The final report from an influential government committee scrutinising pet parasite medications (PPMs) has concluded that they are being overused by pet owners, in many cases without evidence of medical need, and that their widespread availability is causing significant environmental damage.
Following a number of evidence sessions hearing from a range of witnesses including vets, pet charities, retailers, ecologists, academics, research institutes and regulators, the cross-party House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee maintained that the “intensive and unnecessary overuse” of PPMs is not supported by robust scientific evidence, while the release of chemical ingredients such as imidacloprid and fipronil into the environment from pet owners’ homes is potentially causing widespread damage to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
The committee’s report, entitled ‘Paws for Concern: Pets, Parasites and Pollution’, is calling for a ban on the general sale of off-the-shelf and unchecked online pet treatments for fleas and ticks, replacing the General Sales Licence (GSL) with a more restrictive POM-VPS classification, meaning that they can only be sold by vets, pharmacists and by Suitably Qualified Persons (SQPs) in stores, with the environmental risks made more visible on packaging. This would enable pet owners to receive a thorough assessment of the needs of their pets and advice about the potential health and environmental risks of pet parasiticides before purchase, the body argued.
The committee is calling on the Government to establish a clear and comprehensive evidence base on the use of PPMs, including the volume of products sold, the proportion of pets routinely treated, and the prevalence of pet parasites as a whole. The committee also raised concerns about how the pet pharmaceutical industry appears to be “worryingly embedded” within the regulatory and advice-setting frameworks, and called for new research, with appropriate financial contributions from the pet pharmaceutical industry, to address evidence gaps between the environmental impacts of PPMs and the potential risks to human health.
Committee chair Baroness Sheehan said that the over-use of PPMs on household pets is the equivalent of “using a sledgehammer to crack a nut”.
She told PBW News: “These are not innocuous substances, they are designed to have an effect. Currently they can be bought off the shelf, and we want that to be stopped.
“The last thing we want to do is to restrict access to people who have a genuine need, such as those who live in a high-risk area for parasites, or who have a pet who is already suffering from fleas or ticks, but currently the individual need is not being assessed.
“We hope that pet owners will take all of this on board and will and only use these very toxic chemicals judiciously, based on their pets’ needs, rather than just as a routine.”
Following the publication of the report, the government is obliged to formally respond within six weeks. After that, a time slot will be allocated for a parliamentary debate on the topic, either in the Lords’ chamber or in a government committee, and this is expected to take place in early 2027.
The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) is running a separate consultation on the sales of PPMs and is expected to make a statement next month, with recommendations that may or may not agree with the Lords committee.
