Why using genetics to address welfare may not be a good idea

Poultry Science

Volumn 89, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 814-821

  Thompson, P B ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Genetics; Mental well being; Natural behavior; Veterinary health

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; AVES;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL WELFARE; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; ETHICS; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICS; GENOMICS; HUMAN; POULTRY; STANDARD;

ANIMAL WELFARE; ANIMALS; ATTITUDE; ETHICS; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENOMICS; HUMANS; POULTRY;

EID: 77953067584     PISSN: 00325791     EISSN: 15253171     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3382/ps.2009-00307     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Anonymous. 2009. AVMA Issues-California Proposition 2. http://www.avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/california_proposition2. asp Accessed June 2, 2009
2. Appleby, M. C. 1998. Genetic engineering, welfare, and accountability. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 1:255-273
3. Appleby, M. C. 1999. What Should We Do About Animal Welfare? Blackwell Science, Malden, MA
4. Appleby, M. C. 2004. Wefare challenges in sow housing. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 226:1334-1336
5. Appleby, M. C., and B. O. Hughes. 1991. Welfare of laying hens in cages and alternative systems: Environmental, physical and behavioural aspects. World's Poult. Sci. J. 47:109-128
6. Appleby, M. C., and P. T. Sandoe. 2002. Philosophical debate on the nature of well-being: Implications for animal welfare. Anim. Welf. 11:283-294
7. Bergin, L. 2009. Latina feminist metaphysics and genetically engineered foods. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 22:257-271
8. Blandford, D., and L. Fulponi. 1999. Emerging public concerns in agriculture: Domestic policies and international trade commitments. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 26:409-424. doi:10.1093/erae/26.3.409
9. Bovenkerk, B., F. W. A. Brom, and B. J. Van den Bergh. 2002. Brave new birds: The use of "animal integrity" in animal ethics. Hastings Cent. Rep. 32:16-22
10. Cunningham, W. P. 1998. The Golden Rule as universal ethical norm. J. Bus. Ethics 17:105-109
11. David, K. 2008. Socio-technical analysis of those concerned with emerging technology, engagement and governance. Pages 1-30 in What Can Nanotechnology Learn from Biotechnology: Social and Ethical Lessons from the Debate over Agricultrual Biotechnology and GMOs. K. David and P. B. Thompson, ed. Academic Press, New York, NY
12. Dombrowski, D. A. 1997. Babies and Beasts: The Argument from Marginal Cases. University of Illinois Press, Champaign
13. Fiester, A. 2008. Justifying a presumption of restraint in animal biotechnology research. Am. J. Bioeth. 8:36-44
14. Fraser, D. 1999. Animal ethics and animal welfare science: Bridging the two cultures. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 65:171-189
15. Fraser, D., J. A. Mench, and S. Millman. 2001. Farm animals and their welfare in 2000. Pages 87-99 in The State of the Animals in 2001. D. J. Salem and A. N. Rowan, ed. Humane Society Press, Washington, DC
16. Fraser, D., D. E. Weary, E. A. Pajor, and B. A. Milligan. 1997. A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Anim. Welf. 6:187-205
17. Gamborg, C., and P. Sandoe. 2002. Breeding and biotechnology in farm animals. Pages 133-142 in Key Issues in Bioethics-A Guide for Teachers. M. R. Ralph Levinson, ed. Routledge Falmer, London, UK
18. Gaskel, G., N. Allum, and S. Stares. 2003. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002. Methodology Institute, London School of Economics, London, UK
19. Glock, H.-J. 2009. Can animals act for reasons? Inquiry 52:232-254
20. Grinnell, F. 1992. The Scientific Attitude. 2nd ed. The Guilford Press, New York, NY
21. Group, M. 2006. Public Sentiment about Genetically Modified Food. Pew Initaitive on Food and Agricultural Biotechnology, Philadelphia, PA
22. Hoban, T. J. 1998. Trends in consumer attitudes about agricultural biotechnology. AgBioForum 1:1-7
23. Hoban, T. J., and P. Kendall. 1993. Consumer Attitudes about Food Biotechnology. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, Raleigh
24. Julian, R. 1998. Rapid growth problems: Ascites and skeletal deformities in broilers. Poult. Sci. 77:1773-1780
25. Lindeman, M., and M. Sirelius. 2001. Food choice ideologies: The modern manifestations of normative and humanist views of the world. Appetite 37:175-184
26. Lusk, J. L., and B. C. Briggeman. 2009. Food values. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 91:184-196
27. Lusk, J. L., and J. A. Fox. 2002. Consumer demand for mandatory labeling of beef from cattle administered growth hormones or fed genetically modified corn. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 34:27-38
28. Mench, J., and I. Duncan. 1998. Poultry welfare in North America: Opportunities and challenges. Poult. Sci. 77:1763-1765
29. Mench, J. A. 2003. Assessing animal welfare at the farm and group level: A United States perspective. Anim. Welf. 12:493-503
30. Mench, J. A. 2008. Farm animal welfare in the USA: Farming practices, research, education, regulation, and assurance programs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 113:298-312
31. Mill, J. S. 1979. Utilitarianism. Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis, IN
32. Musschenga, A. W. 2002. Naturalness: Beyond animal welfare. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 15:171-186
33. Prickett, R., F. B. Norwood, and J. L. Lusk. 2008. Consumer Preferences for Farm Animal Welfare: Results from a Telephone Survey of U.S. Households in Department of Agricultural Economics Seminar Series. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater
34. Regan, T. 1983. The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press, Berkeley
35. Regan, T. 2003. Animal Rights, Human Wrongs: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD
36. Rollin, B. E. 1981. Animal Rights and Human Morality. Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY
37. Rollin, B. E. 1986. The Frankenstein thing. Pages 285-298 in Genetic Engineering of Animals: An Agricultural Perspective. J. W. Evans and A. Hollaender, ed. Plenum Press, New York, NY
38. Rollin, B. E. 1995. The Frankenstein Syndrome: Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY
39. Rollin, B. E. 1998. On telos and genetic engineering. Pages 156-187 in Animal Biotechnology and Ethics. A. Holland and A. Johnson, ed. Chapman and Hall, London, UK
40. Rollin, B. E. 2003. Ethics and species integrity. Am. J. Bioeth. 3:15-17
41. Rollin, B. E. 2006. Science and Ethics. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY
42. Saba, A., A. Moles, and L. J. Frewer. 1998. Public concerns about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: A comparative study between the UK and Italy. Nutr. Food Sci. 98:19-29
43. Sandoe, P. 1999. Quality of life-Three competing views. Ethical Theory Moral Pract. 2:11-23
44. Sandoe, P., S. B. Christiansen, and M. C. Appleby. 2003. Farm animal welfare: The interaction of ethical questions and animal welfare science. Anim. Welf. 12:469-478
45. Schillo, K. K., and P. B. Thompson. 2003. Postmodernism for animal scientists. J. Anim. Sci. 81:2989-2994
46. Sorensen, D. 2004. Animal welfare-An introduction. Pages 3-14 in The Welfare of Laboratory Animals. E. Kaliste, ed. Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
47. Star, L., E. Ellen, K. Uitdehaag, and F. Brom. 2008. A plea to implement robustness into a breeding goal: Poultry as an example. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 21:109-125
48. Thompson, P. 2008a. The opposite of human enhancement: Nanotechnology and the blind chicken problem. NanoEthics 2:305-316
49. Thompson, P. B. 1997a. Ethics and the genetic engineering of food animals. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 10:1-23
50. Thompson, P. B. 1997b. Science policy and moral purity: The case of animal biotechnology. Agric. Human Values 14:11-27
51. Thompson, P. B. 2001. Social acceptance of nanotechnology. Pages 251-256 in Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology. M. Rocco and W. S. Bainbridge, ed. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA
52. Thompson, P. B. 2007. Ethics on the frontiers of livestock science. Pages 30-45 in Redesigning Animal Agriculture. D. Swain, E. Charmley, J. Steel, and S. Coffey, ed. CAB International, Oxford, UK
53. Thompson, P. B. 2008b. Animal biotechnology: How not to presume. Am. J. Bioeth. 8:49-50
54. Thompson, P. B. 2008c. The opposite of human enhancement: Nanotechnology and the blind chicken problem. NanoEthics 2:305-316
55. Wall, S. 2007. Perfectionism in moral and political philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perfectionism-moral/ Accessed Feb. 19, 2010
56. Wattles, J. 1987. Levels of meaning in the Golden Rule. J. Relig. Ethics 15:106-129
57. Wolfe, A. K., and D. Bjornstad. 2008. "It's like deja vu all over again": Anticipating societal responses to emerging technologies. Pages 157-168 in What Can Nanotechnology Learn from Biotechnology: Social and Ethical Lessons from the Debate over Agricultrual Biotechnology and GMOs. K. David and P. B. Thompson, ed. Academic Press, New York, NY