What Does It Mean To Slaughter Animals Under A Religious Exemption

Abstract

• Religious slaughter is a major current animate being welfare outcome. Significant numbers of Muslim and Jewish people demand meat products from animals killed using practices according to religious requirements.

• There are differences betwixt conventional and religious slaughter practices. Although both methods have been subjected to criticism on animal welfare grounds, religious slaughter has received much recent attention.

• Current concerns virtually religious slaughter focus on stress of preslaughter handling using certain devices, pain and distress that may be felt during and after cervix cutting, besides as prolonged times to loss of brain function and expiry if stunning is non practical.

• Universally agreed right religious slaughter rules and practices are notwithstanding nether contend, and certification and labeling of meat products remain every bit other bug to exist addressed. Because of the above, moves to minimize welfare bug are under fashion to ameliorate slaughter practices by providing more training and new regulations.

Introduction

Religious slaughter methods, required to be applied earlier meat is deemed consumable for some followers of certain faiths, accept connected to be controversial on animal welfare grounds in the last few decades. Discussions take intensified especially with the concomitant increment in Muslim populations in European countries, meat exports into the Middle and Far East, and besides consumer concerns and demands in both secular and Muslim groups. Questions about and calls for changes for current practices and legislation have also become more frequent. Objections are mainly focused on the method of neck cutting if no stunning is used and, to some extent, pre- and post-slaughter handling of animals. Claims are made that animate being welfare compromises occur during the slaughter processes.

Electric current slaughter methods can be defined every bit either conventional or in accord with religious practices. Halal (Muslim) and Shechita (Jewish method) are the principle religious techniques field of study to much fence. A European Commission funded projection, DIALREL, has recently disseminated information relating to religious slaughter (DIALREL, 2009) and the most contempo comprehensive review on religious slaughter has been commissioned by the English language Beefiness and Lamb Executive (EBLEX; Anil, 2012). In-depth data and critical reviews on religious slaughter can also exist establish in publications past Anil and Lambooij (2009), Levinger (1995), Al-Masri (1989), and Rosen (2004).

Although legislation (Ferrari and Bottoni, 2010) commonly covers conventional methods, exemptions for religious slaughter, particularly whether stunning is used, are in place. In Europe, slaughter without stunning is illegal in several countries (e.thou., Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Switzerland).

Halal Slaughter

The Muslim method, Halal, is based on interpretation of the Koran and the Hadith (the sayings of the prophet Mohammed). Prior to the act of slaughter (Al-Dhabh), pronouncing the name of God (Tasmiyya) is a requirement. Following restraint, slaughter is carried out by a transverse incision of the cervix to achieve instant and copious exsanguination. Rapid and maximum blood loss is crucially important because consumption of blood is forbidden. Provision and consumption of meat for Muslim communities is an essential function of the religious life, and certain conditions must be met so that the meat is lawful, Halal, as opposed to Haram. Important requirements include:

• Pigs and carrion are forbidden

• Death must exist through blood loss

• Besmele/Tasmiyyah, citing of God's name

• Stunning, if used, must not stop the heart

The argue on deciding the correct rules is still continuing, and a set of standards prepared by the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) is under consideration. Nevertheless, unlike the Jewish Shechita system, no official Halal regulatory dominance exists. Consequently, self-appointed certifiers operate, resulting in confusion and low consumer confidence in product authenticity. Issues include unlike interpretations of rules, lack of audit trails, insufficient slaughterman training, welfare compromises, and hygiene problems (see "reports" in DIALREL, 2009).

The often debated consequence is about whether stunning should be acceptable before Halal slaughter. There are three views: i) Those who have it if conditions are met because the welfare of animals is protected and rules are maintained (Al-Masri, 1989); ii) those who decline the idea because stunning is unnecessary, against religious rules, or creates problems for animals because of perceived painful effects (Katme, 1986); and iii) others who are either not sure or want assurances in both cases. Sure types of stunning methods such every bit reversible electric methods before Halal slaughter have been regularly used for decades in some countries. For example, New Zealand, where stunning is compulsory, has exported Halal meat from animals stunned and killed by Muslim slaughtermen for many years. Poultry slaughter in large numbers also often employs electrical stunning. Even so, these products are now being objected to by the not-stun anteroom groups.

There are also myths near the effects of stunning. These include behavior that stunning is painful, animals suffer, and blood loss is bereft if stunning is employed compared with slaughter without stunning. In addition, there is concern that premature expiry due to middle stopping post-obit stunning prior to exsanguination could occur rendering the carcass unacceptable

Shechita-Jewish Methods

Jews consume beef, veal, mutton, lamb, and poultry, merely not pork. These meats must be slaughtered and prepared in accordance with the rabbinical laws. Shechita rules and furnishings on physiology, meat quality, and creature welfare are available (Zivotofsky, 2009, 2012; Rosen, 2004; Levinger, 1995).

A trained slaughterman, Shocet, appointed past the Shechita Lath, makes a transverse cut beyond the neck using a sharp, special knife (chalaf; Figure 1). The chalaf needs to be inspected for sharpness after each cut. Preslaughter stunning and harm to tissues such every bit hemorrhages are not accustomed. The reasons for rejecting stunning include that the original method is superior, painless, and causes instantaneous insensibility while stunning causes harm to carcasses. Following slaughter, a Jewish Inspector examines the carcass and rejects certain parts (treifa) and defects such as hemorrhages. Following this inspection, the meat is "porged" to remove veins and other forbidden tissues including blood, certain fats known as chailev, and the sciatic nerve (commonly both hind legs are removed). As consumption of blood is prohibited, some meat cuts are salted earlier marketing. Treifa percentages of carcasses can be loftier. In the UK and possibly elsewhere in Europe, the hindquarter part of the carcass (posterior to the twelfth rib) is normally sold to domestic markets because it is tedious and hard to porge.

Effigy 1.

Shechita/Kosher slaughter of a craven (photo courtesy of Wikipedia/Yofial).

Figure one.

Shechita/Kosher slaughter of a chicken (photo courtesy of Wikipedia/Yofial).

Information technology is claimed past its supporters that Shechita is a humane method and death occurs immediately with no adverse effects to animal welfare. Although bachelor scientific findings (Kalweit et al., 1989; Gibson et al., 2009a,b) do non agree with some of these, information technology is clear that Shechita is a skilled and cocky-regulated process carried out in selected kosher species by highly trained professionals. However, brute welfare concerns even so remain equally referred to beneath.

Welfare Concerns

Concerns about religious slaughter focus on 3 questions:

1. Is at that place preslaughter stress (Dunn, 1990; Grandin and Regenstein, 1994)?

2. Is the neck incision painful (Gibson et al., 2009a,b)?

3. Is sensibility and consciousness lost speedily plenty post-obit exsanguination by neck cutting, or "sticking" (Kalweit et al., 1989; Grandin and Regenstein, 1994; Anil et al., 1995a,b; Rosen, 2004)?

Dissimilar designs of cattle restraint pens tin can exist used at abattoirs. The objective is to confine the animal in a pen then that stunning and slaughter can exist carried out effectively and safely. Animals unremarkably enter the pen afterwards going through a race. Pens must accept gates to close afterwards entry. The race should have smoothen curved sides if long likewise as sufficient light. Utilise of prods should be reduced to minimum.

For captive bolt stunning, facilities to present the head for correct stunning at the forepart would be useful. Some cattle pens are specially constructed for convict bolt, electrical stunning, and/or religious slaughter. Upright and Facomia pen designs have additional features for extra restraint such as belly elevator, back push, and chin elevator. Facomia pens tilt the animal around 45 degrees. Rotary pens that plow the animal 180 degrees are more stressful and are banned in the UK.

The new impending European Quango Regulation, (EC) No 1099/2009, requires a study of cattle restraint systems and a report to be submitted by the end of 2012. Its aim is to establish whether certain optimum types of restraint appliance exist for cattle every bit some existing ones may have inherent undue stress factors. Although this development has implications for both conventional likewise as religious slaughter, the latter could be more than affected. In particular, restraint periods before and after a neck cutting can exist long in some systems. For example, some rotary pens take disproportionately long to rotate and present cattle for slaughter. Cattle are restrained in pens also aided by boosted devices such equally a belly push and chin lift. Rotating pens are banned in the UK and United states of america due to potential stress of rotation. With regard to pre-slaughter handling stress, reported concerns nearly upright and rotating restraint devices for cattle initiated a European study to be commissioned and completed by the terminate of this twelvemonth.

Religious slaughter of sheep can exist carried out either using a cradle or a V-blazon restraining device. In the former instance, a specially constructed cradle is used where each individual animal is lifted upward, carried, and placed in a horizontal position earlier neck cutting. After the neck cutting is performed, the animal has to be held for a prescribed period (20 and 30 seconds for sheep and cattle, respectively, in the UK).

The 2d and third questions are related and business whether stunning is used. The underlying reasons why stunning is compulsory by law in some countries include prevention of animals experiencing pain during the cut and being distressed earlier death; hence the emphasis on humaneness of the technique. However, the original and historical reward of stunning an beast before slaughter was to immobilize or control movements. Supporters of religious slaughter methods that refuse preslaughter stunning believe that their item method is humane.

Shechita precludes preslaughter stunning, whereas for Halal, providing the beast does not die, it is acceptable in some countries (e.g., Turkey and Malaysia). The result of whether the cervix cut is painful has received much controversy and discussion. There are two camps well-nigh the pain effect: Those who think the cut is quick and painless, and therefore slaughter without stunning can be effective and acceptable, and others who argue that varying degrees of severe pain is inevitable. Scientific methods to measure "pain" during neck cut take recently improved, and New Zealand researchers, using neurophysiologic techniques, showed neck cutting to be noxious (Gibson et al., 2009a,b), particularly when claret vessels are severed. Debate continues nevertheless, claiming that the cutting did not simulate original Shechita or the knife was not long enough. Older arguments by Rosen (2004) and Levinger (1995) stating that the Shechita cut is painless because utilise of the abrupt knife causes no pain and brain office is lost immediately still get support. While the potential for hurting perception exists, other take chances factors such every bit changes in management of the cutting, multiple cuts or performance of backup cuts, inadequately sharpened blades, thick necks, peel folds, and insufficient tension of the neck could increment chances of increased hurting perception.

Another concern is the delayed time to loss of consciousness later the neck cut. Following exsanguination, information technology is imperative that consciousness is lost rapidly. Length of time to loss of consciousness depends on a number of factors such as the method of restraint, quality of the cutting, equally well as species differences. Fourth dimension to loss of encephalon function has been studied by various researchers who examined electrical activity of the brain such as electroencephalogram (EEG)-evoked responses too equally brute reactions and reflexes. These reports revealed variations in the above-measured parameters and durations. There is evidence, however, that in cattle, cervix cutting tin can result in carotid occlusions and delay fourth dimension to loss of consciousness (Anil et al., 1995a,b; Gregory et al., 2011).

It is generally agreed that one thousand mal epilepsy, quiescent period, amplitude less than x% of the pre-stun recording in the EEG, and absence of evoked responses are indicative of unconsciousness. Notwithstanding, presence of evoked potentials does non necessarily imply consciousness considering visual-evoked potentials can exist recorded in animals under anesthesia (EFSA, 2004). Kalweit et al. (1989) recorded visual and somatosensory responses after Shechita cervix cutting without stunning in cattle and compared responses after captive bolt stunning. In the latter cases, both recorded responses were lost immediately, whereas subsequently cervix cutting without stunning in the old, responses, although gradually being reduced in amplitude, lasted well-nigh a minute. Therefore, the fact that brain role is not completely lost gives an element of doubt about the presence of sensibility if no stunning is used.

It is claimed that immediate loss of claret pressure later on neck cutting results in rapid loss of consciousness due to ischemia reduction of cerebrospinal fluid pressure (Rosen, 2004; Levinger, 1995). In cattle following exsanguination, information technology takes a certain amount of time for claret loss to reach disquisitional levels. It is estimated that 50% of total blood book is lost during exsanguination. Anil et al. (2006) institute 25% was bled out after 17 seconds. In sheep, however, the time period is much quicker (Anil et al., 2004).

Anatomical differences in cattle can lead to occlusions of the arteries and recovery episodes in blood pressure in calves (Anil et al., 1995b). The brain of ruminants is perfused with blood from a vascular network called "the rete mirabile" that receives branches from the carotid and vertebral arteries. In cattle, extra anastomosis may bring in claret to the rete mirabile and brain sometimes even after exsanguination, whereas in sheep and goats, this is not the case.

Although perfusion of the brain with blood supplied through extra anastomosis is possible and has been demonstrated, it is argued whether this prolonged blood and oxygen availability is sufficient to maintain consciousness. Rosen (2004) claimed that the cerebral claret flow after a cervix cutting would non be sufficient to supply the brain. Anil et al. (1995a) found that carotid occlusion delayed the fourth dimension to isoelectric electrocorticogram (ECoG) in calves. In the same written report, when carotid apoplexy occurred, vertebral avenue blood catamenia was maintained at well-nigh 30% of its initial level for upwardly to three minutes, and in some animals, it increased essentially following sticking (bleeding by neck cutting).

Sharpness of the knife and performing a complete uninterrupted cut could influence other factors such as vasoconstriction, clotting, ballooning known besides equally carotid occlusion, or false aneurisms (Anil et al., 1995a,b). Gregory et al. (2011) constitute a prevalence of large fake aneurysms in 10% of cattle slaughtered past Shechita and Halal with implications for sustained consciousness during religious slaughter in cattle.

Carcass and Meat Quality Effects

Information technology is of utmost importance to expel as much blood equally possible to meet religious requirements of Halal and Shechita slaughter. Information technology was often claimed that stunning would adversely impact exsanguination and that neck cutting without stunning improves claret loss. Levinger (1995), in his volume on Shechita reviewed experiments in which claret parameters, color, and pH were measured under different slaughter methods (conventional with stunning versus no stunning) and concluded that sticking and claret loss were better later Shechita alone because of the very precipitous knife used and efficacy of the cutting. Yet, Anil et al. (2006, 2004) examined exsanguination and compared stunning and slaughter versus Halal slaughter with no stunning in cattle and sheep. No differences were found in both bleed-out rates and full blood loss. Velarde et al. (2003) also previously institute a slight increase in claret loss after electrical stunning in lambs, rather than an improvement in drain out by slaughter without stunning. Based on existing studies and bachelor results, it is reasonable to suggest that regardless of whether preslaughter stunning is used or non, blood loss is unlikely to be dissimilar.

Legal Aspects

In most countries that require preslaughter stunning, there is dispensation for religious slaughter methods. For example, Shechita and Halal may be immune, but stunning has to be used for all other slaughter within abattoirs. The religious dispensation is allowed on the footing of human rights, which with the exception of ane or ii countries in Europe, takes precedence over animate being welfare. In other countries, cultural rights have been embodied in the homo rights legislation, and in the nowadays context, this could complicate interpretation of the scope of the dispensations. The national and international norms such as the OIE (Part International Epizootique) standards and European regulations (European Community, 1993) utilize to religious slaughter, with derogations. The DIALREL project has collected legislation documents (Ferrari and Bottoni, 2010) showing existing gaps and differences in requirements. The new amendment to European Customs regulation is aimed at bringing in further important changes, for case:

• Individual restraint and checks for recovery in ruminant animals slaughtered without stunning

• A written report on restraining bovine animals by inversion

• Ban on hoisting and clamping legs of animals

• Requirement for training slaughtermen

Codes of Practices and Recommendations

The DIALREL project prepared a prepare of recommendations, available on the DIALREL website (final report), for improved practices to be adopted during religious slaughter. These guidelines comprehend both scenarios including religious slaughter with and without stunning.

Haluk Anil, DVM, Ph.D., Dip ECVPH, and former Senior Research Fellow of the Veterinary School, Academy of Bristol, United kingdom, is a consultant scientist for several organizations including Cardiff University, EBLEX, and RSPCA, United kingdom. He was a research leader for projects funded past the UK Department for the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs; Food Standards Agency; and the European Commission. His enquiry interests include farm creature physiology, animal welfare with particular reference to stunning and slaughter, and nutrient safe.

Literature Cited

Al-Masri, B. 1989. Animals in Islam. The Athena Trust

Anil

H.

Effects of slaughter method on carcass and meat characteristics in the meat of cattle and sheep

.

EBLEX—a Divison of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, Uk.

2012

.

Anil

H.

,

Lambooij

B.

2009

.

Stunning and slaughter methods

.

Pages 169–190 in Welfare of production animals: Assessment and management of risks.

Volume v

.

Food Safe Assurance and Veterinary Public Health.

Smulders

F.

,

Algers

B.

eds.

Wageningen Publishers

.

Anil

Chiliad.H.

,

McKinstry

J.L.

,

Wotton

Due south.B.

,

Gregory

N.G.

1995

a.

Welfare of calves—i. Investigation into some aspects of calf slaughter

.

Meat Sci.

41

:

101

–

112

.

Anil

M.H.

,

McKinstry

J.L.

,

Gregory

N.K.

,

Wotton

S.B.

,

Symonds

H.

1995

b.

Welfare of calves—2. Increment in vertebral artery blood flow following exsanguination past neck sticking and evaluation of chest sticking as an culling slaughter method

.

Meat Sci.

41

:

113

–

123

.

Anil

K.H.

,

Yesildere

T.

,

Aksu

H.

,

Matur

E.

,

McKinstry

J.L.

,

Erdogan

O.

,

Hughes

S.

,

Bricklayer

C.

2006

.

Comparison of Halal slaughter with captive commodities stunning and cervix cutting in cattle: Exsanguination and quality parameters

.

Anim. Welfare

15

:

325

–

330

.

Anil

M.H.

,

Yesildere

T.

,

Aksu

H.

,

Matur

E.

,

McKinstry

J.L.

,

Erdogan

O.

,

Hughes

S.

,

Mason

C.

2004

.

Comparison of religious slaughter of sheep with methods that include pre-slaughter stunning, and the lack of differences in exsanguination, packed cell book and meat quality parameters

.

Anim. Welfare

13

:

387

–

392

.

DIALREL

. 2009.

Religious slaughter, improving knowledge and expertise through dialogue and argue on issues of welfare, legislation and socio-economical aspects

.

Accessed May 2, 2012

. http://www.dialrel.eu/dialrel-results.

Dunn

C.Southward.

1990

.

Stress reactions of cattle undergoing ritual slaughter using two methods of restraint

.

Vet. Rec.

126

:

522

–

525

.

EFSA

.

2004

.

Stance of the Scientific Console on Animal Health and Welfare

.

.

European Community

.

1993

.

Directive 93/119/EC on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing. Eur

.

Community Off. J.

340

:

21

–

34

.

Ferrari

South.

,

Bottoni

R.

2010

.

Legislation regarding religious slaughter in the Eu member, candidate and associated countries. Dialrel Deliverable 1.4.

.

Gibson

T.J.

,

Johnson

C.B.

,

Murrel

J.C.

,

Hull

C.M.

,

Mitchinson

Due south.L.

,

Stafford

K.J.

,

Johnstone

A.C.

,

Mellor

D.J.

2009

a.

Electroencephalographic responses of halothane anaesthetized calves to slaughter by ventral-cervix incision without prior stunning

.

Northward.Z. Vet. J.

57

(

2

):

77

–

83

.

Gibson

T.J.

,

Johnson

C.B.

,

Murrell

J.C.

,

Chambers

J.P.

,

Stafford

M.J.

,

Mellor

D.J.

2009

b.

Components of electroencephalographic responses to slaughter in halothane-anaesthetized calves: Effects of cut neck tissues compared with major blood vessels

.

N.Z. Vet. J.

57

(

ii

):

84

–

89

.

Grandin

T.

,

Regenstein

J.M.

1994

.

Religious slaughter and creature welfare: A discussion for meat scientists

.

Meat Focus International.

.

Gregory

N.G.

,

Wenzlawowicz

K.

,

von Holleben

K.

,

Fielding

H.R.

,

Gibson

T.J.

,

Mirabito

50.

,

Kolesar

R.

2011

.

Recent advances in the welfare of livestock at slaughter

.

HSA Centenary Symposium, 30 June and 11 July 2011, Portsmouth, United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland

.

Kalweit

Due east.

,

Ellendorf

F.

,

Daly

C.

,

Schmidt

D.

1989

.

Physiological reactions during slaughter of cattle and sheep with and without stunning. Deutsch

.

Tierärztl. Wochenschr.

96

:

89

–

92

.

Katme

A.

1986

.

An up to date cess of the Muslim method of slaughter

.

.

Levinger, I.M. 1995. Shechita in the low-cal of the year 2000. Maskil 50'David

Rosen

S.D.

Physiological insights into Shechita. Vet

.

Rec.

2004

.

154

:

759

–

765

.

Velarde

A.

,

Gispert

Grand.

,

Diestre

A.

,

Manteca

X.

2003

:

Result of electrical stunning on meat and carcass quality in lambs

.

Meat Sci.

63

:

35

–

38

Zivotofsky

A.Z

2009

.

Dialrel reports: Religious rules and requirements–Judaism

.

Zivotofsky

A.Z.

2011

.

Regime Regulations of Shechita (Jewish Religious Slaughter) in the Twenty-Showtime Century: Are They Ethical?

J Agric Environ Ideals

(

in printing

)

© 2012 Anil

This is an Open up Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/past-nc/4.0/), which permits not-commercial reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

Source: https://academic.oup.com/af/article/2/3/64/4638669

Posted by: korandooundes.blogspot.com

Share this post