Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Sir, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the letter written by Dr. Joel Rumney in response to the Special Report in the July 2008 CVJ entitled “Health Canada’s policy on extra-label drug use in food-producing animals in Canada” (Can Vet J 2008;49:689–693). In his letter, Dr. Rumney asks if the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) should not be lobbying the federal government “to assume full responsibility for the control of the sale of all veterinary pharmaceuticals …”. Dr. Rumney’s point is well taken, in that veterinary oversight of livestock medicine used in food-producing animals under a valid veterinary-client-patient relationship (VCPR) represents a critical control point for food safety and animal health. This is particularly the case when these medicines are used in an extra-label manner (ELDU). The same critical control points do not exist for over-the-counter (OTC) sales or own use importation (OUI) of livestock medicines. The CVMA is very actively engaged with Health Canada and other federal departments on a number of fronts involving issues surrounding veterinary pharmaceuticals in Canada. These activities include the Task Force on OUI, ELDU Advisory Committee, Minor — Use Minor Species (MUMS) etc. It is through this interface that the national voice of the veterinary profession is represented, heard and understood. Regarding OTC sales of livestock medicines in Canada, there are two main issues that surface when this matter is addressed. One is that it is a provincially regulated activity that falls outside of Health Canada’s jurisdiction (for example, the Quebec model of livestock medicine sales). The CVMA tends not to become involved in provincial matters unless specifically called on to do so by our provincial veterinary associations. The other issue is one of perception. How does the profession not appear self-serving when it attempts to remove livestock medicine sales from OTC outlets and place it in the hands of veterinarians that profit from these sales? Dr. Rumney is likely correct in saying that public confidence in our food safety would be eroded if Canadians were more aware of some aspects of livestock medicine use in Canada. It may be that no significant changes will be made on how livestock medicines are sold OTC in Canada until this lobby comes from the public and not from the veterinary profession. The CVMA feels their main role in this is to promote to producers, the public and governments the value of veterinary oversight in the safe and efficacious use of these medications. If and when Canadians or the government decide regulatory changes need to be made, the profession will be well positioned to show how responsible livestock medicine use is best managed by veterinarians working under a valid VCPR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.050 | 0.031 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".