Rigo Marquez Jazmin Loza Lisa Gomez Sara Gonzales Eng.

102 October 29, 2013 Proposal for Change in Livestock Treatment Regulations In our society, much has been said about the importance of implementing the wisdom of the Golden Rule into our everyday lives. It states simply that we should treat others equally or better than we would want others to treat us. When pondering this ethical concept, the first thought that comes to mind is that the others it refers to are other human beings. But couldnt it refer to animals as well? Just like humans, animals have the capabilities to feel pain, pleasure, fear, frustration, loneliness, and even motherly love. (PETA, 2013) Even by modern utilitarian points of view, animals should have the same basic rights to live as humans. Regarding the rights and welfare of animals, utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham stated, The question is not can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But can they suffer? (Animal Ethics, 2008) In other words, the crucial indication that a creature needs in order to have rights is the ability to suffer. It has been proven that animals like cows, horses, dogs, and other species do have the ability to suffer. Pet owners can give testament to that, because they see the way their pets behave during certain situations. Animals cannot defend their rights the same way humans can. Because of this, it is imperative that their inhumane treatment in feedlots should come to a halt. As the amount of safety recalls increase, more and more Americans are asking the question, why do the meat products we consume continue to become unsafe to eat? Consumers are becoming wary of the meat products they buy because of the underlying possibility that it

could be recalled days or weeks later. While diseased meat can be attributed to unsanitary conditions in processing plants, the main problem stems from the treatment of livestock before they reach slaughter. There have been many investigations made to determine if the treatment of the livestock used for processing is humane. Videos have surfaced that depict an unimaginable amount of cruelty shown to animals before their inevitable slaughter. The USDA and the FDA does not have enough regulations preventing abuse and administering antibiotics when unnecessary. (nrdc.org/food/saving) Physical harm is not the only thing being done, the environment they are assigned to live in is absolutely inhumane as well. The livestock is not being well kept up with. Animals do not have a choice but to eat and sleep in feces in the dark. Some animals are caged and unable to move at all until slaughter. Livestock then becomes contaminated with bacteria that later cause illness or death. The FDA has approved that antibiotics be administered routinely to all product. They believe this will prevent more contamination. Instead, it is creating super bugs that are antibiotic resistant. The Government gives meat packing companies the ability to self-regulate, and as a result animals are being treated unfairly. Many methods are employed by processing companies to end the lives of livestock including gun blow to the head, electrical current, throat slicing, drowning in boiling water, and gas chambers. Workers lifting them by the legs then slamming them head first onto the floor instantly kill baby pigs on site. Birds are shackled and sent down an electrical water current to induce heart attack. Some birds are also kept in small cages in the dark and are routinely being kicked around all day by workers. Most animals are kept in enclosures surrounded by their own feces and urine. Blood also flows around, carrying super bugs and other illnesses. Antibiotics are administered to them, hoping that they will kill most of the bacteria before it is being spread.

Doing so limits what the government sees fit for inspections and clean up. The livestock are also being fed a poor and cheap diet consisting of corn; which in a cows case can trigger the growth of E. coli. While cows and chickens are growing, workers have been known to step on or throw them. In doing this, they cause bones to break and even cause death. These actions are not being stopped or prevented because the Government sees that the policies and regulations are carried out. As mentioned earlier, the habitat that the livestock are assigned to have been severely tainted by super bugs and bacteria caused by poor human actions. Antibiotics are given to these animals to kill off some of the bacteria that are left on meat products. It has been proven that the antibiotics used for these treatments are very effective in destroying bacteria. In fact, they are so effective in treating bacteria that they have spawned the evolution of bacteria into one great source of super bugs. Super bugs get their name due to resistance of common antibiotics and are therefore harder to exterminate. The number of super bugs being created and released into the ecosystem has grown in part because of government policies that allow meat companies to set their own regulations. These meat companies have obtained the ability to self-inspect instead of having health inspectors as a result of collusion between government officials and lobbyists representing processing companies. The inadequate regulations posed by meat processors could have been the cause of the recent outbreak of Salmonella in Foster Farms chicken products. Antibiotic resistant infections can lead to longer periods of illness and hospitalizations, which can cause a more painful death. The Director of General World Health Organization, Margaret Chan, recently said, Things as common as strep throat or a childs scratched knee could once kill again. . . A post-antibiotic era means, in effect, an end to modern medicine as we know it.(Nytime.com/2013/03/24)(Nrdc.org/food) Compared to European countries, we are still

many years behind with regards to treatment of livestock meant for consumption. In 2006, European countries ended administration of Penicillin, Streptomycin, and Tetracycline (which promoted faster growth), to reduce the causes of food borne illnesses. In 2006 this act expanded to the European Union. Europe saw a great reduction in super bugs by doing this and it actually raised production by 50% and the cost by only 1%. About 80% of the antibiotics purchased for the U.S. is resourced to livestock. The CDC, or Center of Disease Control, issued a test showing that in 96% of samples taken of meat product, at least one antibiotic resistant bacterial form was found. 52% were positive for multi- resistant antibiotics. They conduct an annual test for bacteria and diseases in food. Tests should be done more often, because of the poor livestock conditions that are caused by inadequate training of workers. The problems livestock in the United States are facing are unfathomable. They face abuse for most of their lives up until they are slaughtered. It is hard to believe what these animals go through while they are being raised. The animals have special treatments they undergo to help them grow at a faster rate. Hormones (antibiotics) are being injected into them. They are growing at twice the rate they grew just fifty years ago. The living arrangements for these animals are not healthy for them or the farmers. Everyday something is going wrong with the livestock. However all we do is not pay attention to these problems and not do anything about it. Livestock animals face abuse for most of their lives. For the majority, the abuse these animals face is poor living conditions, unnatural growth rates and cruel deaths. On today's factory farms, animals are crammed by the thousands into filthy, windowless sheds and confined to wire cages, gestation crates, barren dirt lots, and other cruel confinement systems. (PETA.org) The animals are forced to not see any sun light, and not roam in their natural habitats. They are also forced to live in their own feces. In order to help these living conditions

and make the lives of these animals better there should at least be an allotted a time when they can roam in a natural environment and also see sun light. The workers then should be more efficient in maintaining the clean-up of these animals. There also should be a regulation in place that tells farmers how many animals they can have in an area or a cage at a time. To ensure that farmers are following these regulations, inspectors should perform random, unscheduled visits to ensure honest results. If farmers are not following these regulations they should be heavily fined and put on probation. Injecting hormones into young livestock can make them gain weight faster. More weight means more meat, which means more profit for the producer. Hormones also increase the production of milk by dairy cows. (Hoffman) Even though all of these are positives for the farmers they are harmful for the animals. Animals are growing now at rapid rates and they are not fully developing. Chickens are growing faster than usual. Their breasts are so enlarged from the hormones that it causes the chickens to not be able to walk. Cows are getting milked more than once a day and are in pain because they have produced too much milk. Cattle are also fed foods that are not meant for them to eat. Growing at these rapid speeds causes the animals injury, sicknesses and consistent pain. In order to promote healthy growth, these animals should be fed natural food such as grass, hay, alfalfa, and vegetables. Many farms feed their animals corn, which is can dangerous when given in high amounts. In order to fix this issue we need to come up with a list of appropriate food items to feed these animals. In order to ensure that farmers are feeding the animals a proper diet we must do random checks. Even though the cruel treatment of livestock is causing multiple problems, there are solutions as well. One way that would help this horrible situation is if the USDA would make new regulations. The primary regulations that need to be implemented have to do with

employees and health inspectors. Employees should be the first priority because they are the ones closest to the animals before slaughter. Some new regulations would include changing the hiring process companies use to ensure prospective employees can meet new standards for treatment of livestock. These people should be evaluated to see if they have enough experience with animals. The animals need to be treated fairly and equally. The future employees should also be tested psychologically, to make sure they have no intention to mistreat livestock. A training program should be administered to current employees so that they are also aware of the new regulations being put into place. The second priority in our solution would be the health inspectors. Currently, health inspectors that are being sent out to check the conditions of the animals are persuaded by these large companies not to tell the truth; and have someone within the company to self-inspect factories regarding the living conditions. This would have to change, and the way to do that is to have more independent health inspectors with no ties to the processing plants they are sent to inspect. To manage these inspectors a new regulatory commission would have to be founded, funded and supported by tax payers. Obtaining the funding from tax payers will not have the drastic effects that some people may believe will happen. Although the citizens would have to pay for the funding of the commission, the benefits would outweigh the cost. It would be no different than the funding they already provide to government programs like the USDA. If no inhumane treatment were occurring to the livestock, there would be less risk of having contaminated products. If there are no contaminated products, then the consumers would ultimately be healthier. While these are large benefits for us humans, the major benefit would be for the ethical treatment of these animals. Even though the animals will eventually die, they will do so in a more humane process. From a moral and ethical perspective, the solution has the ability to indirectly clear the

conscience of consumers that eat meat products but want to change the process of how the meal came to be. While the short term cost of this solution would be great, the long term benefits would justify it.

References "Factory Farming: Cruelty to Animals." PETA.org. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. Matthew Hoffman, WDWebMD Feature Provided in Collaboration with Healthy Child Healthy. Understanding Food Safety: Pesticides, Hormones, and Antibiotics in Food. WebMD. Web MD, 18 Dec. 2008. Web. 24 Oct. 2013. "Factory Farming: Cruelty to Animals." PETA.org. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. Panaman , R. (2008, April). Jeremy bentham. Retrieved from http://www.animalethics.org.uk/bentham-jeremy.html Why animal rights?. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/why-animalrights.apsx