Abstract:
The importance of mortality caused by veterinary use of the drug diclofenac (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, NSAID) in the population collapse of three species of Gyps vulture across South Asia is supported by several lines of evidence (Green et al., 2004, Oaks et al., 2004 and Shultz et al., 2004) and represents the best-established instance of a pharmaceutical compound having secondary environmental impacts. Diclofenac is toxic to Gyps vulture species at levels they encounter in the wild (Oaks et al., 2004 and Swan et al., 2006a), and recent safety testing has demonstrated the low toxicity of the NSAID meloxicam to Gyps vultures, suggesting its suitability as a replacement for diclofenac in veterinary medicine (Swan et al., 2006b). Reddy et al. (2006) compare the toxicity to domestic fowl (Gallus domesticus) of diclofenac with that of the NSAID nimesulide and claim that “nimesulide … (is) completely safe for birds at the dose levels tested”. While we commend their efforts in investigating the effects of these two NSAIDs, we reject the application of their results to species beyond domestic fowl, and consider their conclusion to be erroneous and potentially damaging for the conservation of Gyps vultures and other scavenging birds.
