Intuitive animal communication (IAC) is defined as a process of transmitting and receiving information between humans and animals, supposedly transcending conventional channels, sometimes invoking mystical roots. The apparent recent increase in practitioners, the “wild” aspects of their practice, the substantial expenses, and the intrusions into veterinary questions point to the need for an evaluation of its scientificity. 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. 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 in the images. In conclusion, 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. We find no scientific reason to recommend this practice. Finally, proving that IAC has no basis should save animals from ineffective treatments and their owners from undue expenses.