F vs. 1,400–2,100°F) and emits no harmful substances.

Why it matters: Environmental impact

Lower carbon emissions

Aquamation produces up to 90% fewer carbon emissions than fire cremation –  the reduction is significant—especially for clients trying to leave a lighter footprint.

Energy efficiency

Because it runs at lower temperatures, aquamation uses about one-eighth the energy of fire cremation.

No air pollutants

There are no harmful emissions, mercury vapors, or particulate matter—making this option attractive to those concerned about air quality and community health.

Water cycle friendly

The sterile liquid byproduct is nutrient-rich and safely processed to enrich farmers’ fields. No fossil fuels. No smoke. Just a clean return to the earth.

Benefits for pet owners

A gentler goodbye

Many clients appreciate the natural, water-based process, which feels more peaceful than combustion. For those who view pets as family, this gentle alternative provides emotional comfort.

More ashes returned

Aquamation typically returns 20–30% more remains than fire cremation—something clients often find meaningful when choosing how to memorialize their companion.

Safe and sterile

The highpH environment eliminates all pathogens. Clients can feel assured that the process is both dignified and safe.

A familiar end product

The resulting remains look and feel like traditional cremation ashes, making the transition seamless for families already familiar with that ritual.

Why it matters for your practice

Attract eco-conscious clients

Offering aquamation signals that your practice shares today’s environmental values. This resonates deeply with a growing group of pet owners seeking services that align with their beliefs.

Differentiate your brand

In a competitive veterinary landscape, early adoption of aquamation positions your clinic as innovative, forward-thinking, and values driven.

Boost team morale

Staff often feel proud to offer services that align with sustainability and compassion. This can enhance morale and reinforce your clinic’s culture of care.

Future-proof your services

Sustainability is no longer a niche concern. It’s a market force. Embracing aquamation now positions your practice ahead of the curve—not behind it.

The future of pet aftercare

Aquamation isn’t just the new environmental standard:it’s a new ethos. It extends the compassion at the heart of veterinary medicine into the environmental sphere.

As more clients ask, “What happens next?” after a pet’s passing, offering a sustainable, gentle option becomes not just good practice—but good leadership.

In a profession built on empathy, aquamation allows us to care for animals and the earth they called home.

Dr. Judith Samson-French is an OVC’89 graduate with a background in mixed and exotic animal practice. She founded Banded Peak Veterinary Hospital and served Bragg Creek, Alberta, for 25 years. Today, she serves as Veterinary Advisor for Gentle Waters Pet Memorial Services.

A new perspective on access, affordability, and innovation in pet health

Across Canada, pet ownership has risen steadily, with more than 12 million households now including a dog or cat. Yet, behind these numbers lies a deepening crisis: for millions of pet parents, veterinary care is simply out of reach. PetSmart Charities of Canada, in collaboration with Gallup, set out to understand the landscape of companion animal healthcare from the perspective of pet parents. More than 2,000 Canadian cat and dog owners were interviewed in December, 2024 and asked to share their experiences with veterinary care.  The findings reveal urgent challenges — and potential pathways forward — for veterinarians, policymakers, and animal health stakeholders.

Veterinary care: In demand, yet inaccessible

Half of Canadian pet parents (50%) report they have either not visited a veterinarian in the past year or have declined recommended care. The rate of skipped or refused care is highest among the youngest pet owners (18–29 years old), with nearly 60% reporting some form of care avoidance.

Interestingly, these care gaps persist across income levels — suggesting that age, accessibility, and perceptions of value also play significant roles.

The financial barrier: More than a budget problem

Affordability stands out as the top reason for skipped veterinary care. Among those who declined care, two-thirds (67%) cited financial constraints or felt the care was not worth the cost:

• 41% could not afford the treatment.
• 37% believed the treatment was not worth the money.
• Even among households earning over $90,000 annually, more than one in four still reported cost as a reason for skipping care.

There’s nuance in how income brackets perceive cost:

• Lower-income households emphasized affordability;
• Higher-income households questioned value.

These insights suggest not only economic pressure but also a communication gap around the value proposition of veterinary care.

Declined care Isn’t harmless

Veterinary teams understand that skipping care often has consequences — and the data confirm it. Among pet parents who declined care,

• 12% said their pet’s condition worsened or resulted in death;
• Nearly 30% knew someone whose pet died due to unaffordable treatment; and
• 7% reported turning down life-saving surgeries.

Such outcomes are not hypothetical; they represent real stories of suffering, often tied to financial strain or logistical hurdles.

Cost versus compassion: Are we meeting clients where they are?

Despite affordability being the primary barrier, veterinarians are far more likely to offer alternatives for logistical impracticalities (e.g., stress-inducing treatments or difficult administration) than for cost. 

Therefore, while 65% of pet parents declining care for practicality were offered other options, only 28% of those who declined care due to cost were presented with a more affordable option. Further, payment plans were offered to just 21% of pet owners — even among those citing cost as the barrier.

This represents a missed opportunity. Interest-free payment plans could significantly impact access: two-thirds of pet parents say such a plan would allow them to double their spending on life-saving treatments.

Care beyond the clinic: The rise of non-traditional models

Traditional clinic-based care remains the norm, but there’s rising interest in alternatives. If these were made available,

• 43% would consider home veterinary visits;
• 40% would be open to telemedicine; and
• 32% would use community clinics (e.g., pop-up services).

Telemedicine especially appeals to:

• Female pet owners (43% vs. 31% of males); and
• Pet parents managing chronic conditions (43%).

Despite these preferences, availability remains sparse, and regulatory inconsistencies across provinces hinder expansion. The message is clear: pet parents are ready — and eager — for more flexible care delivery.

Geography matters: Rural challenges and travel barriers

Distance to care is another critical obstacle. Only 32% of rural pet parents live within 10 km of a vet, compared to 57–61% of pet parents who live in urban or semi-urban settings. The farther one lives from care, the more likely they are to skip it. Among those traveling:

• 10–25 km: 52% skipped care;
• 25–50 km: 60% skipped care; and
• Over 50 km: 55% skipped care.

Even controlling for province and urbanicity, travel distance is a clear predictor of veterinary engagement.

The role of trust and perceived value

While cost is central, trust in the veterinarian ranks nearly as high in importance. Among pet parents,

• 57% prioritized quality of care;
• 50% prioritized cost; and
• 47% emphasized trust in their provider.

Notably, only 9% declined care due to distrust — a strong endorsement of the profession’s credibility. For those with pet insurance, the focus shifts even more toward quality (64%) and away from cost (37%).

Where do pet parents go for Information? Not always the clinic

Veterinarians remain the top source of health guidance for pet parents — but not universally:

• 79% consult a veterinarian when their pet is ill;
• 43% also rely on the internet;
• 30% consult friends/family;
• 22% turn to pet professionals like trainers or groomers; and
• Alarmingly, 18% only consult non-veterinary sources.

This reliance on unvetted advice increases with travel distance and is most prevalent among younger and lower-income demographics. Ensuring access — physically and virtually — may help reduce reliance on misinformation.

A call for empathy, innovation, and inclusion

The implications of the report go beyond statistics. For many, skipping care is a reluctant, painful choice — a last resort when no other options feel viable. The data challenges veterinary professionals to think differently about delivery models and payment flexibility.

Opportunities for veterinary teams:

1.  Expand care options – Consider community clinics, telemedicine, or home visits, especially for rural or transportation-challenged clients.

2. Offer payment flexibility — Promote awareness of financing solutions. If offered interest-free, payment flexibility could make lifesaving interventions feasible for more than half of clients.
3. Strengthen communication — Clearly communicate the value of diagnostics, procedures, and preventative care, especially for skeptical or high-income pet parents.
4. Build trust through flexibility — Recognize that practical concerns (treatment stress, pain, feasibility) are just as influential as cost.
5. Engage with policy — Advocate for regulatory reform to support broader implementation of community and telehealth models across provinces.

The bottom line

The veterinary field is grounded in compassion, expertise, and a deep bond with animals. However, if our systems don’t reflect the lived experiences of pet families — especially the most vulnerable — we risk leaving too many behind and having pets suffer the consequences.

Pet parents aren’t asking for lower standards of care. They’re asking for access, understanding, and flexibility. They’re pointing toward a more inclusive model of veterinary care — the veterinary community has a real opportunity to evolve care solutions.

Source:

PetSmart Charities of Canada-Gallup (2025, June 11). “State of Pet Care Study: Pet Parents’ Assessment of Canadian Veterinary Care.”

To read the full report: https://www.gallup.com/analytics/659123/gallup-petsmart-charities.aspx

Feline medicine has experienced a surge of interest over the past decade, with increasing research on cat specific diseases and conditions.  It’s estimated that there are up to 373 million cats kept as pets worldwide and this number continues to grow.   The recently released 2025 World of the Cat Report offers insights into feline-specific veterinary care.  Developed by Hill’s Pet Nutrition’s new Cat Advisory Team, (C.A.T.), which includes leading Canadian feline specialist Dr. Susan Little, the report covers cat demographics, population statistics, pet food advances, and the effect of cost on veterinary care and nutrition.

Cat demographics

Pet ownership is increasing worldwide, with Russia having the highest share of cat owners globally.  The other population of cats is strays.  In the United States alone, there are approximately 30 to 40 million stray, feral or uncared-for cats. 

There are 73 cat breeds recognized by the International Cat Association.  The 3 most popular breeds worldwide are the Ragdoll, Maine Coon, and Devon Rex.  Breed popularity varies across the globe, with the Exotic Shorthair being the most popular breed in the United States, ahead of the Ragdoll.  In the United Kingdom, the British Shorthair is most popular, followed by the Bengal.  Cat procurement is generally from animal shelters, breeders, or from a friend, neighbour or relative. 

Most common feline diagnoses

Urinary tract disease, encompassing both infectious and non-infectious lower urinary tract conditions, is one of the most common feline diagnoses.  Other top conditions diagnosed in cats include:

• Gastrointestinal disease
• Upper respiratory tract disease
• Overweight/Obesity
• Dental disease                         
• Urinary tract disease (upper and lower)
• Kidney disease
• Behaviour concerns

Feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukemia remain two of the most common infectious diseases worldwide.

Feline veterinary experts

Worldwide, there were a total of 96 American Board of Veterinary Practitioners (ABVP) Feline diplomates at the end of 2024.  Over two thousand practices have achieved one of two ‘cat friendly’ designations: the ISFM Cat Friendly clinic program, available in 31 countries, and the Cat Friendly Practice® program licensed by the Feline Veterinary Medical Association (Feline VMA) in North and South America. At the end of 2023, there were 880 Cat Friendly Practices®, with another 355 in progress.

The ‘cat friendly’ designations have made a positive contribution to feline health and well-being during the past 12 years.  A study published in late 2023 found that cat friendly practices had higher revenue per visit, higher revenue per visit when diagnostic testing was done, higher mean visits per cat per year, and more diagnoses of common endocrine, kidney, and electrolyte conditions.  As well, in practices following the cat friendly guidelines, pet parents are better prepared and satisfied, stress is reduced during clinic visits, retention is improved, and cats are seen more frequently. 

Since 2020, thirteen new guidelines for feline practice have been released by the Feline VMA and ISFM. These cover feline medicine, wellness, the veterinary environment, and how the veterinary health care team should interact with cats in the clinic.  As well, at least 12 new feline-specific textbooks have been published in the last five years.

New treatments and diagnostic tests

New treatments and diagnostic tests are available to help veterinarians treat cats with veterinary visit fear and anxiety, and manage cats with diabetes mellitus, feline infectious peritonitis (FIP), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Some of these are:

Bonqat® ( Zoetis)

• A pregabalin oral solution that is more potent than gabapentin.
• It is indicated for the alleviation of feline acute anxiety and fear associated with transportation and veterinary visits.
• Available in the US; not yet available in Canada.

Fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF-23) test (IDEXX)

• A lab test to measure FGF-23 serum concentration.
• Offers a new method for managing and monitoring phosphorus overload and metabolic bone disease in cats in IRIS CKD stages 1 or 2.

Cystatin B lab test (IDEXX)

• Another newly available lab test, it will show acute kidney injury earlier than increases in SDMA or creatinine.
• This assessment can be important in many cases, including potential toxin exposure, tracking treatment and recovery after acute kidney injury, monitoring progression from IRIS stage 1 CKD, screening for injury following NSAID use, and assessing the pet after a hypotensive event during anesthesia.

Varenzin™-CA1 (Elanco)

• Molidustat oral suspension is the first conditionally licensed veterinary option for treating nonregenerative anemia in cats with CKD.
• Stimulates endogenous production of erythropoietin when given daily.
• Available in the US and Canada.

Bexacat™ (Elanco) and Senvelgo® (Boehringer Ingelheim)

• Two new oral hypoglycemic agents approved for use in cats, bexagliflozin and velagliflozin.
• These SGLT2 inhibitors inhibit glucose resorption from the proximal tubule of the kidney and are indicated for treatment of newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus.
• They decrease blood glucose, decrease serum fructosamine concentration, and improve clinical signs in a majority of newly diagnosed diabetic cats.
• Available in the US and Canada.

GS-441524

• An antiviral drug that inhibits the replication of feline coronavirus strains that cause FIP.
• GS-441524 is a highly effective treatment for FIP, which was almost routinely a fatal condition.
• Available in the US, and Canada (Trutina Pharmacy), as an oral formulation.

Pet food advances

The Association for Pet Obesity Prevention’s 2022 US Pet Obesity Prevalence Survey found that a staggering 61% of pet cats are overweight or obese in the United States, indicating a widespread problem with pet health. A survey conducted in late 2023 revealed a lack of awareness of this problem on the part of pet parents. Only 28% of those surveyed believed their cat was overweight or obese, while 57% believed that their cat was at a healthy/optimal body condition.

Ontario Veterinary College recently surveyed cat owners in North America as part of a study which was designed to determine the relative importance of information communicated to cat owners during veterinarian-client obesity-related conversations. Owners indicated that the impact of excess weight on life expectancy, in a conversation with a veterinarian about their overweight or obese cat, would most encourage them to pursue weight management for their pet.

Dry kibble continues to be the most popular form of pet food fed to cats, and treats are also popular. Use of wet food, in single cans, multi-serving cans, or pouches, is steady or increasing in most countries. Feline diseases and conditions have new research leading to some new nutritional management technologies. For example, Hill’s Pet Nutrition has developed a proprietary blend of prebiotic fibers (ActivBiome+) that works with, and is utilized by, each cat’s unique bacterial population allowing the beneficial bacteria to thrive.

Effect of cost on pet food and veterinary care

Costs of veterinary care and pet food have some effect on the behavior of pet parents. Top reasons for pet owners to switch brands of pet food are cost, perceived value, and available promotions. Other reasons for changing brands include recommendation by a veterinarian or veterinary health care team member and finding a food that the pet prefers the taste of.

Many cat owners with cats on therapeutic pet foods tell their veterinarians that they switched to non-therapeutic foods due to financial pressures, or they refused a prescribed therapeutic pet food. Some cat owners cut out medication for a specific health condition and others spaced out medication for financial reasons.

Approximately one-third of cat owners have made cutbacks to veterinary-related expenses. Veterinarians have seen treatment delay or cessation among cats suffering from all major health conditions. Dental issues and obesity lead the list, and mobility issues and kidney or urinary issues have gone untreated in cats.

Only 40% of cats visit the veterinarian annually.  Among pet owners, a range of 6% in Spain to 15% in the US say they had not visited their veterinarian in the last 12 months. Following ‘my pet was not ill,’ the next most common reasons for not visiting the veterinarian were that it has become too costly, and that the pet gets stressed when going to the vet. CVP

Source:  2025 Hill’s Pet Nutrition World of the Cat Report