Intuitive animal communication (IAC) is defined as a process of transmitting and receiving information between humans and other animals while transcending conventional channels, sometimes invoking mystical roots. The apparent recent increase in the number of IAC practitioners, the “wild” aspects of their practice, the substantial expenses it often entails, and the intrusion into veterinary questions it amounts to, all point to the need for an evaluation of IAC scientificity. To this aim, we conducted a systematic literature review and developed a randomized, double-blind, protocol testing the ability to distinguish living animals from deceased ones, in conditions close to IAC practice. Participants, practitioners and non-practitioners, were shown random photos of dogs, cats, and horses, each animal being currently alive or deceased, and tasked with “feeling” their status. As a result, practitioners (N = 340) and non-practitioners (N = 1986) perform similarly and not better than chance when predicting living vs. dead status. Statistically, some scores are unusually high or low, indicating unnoticed clues, true or misleading, in the images. To sum up, until today, no IAC capability has been demonstrated, and our protocol confirms this absence. The success of IAC seems based on a combination of guesswork and subjective validations and we find no scientific reason to recommend this practice. Regarding clinical relevance, proving that IAC has no basis should save animals from ineffective treatments and their owners from undue expenses.