Official websites use .gov
A
.gov website belongs to an official government
organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A
lock (
) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to
the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official,
secure websites.
We have launched our new website and are actively monitoring it. If you notice any issues, please submit feedback. Search results may take a few days to update while search engines index the new website.
During the 2026 legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly enacted Chapter 48 (SB 54/HB 452), which prohibits the State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners (“SBVME” or “Board”) from taking disciplinary action against a licensee solely because the licensee discussed or recommended the use of cannabis, or a product containing cannabidiol (“CBD”), on an animal for potential therapeutic effect or health supplementation purposes. The full text of the legislation, which took effect on October 1, 2026, can be found on the Maryland General Assembly website.
SBVME has never taken formal disciplinary action against a veterinary practitioner based on a discussion with a client about the use of cannabis or products containing CBD. The Board’s position has been that if asked by a client, a veterinary practitioner may discuss the use of such products, but that discussion should encompass information such as the benefits and risks of use of the products, potential drug interactions, and disclosure of studies or lack of studies reflecting their safety and efficacy. However, the Board had previously advised that given the unsettled legal framework and lack of research regarding the safety and efficacy of such products for use in animals, a veterinary practitioner should not recommend these products to clients for use on their animals.
As of the effective date of the legislation, if the Board receives a complaint involving a veterinarian’s discussion or recommendation of cannabis or CBD products, it will be evaluated in the same manner as any complaint involving other medications or supplements. The Board will consider all facts related to the client communications and recommendation to determine whether the advice or recommendation was appropriate for the patient under the circumstances. Issues considered by the Board may include whether the client was reasonably informed of potential risk and benefits associated with using the product for their animal, including interactions with other medications and overdose risk; presented with appropriate warnings and instructions for use, and given information about the lack of FDA testing and approval of such product for use in pets and the limited regulation of pet products containing cannabis or CBD.
As with any discussion or recommendation of medications or supplements for therapeutic effect or health supplementation purposes, the Board may take disciplinary action against a veterinary practitioner if the information provided to the client about use of the product was inappropriate, inaccurate, or did not include information necessary to allow the client to make an informed decision regarding whether to use the product on their animal. If a veterinary practitioner recommends a specific manufacturer’s product for use in a client’s animal, the veterinarian should be familiar with the formulation, ingredients, accuracy of labeling, and efficacy of the product.
As a final reminder, a veterinary practitioner may not legally prescribe or dispense cannabis or CBD products to animals because no such products have FDA approval for veterinary use.
ANNAPOLIS, MD (October 2nd, 2026)—
