Bioethics Symposium: The ethical food movement: What does it mean for the role of science and scientists in current debates about animal agriculture?

Contemporary animal agriculture is increasingly criticized on ethical grounds. Consequently, current policy and legislative discussions have become highly controversial as decision makers attempt to reconcile concerns about the impacts of animal production on animal welfare, the environment, and on the efficacy of antibiotics required to ensure human health with demands for abundant, affordable, safe food. Clearly, the broad implications for US animal agriculture of what appears to be a burgeoning movement relative to ethical food production must be understood by animal agriculture stakeholders. The potential effects of such developments on animal agricultural practices, corporate marketing strategies, and public perceptions of the ethics of animal production must also be clarified. To that end, it is essential to acknowledge that people's beliefs about which food production practices are appropriate are tied to diverse, latent value systems. Thus, relying solely on scientific information as a means to resolve current debates about animal agriculture is unlikely to be effective. The problem is compounded when scientific information is used inappropriately or strategically to advance a political agenda. Examples of the interface between science and ethics in regards to addressing currently contentious aspects of food animal production (animal welfare, antimicrobial use, and impacts of animal production practices on the environment) are reviewed. The roles of scientists and science in public debates about animal agricultural practices are also examined. It is suggested that scientists have a duty to contribute to the development of sound policy by providing clear and objectively presented information, by clarifying misinterpretations of science, and by recognizing the differences between presenting data vs. promoting their own value judgments in regard to how and which data should be used to establish policy. Finally, the role of the media in shaping public opinions on key issues pertaining to animal agriculture is also discussed.     

Critical perspectives in animal agriculture: a response

People who work in the animal industries are faced with questions and criticisms about a variety of contentious issues, including animal management practices, ethics, diversity in animal agriculture, and animal welfare. Formulating responses to these questions requires a critical evaluation of our own work and open discussion of these controversial issues. Effective debate on these issues can be accomplished only with input from philosophers and social scientists skilled in such discussions, in addition to animal scientists. Therefore, animal scientists must engage in discussions of controversial issues among themselves and with entities outside agriculture. Furthermore, we must accept responsibility for the application of research results and any potential negative consequences. Because society is increasingly concerned with issues of animal welfare and the effects of new technologies, we should increase communications and transparency with the public. Increased diversity of race and gender will increase the ability of animal agriculture to connect with our stakeholders and to communicate the relevance of our work to society. Animal scientists need a professional ethic that espouses a higher level of understanding and commitment to philosophical discussions of contentious issues.     

Postmodernism for animal scientists

Many scientists regard the term "postmodernism" as controversial. Because postmodern theorists question whether science can be objective, some scientists view postmodernism as anti-scientific. In this paper, we argue that traditional accounts of science developed during the modern era (16th, 17th, and 18th centuries) are still influential in animal science, but are no longer plausible. In particular, the view that science automatically leads to human betterment seems to be disingenuous. A postmodern view that portrays science as a political activity seems more plausible, and offers a means to better understand contentious policy issues that involve science. Although most animal scientists accept the view that theory selection, experimental designs, and technology development require value-laden judgments, most fail to recognize that such values may be politically motivated and embrace prevailing political structures. Postmodernists such as Michel Foucault argue that through the generation of knowledge, scientific disciplines create a discourse that serves to maintain a particular social structure that has political implications. Viewed in this way, it becomes clear how various interest groups can be critical of certain scientific programs. For example, groups that oppose research dealing with cloning, genetically modified organisms, and intensive livestock production may not be as much opposed to science as they are to the political interests served by this science. In other words, such groups view these research agendas as promoting policies that place them at risk. Such a postmodern account of science, may help animal scientists better understand the nature of contentious issues, and provide a basis for reforming the animal science discipline in ways that make it more responsive to the diverse interests of a pluralistic society.     

A commentary on domestic animals as dual-purpose models that benefit agricultural and biomedical research

Research on domestic animals (cattle, swine, sheep, goats, poultry, horses, and aquatic species) at land grant institutions is integral to improving the global competitiveness of US animal agriculture and to resolving complex animal and human diseases. However, dwindling federal and state budgets, years of stagnant funding from USDA for the Competitive State Research, Education, and Extension Service National Research Initiative (CSREES-NRI) Competitive Grants Program, significant reductions in farm animal species and in numbers at land grant institutions, and declining enrollment for graduate studies in animal science are diminishing the resources necessary to conduct research on domestic species. Consequently, recruitment of scientists who use such models to conduct research relevant to animal agriculture and biomedicine at land grant institutions is in jeopardy. Concerned stakeholders have addressed this critical problem by conducting workshops, holding a series of meetings with USDA and National Institutes of Health (NIH) officials, and developing a white paper to propose solutions to obstacles impeding the use of domestic species as dual-purpose animal models for high-priority problems common to agriculture and biomedicine. In addition to shortfalls in research support and human resources, overwhelming use of mouse models in biomedicine, lack of advocacy from university administrators, long-standing cultural barriers between agriculture and human medicine, inadequate grantsmanship by animal scientists, and a scarcity of key reagents and resources are major roadblocks to progress. Solutions will require a large financial enhancement of USDA's Competitive Grants Program, educational programs geared toward explaining how research using agricultural animals benefits both animal agriculture and human health, and the development of a new mind-set in land grant institutions that fosters greater cooperation among basic and applied researchers. Recruitment of outstanding scientists dedicated to using domestic animal models for agricultural and biomedical research, strong incentives for scientists to take advantage of training opportunities to write NIH grants, and greater NIH and USDA cooperation to sponsor the use of agricultural animals as dual-purpose animal models that benefit agriculture and biomedicine will also be necessary. In conclusion, the broad diversity of animal models needed for agricultural and biomedical research is at risk unless research priorities at the land grant universities are critically evaluated and financial support for such research is dramatically increased.     

Science, values, and common ground

In this paper, I argue that there may be common ground shared by animal science and its critics insofar as animal scientists seek improvement in their field in four areas: the quality of their products, the quality of life for those who make their livelihood in food production, the fair treatment of human workers, and the humane treatment of animals. I also propose that there are fundamental differences between improvement motivated by profit and improvement motivated by ethical values. Positive moral change is sometimes revolutionary, although it is often a matter of promoting positive incremental changes and keeping one's attention on the effects of actions and attitudes. In conclusion, I suggest that in animal agriculture, positive change can be brought about by "getting closer" to the objects of scientific research, including nonhuman animals, by paying more attention to their welfare.     

Science,politics and animal health policy: epidemiology in action

Public policy decisions underlie society's response to current animal health issues ranging from emerging diseases and public health threats to food safety concerns and sustainable animal agriculture strategies. Despite strong calls for "science-based" decisions, animal health policy most commonly emerges at the interface of science and politics. Too often scientists' disdain for politics limits their involvement in formulating policy. By contrast, epidemiologists are ideally qualified to bring scientific skills to complex policy issues through analytical, macro-epidemiological approaches that consider the economic, legal, and cultural context of policy issues as well as the biological and medical aspects. Risk analysis provides a systematic approach to evaluating animal health issues and comparing policy options. Capturing these opportunities for applied epidemiology requires an understanding of the policy-making process as well as the basic principles of epidemiology. Furthermore, epidemiology training programs must incorporate communications skill building and experiential learning opportunities in a team environment.     

We and they: Animal welfare in the era of advanced agricultural biotechnology

The paper discusses central moral issues raised by the applications of advanced biotechnology to animal agriculture and introduces the major ethical concepts and principles of animal bioethics. It is argued that biotechnology enables human beings to transform animals according to human needs, which blurs the boundary between humans and non-human animals in moral and biological sense. The more humans change animals, the more responsible humans are for the welfare of the animals and the greater their moral obligations. The paper introduces the main ethical approaches to animal welfare, traces the philosophical roots of animal ethics in the Judeo-Christian tradition and discusses the views of classical and contemporary ethicists such as Kant, Bentham, Mill, Peter Singer and Tom Regan. The paper explores the concept of animal welfare, suffering and rights, and the values behind Animal Liberation. Special attention is given to the animal welfare issues posed by cloning, genetic engineering and patenting of living organism. For each technology, actual or potential risks to animal welfare are identified and their moral implications are outlined. It is noted that the traditional moral principles of animal welfare, animal interests and animal rights are inadequate as means for evaluating the morality of certain advanced technologies because the technologies can change the animals in profound ways that make animal awareness too limited to give rise to claims about welfare, interests or rights. The principle of animal integrity is endorsed as an alternative better suited for evaluating the morality of advanced biotechnology.     

From a philosopher's perspective, how should animal scientists meet the challenge of contentious issues?

This article reviews how professional ethics can be useful in helping animal scientists meet new responsibilities. The transition to a postindustrial period in animal production signals a shift in the nature of contentious issues that animal producers face. Whereas farm income was once the most controversial issue in animal production, producers and animal scientists now face complex risk issues that have overlapping constituencies. Animal scientists need to develop a professional ethic that will stress open and active debate on these issues. Discussion of these issues must take place in the animal science classroom. The new professional ethic should be based on core values required for scientific research. However, departments and professional societies must develop institutions that will permit the values and methods of rationality and truth seeking to be applied in areas where measurement and experimental method are unlikely to resolve disputes, (i.e., to controversial issues that require public discussion and debate). Several specific proposals for such institution building are discussed.     

ASAS Centennial Paper: Developments and future outlook for preharvest food safety

The last century of food animal agriculture is a remarkable triumph of scientific research. Knowledge derived through research has resulted in the development and use of new technologies that have increased the efficiency of food production and created a huge animal production and food manufacturing industry capable of feeding the US population while also providing significant quantities of high-quality food for export to other countries. Although the US food supply is among the safest in the world, the US Center for Disease Prevention and Control estimates that 76 million people get sick, more than 300,000 are hospitalized, and 5,000 die each year from foodborne illness. Consequently, preventing foodborne illness and death remains a major public health concern. Challenges to providing a safe, abundant, and nutritious food supply are complex because all aspects of food production, from farm to fork, must be considered. Given the national and international demand and expectations for food safety as well as the formidable challenges of producing and maintaining a safe food supply, food safety research and educational programs have taken on a new urgency. Remarkable progress has been made during the last century. Wisdom from a century of animal agriculture research now includes the realization that on-farm pathogens are intricately associated with animal health and well-being, the production of high-quality food, and profitability. In this review, some of the developments that have occurred over the last few decades are summarized, including types, sources, and concentrations of disease-causing pathogens encountered in food-producing animal environments and their association with food safety; current and future methods to control or reduce foodborne pathogens on the farm; and present and future preharvest food safety research directions. Future scientific breakthroughs will no doubt have a profound impact on animal agriculture and the production of high-quality food, but we will also be faced with moral, ethical, and societal dilemmas that must be reconciled. A strong, science-based approach that addresses all the complex issues involved in continuing to improve food safety and public health is necessary to prevent foodborne illnesses. Not only must research be conducted to solve complex food safety issues, but results of that research must also be communicated effectively to producers and consumers.     

Livestock, ethics, and quality of life

Agricultural and animal scientists need to embrace a new vision beyond the single-minded existing pursuit of biological efficiency. The public in the West is no longer concerned solely with cheap food. Other paramount issues define quality of life, including: health and safety of foods; nutritional value; traditional, regional, locally produced, and organic foods; animal welfare; sustainable farming, environment, and rural resources. The paper provides examples of how the credibility of animal scientists has been lost due to some recent unethical behavior. Research, teaching and application of agricultural and animal science, especially of biotechnology, need to be reshaped into a new "Quality of Life Agricultural Era" to replace the "Era of Intensification." This new era will need fresh assumptions, beliefs and leadership to match the emerging social agenda of the 21st century. Animal scientists have a special role in implementing this new plausibility structure.     

Emergence of "new" viral zoonoses]

In the last two to three decades a significant increase of viral zoonotic infections was observed. These zoonoses are not only newly (or previously unrecognized) emerging diseases, but also due to the reappearance of diseases thought to have been defeated (re-emerging diseases). "New" viral diseases can arise when viruses broaden their host-range (monkey poxvirus; equine morbillivirus), or can be a consequence of intrinsic properties of the virus itself, such as high mutation rates (influenza A virus). Most new or reemerging viral zoonoses are due to infections with hemorrhagic viruses. Many of them are transmitted by insects (arboviruses, e.g. yellow fever virus) or by rodents (e.g. Hanta viruses), others by contact with patients and nosocomial infections (e.g. Ebola virus). The emergence and increase of these diseases are a consequence of anthropogenic environmental changes, such as distortions of the ecological balance and changes in agriculture. In addition, the uncontrolled growth of the cities in tropical and subtropical regions without improvement of the public health measures and the increasing international animal trade and travel also favour the spread and recurrence of these diseases.     

Ethics: The new challenge for animal agriculture

This paper introduces this volume dedicated to ethics in animal agriculture, in which moral responsibility of the actors of the animal production chain and relations between science, production and the society are analysed. Ethical concepts and their evolution through the ages, and ethical issues arising across different modes of production are presented. The diversity of viewpoints and interests of the stakeholders (farmers, technicians, scientists, consumers and citizens), relative to their values, cultures, and production conditions, is emphasized. The processes by which norms can be built while taking into account this diversity and societal objectives are illustrated at the levels of the profession, the country, Europe or the world. Ethics in animal production is a condition of the acceptability of the products, but also of the animal production sector as a whole.     

Critical perspectives of animal agriculture: introduction

The American Society of Animal Science has recently focused its attention on a variety of contentious issues in animal agriculture. This paper deals with critique, a philosophical approach to analyzing and understanding issues. This method has been employed by various contemporary philosophers. For example, feminist theorists have used this approach to critically analyze sexual harassment. Critique involves a critical analysis of the discourse (ideas or language) and practices that define the social reality in which we live. How we think about the world and how we behave in it determines how we humans interact with each other as well as with the rest of nature. This social structure is associated with power structures that benefit some individuals and harm others. In this paper, I demonstrate how critique can be used to better understand the social reality of animal agriculture. By analyzing certain popular texts in this field, I show that a "mechanical view of nature" is dominant in animal agriculture and argue that such a view contributes to a social reality that can be harmful to some humans and other animals. I conclude that various contentious issues can be better addressed when we engage in a critical analysis of this conceptual framework and base our analysis on the experiences of many different people, including those who have been harmed by our current system of animal agriculture.     

The relativity of ethical issues in animal agriculture related to different cultures and production conditions

Initiatives to incorporate European animal welfare standards in international trade agreements raise issues of ethical relativism: (1) in the Fulani pastoral system the harsh environmental conditions result in a strong mutual dependency of pastoralists and their animals. Thus, animal ethics is vital to ensure the survival of the pastoral family, framed as ethic of securing survival; (2) the magnitude of human intervention, investigated in the Indian smallholder crop-livestock production system keeping oxen for work, determines the farmer's responsibility for adequate handling of animals. The apt anticruelty ethic prohibits deliberate cruelty to animals and neglect; (3) in intensive animal agriculture, such as intensive poultry and pig production in Thailand, the traditional ethical concept is no longer applicable and a new ethic encoded in law that respects the animals' natures is needed; (4) local moralities, as illustrated with the case of the llama system in the Andean highlands, deserve adequate attention independent of the production system. Therefore, the issue of animal welfare should be regarded relative in the global context and a dialogue between the cultures is encouraged to advance ethical concerns in animal agriculture.     

Definition of animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems

What we do is determined by the way we "view" a complex issue and what sample of issues or events we choose to deal with. In this paper, a model based on a communal, cultural, or people-centered worldview, informed by a subjective epistemology and a holistic ontology, is considered. Definitions and interpretations of sustainable agriculture are reviewed. Common elements in published definitions of sustainable agriculture and animal production among those who seek long-term and equitable solutions for food production are resource efficiency, profitability, productivity, environmental soundness, biodiversity, social viability, and ethical aspects. Possible characteristics of future sustainable production systems and further development are presented. The impact of these characteristics on animal breeding goals is reviewed. The need for long-term biologically, ecologically, and sociologically sound breeding goals is emphasized, because animal breeding determined only by short-term market forces leads to unwanted side effects. Hence, a procedure for defining animal breeding goals with ethical priorities and weighing of market and non-market values is suggested. Implementation of non-market as well as market economic trait values in the aggregate genotype, as suggested, may allow for breeding programs that contribute to sustainable production systems. Examples of breeding goals in salmon, cattle, and pigs are given, and the resulting genetic responses are evaluated with respect to economic profit (or costs) and other criteria of sustainability. Important prerequisites for breeding programs for sustainable production are appropriate governmental policies, awareness of our way of thinking, and a more communal worldview informed by a subjective epistemology and a holistic ontology.     

Limits and risks of biotechnology in veterinary medicine from the viewpoint of the reproductive biologist

New biotechnical methods in reproduction have been introduced in animal breeding via embryo transfer. There are no serious objections against these methods as long as the variety of species is reassured and the animal protection law is considered. More substantial objections exist against genetic engineering methods which alter the genome of animals. Beside for legal protection there is a strong public demand for the adequete awareness and responsibility of scientists who are active in this field. Comprehensive information on such research projects can lead to a better understanding of the aims and methods and might, therefore, help to reduce inadequate apprehensions.     

A survey to determine public opinion about the ethics and governance of farm animal welfare

OBJECTIVE: To determine the attitude of the public toward farm animal welfare and identify beliefs regarding how decisions about farm animal welfare should be made. DESIGN: Telephone survey. STUDY POPULATION: A random sample of 1,019 US households. PROCEDURES: US households were contacted by telephone and asked to take part in a survey consisting of 48 items. RESULTS: A majority (437/773 [56.4%]) of respondents believed decisions about farm animal welfare should be made by experts rather than being based on the views of the public. Such advocates of expert decision making were less likely to believe the government should regulate farm animal welfare. Most (420/773 [54.3%]) respondents believed decisions about farm animal welfare should be based on scientific measures of animal well-being, as opposed to moral and ethical considerations. Those individuals who believed farm animal welfare decisions should be made by experts and be based on scientific measures were the least concerned about farm animal welfare issues. People who believed animal welfare decisions should be made by experts and be based on scientific measures were most responsive to information about use of gestation crates for sows. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These results should help increase recognition that changing public opinion is not simply a matter of convincing the public to support positions established by veterinarians and animal scientists. People's views about the role of the democratic process in regulating technologic change are important determinants of whether people accept the changes in animal agriculture that have occurred during the past century.     

动物性食品安全问题与公共卫生

动物性食品安全问题是食品安全的重大问题之一,关系到人类健康和公共卫生安全.通过对人兽共患病、化学污染、动物食物链污染、动物性食品加工过程污染等影响动物性食品卫生与安全的主要问题进行系统的阐述,同时对防范动物性食品安全问题采取的措施和公共卫生安全方面进行论述,从而为动物性食品安全的防范提供理论依据.     

Ethical reflections on xenotransplantation]

The success of transplantation and the increasing demand for donor organs have led to an increasingly acute shortage of human organs and tissue for transplantation. In this situation xenotransplantation (cross-species transplantation from animals to humans) is discussed as a possible alternative to allotransplantation. Therefore the animal plays an important role in the discussions on xenotransplantation. Currently, a lot of research is being done on xenotransplantation. Cross-species transplantation involves many biological and medical problems and risks which may affect not only the individual patient but also the wider community and population. These problems give rise to important ethical questions about xenotransplantation. Apart from them other ethical issues are involved, concerning the human being as well as the animal. Animals are raised, genetically modified (transgenic animals) and kept under SPF-conditions before they can be used as organ sources. At the moment they are used as models in xenotransplantation research. My aim is to discuss some of the major ethical, medical and biological problems of xenotransplantation.