Back in 2016, proponents of using acupuncture in veterinary medicine attempted to gain recognition as a medical specialty through the AVMA’s American Board of Veterinary Specialties (ABVS), which is the organization that formally recognizes such specialized branches of veterinary medicine. The attempt failed because the ABVS recognized there was “a lack of scientific basis for such a specialty.” In other words, as I have been illustrating for over 15 years, there is no compelling body of scientific evidence showing that acupuncture is a coherent, safe, or effective treatment for any medical condition.
I detailed my own training and certification in acupuncture here, and despite engaging deeply with the scientific literature and hands-on practice, I remain unconvinced by claims that this method is anything more than a reliable of pre-scientific folk medicine, especially as taught an practiced by the majority of proponents through the perspective of so-called Traditional Chinese Medicine.
I am by no means alone in my conclusions, and the Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine Association (EBVMA), of which I am a member and past-president, has submitted an official letter recommending again rejecting the petition as inconsistent with the preponderance of the scientific evidence.
I contributed to this letter, but I had a slightly different view of the issues and so have also chosen to submit my own letter to ABVS opposing the petition. I encourage anyone who shares my concern to submit your own letter, or I would be happy to add your name to my own and that of other individuals who have chosen to endorse this statement. I have copied the letter and the current list of individuals endorsing it below. Let me know in the comments if you would like to be included
Public comment on this petition is due no later than 11:59 p.m. on August 12, 2025. All comments must be submitted by email to ABVS@avma.orgwith the subject line “Public comment – Acupuncture Specialty.”
Letter Opposing Recognition of Acupuncture as a Veterinary Medical Specialty
We are writing to oppose the establishment of an ABVS-sanctioned specialty in veterinary acupuncture. A similar petition was denied in 2016 due to “a lack of scientific basis for such a specialty.” Nothing substantive has changed since that decision, and despite decades of research and thousands of studies in humans and other species, there is still no cogent, robust body of scientific evidence to support the claims and practices of acupuncturists.
Acupuncture is fundamentally based not on plausible and proven scientific principles but on pre-scientific folk medicine concepts. The majority of veterinary acupuncture practitioners are trained in the model of so-called Traditional Chinese Veterinary Medicine (TCVM), largely by the Chi Institute and affiliated organizations. This system consists of a mélange of practices and philosophies developed for use in humans and adapted in modern times for use in animals. These disparate folk medicine traditions were repackaged and marketed as a unified system in China in the 1950s for domestic political reasons and then introduced into Europe and the United States in the 1970s.1,2 The claim that acupuncture is an ancient, unbroken tradition of veterinary treatment is not only irrelevant to the scientific validity of the practice but also factually incorrect.
TCVM relies on pre-scientific concepts to guide and validate acupuncture, including manipulation of an undetectable spiritual energy (e.g. Chi) and the Daoist metaphysical concept of “balance” between the universal opposites of Yin and Yang, often identified with masculine/feminine, heat/cold, light/dark, the seasons, and the five “elements” of nature (earth, air, fire, water, and wood).3 This system is similar to ancient Greek humoral medicine, Indian Ayurveda, and many other folk medicine systems for explaining disease in the absence of a scientific understanding of biology. Such a method does not correspond to the reality of physiology and pathophysiology as revealed by science, and it has not place in modern, science-based veterinary medicine.
Some proponents of acupuncture will claim that while they continue to use the terminology and clinical practices of TCVM acupuncture, they have replaced the underlying folk medicine principles with scientific explanations for the effects of their treatments. This often includes claiming acupuncture “points” and “channels” have some identifiable correspondence to verifiable functional or anatomic structures (e.g. nerves, muscles, blood vessels, tendons, myofascial “trigger points,” etc.). Stimulating these locations with needles, and with non-traditional adjuncts like electricity, is claimed to release endorphins or endogenous opioids or have other detectable physiology effects.
The problem with these claims is that they have not been validated by high-quality, repeatable scientific research.4 The minor local trauma of needle insertion certainly has detectable effects, certainly, but the consistency, predictability, and clinical value of these effects has not been demonstrated. There is little to distinguish acupuncture from other forms of mild trauma, such as prodding patients with a toothpick or striking them lightly with a hammer.
Similarly, the existence of special “points” at which such minor trauma should be directed has not been convincingly demonstrated. Almost any part of the body contains some structure that one could argue is relevant and would respond in some way to stimulation. Studies of clinical acupuncture find that different practitioners use very different locations for needling,5 and virtually no part of the body has not been claimed as a special “point” by at least some school of acupuncturists.4,6,7
The lack of a biologically plausible theoretical mechanisms demonstrated by pre-clinical studies for both TCVM and the more ostensibly scientific varieties of veterinary acupuncture is not the only deficiency in the evidence base. Despite the lack of a plausible and demonstrable mechanism of action, many clinical studies of acupuncture have been done, in humans and other species. Even with thousands of such studies, and thousands of systematic reviews and meta-analyses conducted over many decades, no clear consensus has emerged demonstrating meaningful, consistent, predictable benefits for acupuncture treatment. The claims acupuncturists make are still predominantly based on personal clinical experience and selective emphasis on positive clinical studies with significant methodological flaws.
PubMed lists over 2,000 systematic reviews of acupuncture studies since the last attempt to form a veterinary acupuncture specialty in 2016. The vast majority of reviews, and of acupuncture clinical studies, are conducted by advocates for the practice, and many are published in journals and countries with a documented publication bias that favors acupuncture.8–12 Despite this obvious risk of bias, systematic reviews of the systematic reviews in this area consistently find inconclusive evidence or low quality, with the best quality studies most likely to show no effect and the positive studies most likely to involve subjective symptoms, such as pain.
For example, a 2022 review of systematic reviews concluded13,
“Despite a vast number of randomized trials, systematic reviews of acupuncture for adult health conditions have rated only a minority of conclusions as high- or moderate-certainty evidence, and most of these were about comparisons with sham treatment or had conclusions of no benefit of acupuncture.”
This is effectively the same conclusion as a similar review of reviews published in 200614,
“Systematic reviews of acupuncture have overstated effectiveness by including studies likely to be biased. They provide no robust evidence that acupuncture works for any indication.”
When decades of research involving thousands of studies and hundreds of thousands of participants fail to find unequivocal, high-quality evidence supporting an intervention, it becomes very implausible to claim that it is a powerfully effective treatment that deserves recognition as a medical specialty.
The veterinary acupuncture literature, as expected, is far smaller and or lower quality than the research in humans. The majority of studies have significant methodological limitations and high risk of bias, and both positive and negative results have been reported. The literature is insufficient to support rigorous systematic reviews or meta-analyses. There is little reason, however, to imagine that the results of reviews, even if more and better quality studies were available, would be more supportive than the vast, and still inconclusive literature on acupuncture in humans.
Proponents of a specialty argue that the popularity of the practice is growing and that this justifies a recognized specialty. Even if their claim of 5,000 individuals trained in this practice is correct, that represents less than 4% of veterinarians in the U.S. More importantly, the popularity of a practice has no relevance to its scientific validity.
Recognition of acupuncture as a specialty would create the impression that it is a clinical practice with scientific validity and genuine expertise equivalent to cardiology, internal medicine, emergency and critical care, and other ABVS-recognized specialties. This is simply false. Even if recognition encouraged standardization of training and credentials, how is this of value to veterinary patients and clients when the principles underlying this training are implausible and not supported by reliable and consistent scientific evidence? Legitimizing acupuncture by declaring it a clinical specialty would mislead veterinarians and the public and likely encourage expanded use of this dubious practice. For these reasons, we oppose the current petition.
Brennen McKenzie, MA, MSc, VMD, CVMA
Gary Block DVM, MS, DACVIM
President EBVMA
Jörg M. Steiner, med.vet., Dr.med.vet., PhD, DACVIM, DECVIM-CA, AGAF
Nicholas Jenkins, DVM, MS
Erica Tramuta-Drobnis, VMD MPH CPH
Thomas Doker DVM, MPH, DACVPM(Epidemiology), CPH
Robert Larson DVM, PhD, DACT, DACVPM Epidemiology), ACAN
Martin Whitehead BSc, PhD, BVSc, CertSAM, MRCVS
Luis Arroyo Lic. Med Vet,, DVSc, PhD, DACVIM
References
1. Ramey DW, Buell PD. Acupuncture and ‘traditional Chinese medicine’ in the horse. Part 1: A historical overview. Equine Vet Educ. 2004;16(4):218-224. doi:10.1111/j.2042-3292.2004.tb00301.x
2. Michaels PA. Chinese Medicine in Early Communist China, 1945–1963: A Medicine of Revolution. Soc Hist Med. 2006;19(2):338-340. doi:10.1093/shm/hkl010
3. Xie H, Preast V. TCVM: Fundamental Principles. 2nd ed. Chi Institute Press; 2013. https://media.graphassets.com/pp77sBzRQVGnm6lNJa8x
4. McKenzie BA. Acupuncture. In: Placebos for Pets: The Truth about Alternative Medicine in Animals. Ockham Publishing; 2019:490.
5. Molsberger AF, Manickavasagan J, Abholz HH, Maixner WB, Endres HG. Acupuncture points are large fields: the fuzziness of acupuncture point localization by doctors in practice. Eur J Pain Lond Engl. 2012;16(9):1264-1270. doi:10.1002/j.1532-2149.2012.00145.x
6. Magovern P. Koryo Hand Acupuncture: A Versatile and Potent Acupuncture Microsystem. Acupunct Med. 1995;13(1):10-14. doi:10.1136/aim.13.1.10
7. Gori L, Firenzuoli F. Ear Acupuncture in European Traditional Medicine. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med ECAM. 2007;4(Suppl 1):13-16. doi:10.1093/ecam/nem106
8. Li J, Hui X, Yao L, et al. The relationship of publication language, study population, risk of bias, and treatment effects in acupuncture related systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiologic study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023;23:96. doi:10.1186/s12874-023-01904-w
9. Ma B, Qi G qing, Lin X ting, Wang T, Chen Z min, Yang K hu. Epidemiology, Quality, and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Acupuncture Interventions Published in Chinese Journals. J Altern Complement Med. 2012;18(9):813-817. doi:10.1089/acm.2011.0274
10. Masuyama S, Yamashita H. Trends and quality of randomized controlled trials on acupuncture conducted in Japan by decade from the 1960s to the 2010s: a systematic review. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2023;23:91. doi:10.1186/s12906-023-03910-3
11. Vickers A, Goyal N, Harland R, Rees R. Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. Control Clin Trials. 1998;19(2):159-166. doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00150-5
12. Wang Y, Wang L, Chai Q, Liu J. Positive Results in Randomized Controlled Trials on Acupuncture Published in Chinese Journals: A Systematic Literature Review. J Altern Complement Med. 2014;20(5):A129-A129. doi:10.1089/acm.2014.5346.abstract
13. Allen J, Mak SS, Begashaw M, et al. Use of Acupuncture for Adult Health Conditions, 2013 to 2021: A Systematic Review. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(11):e2243665. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.43665
14. Derry CJ, Derry S, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Systematic review of systematic reviews of acupuncture published 1996-2005. Clin Med Lond Engl. 2006;6(4):381-386. doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.6-4-381
I, Christopher N. Ricks, D.V.M., would like to be included in this letter opposing acupuncture as specialty branch and Acupuncturist for board specialty status.
Will do, thanks!
Please include me in this letter- Stephen LaRocca, DVM. I fully oppose the proposition of the inclusion of acupuncture as a veterinary specialty. Further, I do not believe this discipline should be a component of general practice, either. The idea of restraining animals and stabbing them with needles despite lack of empirical support is flatly wrong.
Please include my name on this letter opposing acupuncture as a recognized veterinary specialty.
Claire Landwehr, DVM
Will do, thanks!
Thanks for the support!
You can include my name as opposing acupuncture as a specialty.
Elena T. Contreras, DVM, MS, PhD
Acupuncture is not empirically-verified medicine! Don’t subject our beloved fur babies to these unproven methods.
I , Melissa Alley, BVSC MANZCVS PGCERTSC FCERTECC, senior companion animal veterinarian in clinical practice, would like to be included in this letter opposing acupuncture as specialty branch and Acupuncturist for board specialty status.
I would love to be included in this letter, I completely agree that the ABVS should not recognize acupuncturist as a specialty, for all the reasons listed above. Audrey Kastner, DVM
Dr. William F. “Bill” Jackson from Florida was the one who played a key role in starting veterinary specialty boards. He was the founding president, organizing chairman, and an honorary diplomate of the American Board of Veterinary Practitioners (ABVP), which was a significant step in establishing veterinary specialties. He was also a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons and the American College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists, further cementing his influence in the field. I remember seeing him at the local meetings. When these vets get up at our required CE meetings to promote acupuncture specialty we need to address the quackery then.
Please add my name to the opposition letter – Maria Brink, DVM BSc
If not too late, I would appreciate being added as a signatory to this letter opposing ABVS recognition of the proposed acupuncture specialty organization. The proposed “specialty” does not meet the criteria for recognition as an AVMA Recognized Specialty Organization and this letter makes that quite clear.
Thank you for your efforts opposing this!
Charles Lemme, DVM
Absolutely!
Thank you!
Thank you!
Thanks!
since Nixon went to china and they showed us video on tv of people getting acupuncture for surgery rather than anesthesia how much money has the American public spent on acupuncture for themselves and their pets?
Grok pontificates
Estimating the total spending on acupuncture for humans and pets in the United States since 1972, when President Nixon’s visit to China popularized the practice, is challenging due to limited historical data and the evolving nature of the acupuncture market. Below, I provide an analysis based on available information, acknowledging gaps and offering a reasoned estimate where possible.
Acupuncture for Humans
Acupuncture gained significant attention in the U.S. following Nixon’s 1972 trip, during which journalist James Reston’s experience with acupuncture for post-surgical pain was widely publicized. Since then, acupuncture has grown into a recognized complementary therapy, with spending influenced by out-of-pocket costs, insurance coverage, and increasing practitioner numbers.
Key Data Points:
Recent Spending Estimates:
In 2018, the total annual cost of acupuncture services in the U.S. was approximately $3.5 billion, based on an estimated 37,886 licensed acupuncturists earning an average gross income of $95,760 each.
From 2010 to 2019, annual spending on acupuncturist visits increased from $593 per user (2010–2011) to $1,021 per user (2018–2019), with the number of visits per user rising from 5.4 to 8.2. Total spending rose significantly, driven by increased utilization.
By 2024, the U.S. acupuncture market was valued at part of a global $65.1 billion botanicals and acupuncture market, with the U.S. holding a significant share (approximately 20.4% of the North American market, which itself is a fraction of the global total).
Historical Context:
In the 1970s and 1980s, acupuncture was largely out-of-pocket, with limited insurance coverage. The first legal acupuncture center opened in Washington, DC, in 1972, and by the 1980s, practitioner numbers were still low, suggesting modest early spending.
By 1998, there were approximately 10,600 licensed acupuncturists, increasing to 37,886 by 2018 (a 257% growth). This growth correlates with rising consumer demand and spending.
Insurance coverage began expanding in the 2000s, with Medicare covering acupuncture for chronic low back pain since 2020, and some states including it as an essential health benefit under the Affordable Care Act. However, about 50% of acupuncture visits in 2018–2019 were still paid out-of-pocket.
Usage Trends:
In 2012, over 4.08 million adults visited acupuncturists, averaging 8.09 visits each, totaling 33.01 million treatments. Up to 75% of these were out-of-pocket.
By 2022, 7.3 million adults used acupuncture, representing 2.2% of the population, up from 1% in 2002.
Session costs vary widely, with initial visits ranging from $20 to $300 (averaging $112 in 2019) and follow-ups from $50 to $100 (averaging $80).
Estimation Approach for Humans:
To estimate total spending from 1972 to 2025, we can use a combination of historical and recent data, interpolating for years with less information:
1972–1990: Assume minimal spending due to low practitioner numbers (likely under 1,000) and limited public awareness. If 1,000 acupuncturists earned an average of $50,000 annually (adjusted for inflation to 2018 dollars), annual spending might have been $50 million. Over 18 years, this totals approximately $0.9 billion.
1991–2000: Practitioner numbers grew to ~10,600 by 1998. Assuming an average of 5,000 acupuncturists earning $60,000 annually (reflecting growing acceptance), annual spending might have been $300 million. Over 10 years, this totals $3 billion.
2001–2010: With ~20,000 acupuncturists by 2005 and increasing insurance coverage, annual spending likely grew from $1 billion to $2 billion. Assuming an average of $1.5 billion annually, this totals $15 billion over 10 years.
2011–2018: Spending is better documented, with $3.5 billion in 2018. Assuming a linear increase from $2 billion in 2011, the average annual spending is ~$2.75 billion, totaling $22 billion over 8 years.
2019–2025: Projecting forward, with the market growing at a 17.72% CAGR (from $54.16 billion globally in 2023 to $276.72 billion by 2033), U.S. spending likely increased from $3.5 billion to ~$5 billion by 2024. Assuming an average of $4.25 billion annually, this totals $25.5 billion over 6 years.
Total Estimated Spending (Humans, 1972–2025): $0.9B + $3B + $15B + $22B + $25.5B = ~$66.4 billion
This is a rough estimate, as early data is sparse, and inflation adjustments, regional cost variations, and unreported cash transactions introduce uncertainty.
Acupuncture for Pets
Veterinary acupuncture, while less common, has grown in popularity, particularly for conditions like arthritis, pain, and mobility issues in dogs, cats, and horses. Data on pet acupuncture spending is scarce, but some insights are available.
Key Data Points:
Cost per Session: Veterinary acupuncture typically costs $70 to $120 per session, comparable to human treatments, with costs varying by location and practitioner expertise.
Availability: Veterinary acupuncture requires specialized training, and practitioners are fewer than human acupuncturists. It’s often offered by veterinarians with additional certification, limiting its scale.
Cultural Context: In China, pet acupuncture gained attention in the 2010s, with clinics charging ~$400 for a course of 10 treatments. In the U.S., pet ownership and spending on pet healthcare have risen, with $147 billion spent on pets in 2023, though acupuncture is a small fraction. (American Pet Products Association, 2023)
Market Size: No specific U.S. data isolates pet acupuncture spending, but the global veterinary acupuncture market is a niche segment of the broader acupuncture market, likely under 1% of the total.
Estimation Approach for Pets:
1972–1990: Veterinary acupuncture was likely negligible, as the practice was rare even for humans. Assume near-zero spending.
1991–2000: Sporadic use might have begun in affluent areas, but with minimal practitioners (perhaps 100 nationwide), annual spending was likely under $10 million. Over 10 years, this totals $0.1 billion.
2001–2010: Growing pet healthcare spending and holistic trends suggest a small market. If 500 practitioners offered pet acupuncture at $50,000 annually, spending might have been $25 million per year, totaling $0.25 billion over 10 years.
2011–2020: Assume 1,000 practitioners by 2015, with spending rising to $50 million annually. Over 10 years, this totals $0.5 billion.
2021–2025: With pet spending surging (e.g., $147 billion in 2023), acupuncture might represent 0.1% of this, or $150 million annually. Over 5 years, this totals $0.75 billion.
Total Estimated Spending (Pets, 1972–2025): $0B + $0.1B + $0.25B + $0.5B + $0.75B = ~$1.6 billion
This estimate is highly speculative due to limited data on veterinary acupuncture prevalence and practitioner numbers.
Total Estimated Spending (Humans + Pets)
Humans: ~$66.4 billion
Pets: ~$1.6 billion
Total: ~$68 billion
Critical Considerations
Data Gaps: Comprehensive spending data before 2000 is nearly nonexistent, especially for pets. Estimates rely on extrapolating practitioner numbers and average incomes, which may over- or underestimate true spending.
Inflation: Figures are not consistently adjusted for inflation, though recent data (e.g., 2018–2019) uses 2019 dollars. Historical estimates use approximate inflation-adjusted values.
Unreported Spending: Cash-based transactions and unreported income by practitioners may mean actual spending is higher.
Market Trends: The acupuncture market is projected to grow significantly (to $276 billion globally by 2033), suggesting recent and future spending will dominate the total.
Skepticism of Sources: Some sources may overestimate market size to promote industry growth, and clinical efficacy debates (e.g., placebo effects) could affect perceived value and spending.
Conclusion
Since 1972, the American public has likely spent approximately $68 billion on acupuncture for humans and pets, with ~$66.4 billion for humans and ~$1.6 billion for pets. These figures are rough estimates due to sparse early data and assumptions about practitioner numbers and session costs. For more precise insights, detailed historical surveys or industry reports would be needed, but such records are limited. If you’d like, I can refine the estimate with additional assumptions or search for more specific data sources.
Please add my support for this letter opposing the inclusion of Acupuncture as a specialty of the ABVS.
Sara Monteleone, DVM
Absolutely, and thank you!
Hey bud, I’m a food scientist, but like a weird goofy one that is super nerdy and all autodidactic in a bunch of science fields that I have no work in… I just love science and understanding the universe we live in. I never went past a masters deg because it wasn’t necessary in my field and I felt I did more than enough research work to last me. Anyway, a while back after I got my own pets back in 2019, I think, I started to notice so much stuff when I asked questions out of curiosity about my own cat, stuff on the internet that seemed generally accepted knowledge in the pet-universe, but that didn’t quite seem right when meshed with my foundational knowledge in biology, micro and otherwise. Eventually I started to come to the conclusion that vet science (along with dentistry and nutritional science really) is completely FLUSH with pseudoscientific nonsense. How it’s possible this stuff is all over the place is crazy to me. Take today for instance. I was randomly thinking about how sometimes my cats might accidentally go a day or two without food if I didn’t catch the pet feeder in time. Something that’s exceptionally rare but I’ve accepted can happen. My routine never allows it to go too far, but anyway I was thinking about that, and how I’ve fasted out of curiosity in my life, scientific and philosophically, and how these days science is starting to uncover hidden potential benefits behind fasting. I joked to myself how some weirdos probably fast their cats, mainly because they’re weirdos… the kind that might attempt to feed them vegan diets or something like that. Then I get online to look into it more and I find there’s a whole idea that’s totally embraced by everyone how “you should never fast your cat”. Then I thought about telling all the cats in the wild, big and small, about how they’re so metabolically different from us and the rest of mammalia that they will drastically harm themselves if they go days without food, like they probably do all the time. I also found one of the articles popularly cited here (Compromised Hepatic Detoxification in Companion Animals and its Correction via Nutritional Supplementation and Modified Fasting – Nancy Scanlan, DVM, CVA) and shoved it into ChatGPT to double check my thinking that it was completely nonsense… ChatGPT thought the same and completely tore it apart. Anyway I just had to tell someone that understood all this and found you. Glad there’s someone else in this universe that also gets how crazy this all is. Clearly cats need expensive supplements to live full, long lives.
Whenever I’m seeking internet advice for my geriatric dog and someone touts the magic of a “woo” treatment – and it momentarily gets my hopes up – I come to your site and search, and I calm down, realizing I’d be better off spending my money on steak and whipped cream to make his days happy than spending it on herbs that taste disgusting and won’t do a damned thing.
Not relevant to the subject of this post, but I just wanted to thank you for being a rational voice.
Is it too late to be included?
Andy DeStefano, DVM
St. Petersburg, FL
Unfortunately, the comment period closed Aug. 12, but I have no doubt other chances to stand up for science-based vet med will come up often!
could not find any news about acupuncture becoming a specialty but vet students at the veterinary school in Florida can still get their acupuncture on and the AVMA seems ok with this . Grok, does the vet school in Florida still offer a acupuncture course as of today
Grok pontificates
Yes, the University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine (the state’s primary veterinary school) continues to offer training in veterinary acupuncture as part of its curriculum. Specifically, the elective course VEM 5208: Integrative Medicine (1 credit, pass/fail) includes dedicated content on acupuncture, such as a lecture addressing its controversies, evidence-based approaches, traditional systems, and neuroanatomic applications. This course is available to third-year DVM students in Phase III and is scheduled for Fall 2025, combining conventional veterinary medicine with complementary modalities like acupuncture, rehabilitation, botanical medicine, and nutrition.Additionally, UF CVM provides advanced postgraduate training through an internship and residency program in Integrative and Mobility Medicine, which encompasses acupuncture and rehabilitative medicine. These programs remain active, with orientations planned for new participants starting in July 2025. The college also operates an on-site acupuncture service at its Small Animal Hospital, supporting hands-on learning opportunities.Note that while UF CVM integrates acupuncture into its programs, full certification tracks are often pursued through affiliated or nearby institutions like Chi University in Reddick, Florida, which specializes in Traditional Chinese Veterinary Medicine.