To get updates on new site content, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter.

Difference between revisions of "Pigs"

From JFA Wiki
(Global Animal Partnership 5-Step Certification)
(Meta: added keywords)
 
(121 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{jfa-top}}
 
{{jfa-top}}
  
{{jfa-note}}
+
This article provides summarized information about farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to communities and workers.
This draft is in the process of being written by [[User:Bethany.Chester]]. It will be moved to the main namespace when it is completed.
 
{{jfa-note-end}}
 
 
 
This article provides information about pigs that should prove useful to those advocating for animal rights, as well as to those exploring the rationale for [[veganism]]. 
 
 
 
It covers various aspects of farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to communities and workers  
 
  
 
== General Information  ==
 
== General Information  ==
  
 
=== Lineage ===
 
=== Lineage ===
Pigs were domesticated approximately 9000 years ago from various subspecies of the Eurasian wild boar.<ref>Giuffra, E., J. M. Kijas, V. Amarger, O. Carlborg, J. T. Jeon, and L. Andersson. “The Origin of the Domestic Pig: Independent Domestication and Subsequent Introgression.” Genetics 154, no. 4 (April 2000): 1785–91.</ref> Domestication occurred separately in Europe and Asia, though there is evidence that interbreeding later took place. Pigs were brought to North America by Spanish explorers in the 16th century.
+
Pigs were domesticated approximately 9000 years ago from various subspecies of the Eurasian wild boar.<ref>Giuffra, E., J. M. Kijas, V. Amarger, O. Carlborg, J. T. Jeon, and L. Andersson. “The Origin of the Domestic Pig: Independent Domestication and Subsequent Introgression.” Genetics 154, no. 4 (April 2000): 1785–91.</ref> Domestication occurred separately in Europe and Asia, though there is evidence that interbreeding later took place.<ref>Larson, G. “Worldwide Phylogeography of Wild Boar Reveals Multiple Centers of Pig Domestication.” Science 307, no. 5715 (March 11, 2005): 1618–21. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106927.</ref> Pigs were brought to North America by Spanish explorers in the 16th century.<ref>Singer, Francis J. “Wild Pig Populations in the National Parks.” Environmental Management 5, no. 3 (May 1981): 263–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01873285.</ref>
  
 
=== Numbers ===
 
=== Numbers ===
Worldwide, over[[Table: Annual Slaughter Counts of Land Animals by Country, Animal, and Usage | 2 billion]] pigs are slaughtered for meat each year. In the United States alone, over 121 million are killed annually.
+
Worldwide, over[[Table: Annual Slaughter Counts of Land Animals by Country, Animal, and Usage | two billion]] pigs are slaughtered for meat each year. In the United States alone, over 121 million are killed annually.
  
 
Using data from the USDA Census of Agriculture and the EPA's definitions of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, the Sentience Institute estimates that 98.3 percent of pigs in the USA are factory-farmed.<ref>“US Factory Farming Estimates.” Sentience Institute. Accessed October 22, 2019. http://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estimates.</ref> The figures for other industrialized nations are likely to be similar.
 
Using data from the USDA Census of Agriculture and the EPA's definitions of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, the Sentience Institute estimates that 98.3 percent of pigs in the USA are factory-farmed.<ref>“US Factory Farming Estimates.” Sentience Institute. Accessed October 22, 2019. http://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estimates.</ref> The figures for other industrialized nations are likely to be similar.
Line 21: Line 15:
 
== Injustices and Suffering ==
 
== Injustices and Suffering ==
  
The injustices inherent in exploiting pigs and other non-human animals stem from seeing them as commodities having only instrumental value, lacking any inherent worth apart from their usefulness to humans.
+
{{Embed:Injustices because commodities | pigs}}
 
 
As Tom Regan [[Archive:Tom Regan Speech at the Royal Institute of Great Britain in 1989 |put it]], the animals we use "have a life of their own that is of importance to them, apart from their utility to us. They are not only in the world, they are aware of it and also of what happens to them. And what happens to them matters to them. Each has a life that fares experientially better or worse for the one whose life it is."
 
 
 
As shown in the section on sentience and cognition, pigs not only have a will to live and value their lives, just as humans do, but also have desires, preferences, emotions, families, social communities, natural behaviors, a sense of themselves, and a sense of the future.
 
 
 
The injustices discussed below—all arising from a failure to recognize the inherent worth of other sentient beings—are either standard practice or not unusual. And, as shown in the section below on humane labels and certifications, this is true even for those pig products with a humane label or certification. To omit a significant number of these injustices would likely increase costs to the point of rendering pig meat unaffordable by all but the most affluent.
 
  
 
=== Loss of Life ===
 
=== Loss of Life ===
Line 37: Line 25:
 
=== Slaughter ===
 
=== Slaughter ===
  
<-- discuss methods of slaughter, for example: USDA inspecter testimonials, slaughter speed lines, and the cruelty involved. The books ''Slaughterhouse" and  ''Eating Animals'' can help if you have them or can get them. —>''
+
==== Boiling Alive ====
 +
 
 +
Many slaughterhouses kill 1000 pigs or more per hour, and the USDA is attempting to remove limits on slaughter line speeds.<ref>Animal Legal Defense Fund. “Stopping Cruel High-Speed Pig Slaughter.” Accessed November 2, 2019. <nowiki>https://aldf.org/article/stopping-cruel-high-speed-pig-slaughter/</nowiki>.</ref> Legally, pigs are required to be rendered unconscious by stunning before slaughter. However, lines run so quickly that mistakes are inevitable. Many pigs are not properly stunned, and investigations show that as a consequence they are still conscious when they reach the scalding tanks which remove their hair.<ref name="hormel" /> This means they are effectively boiled alive.
  
Many slaughterhouses kill 1000 pigs or more per hour. Pigs are supposed to be rendered unconscious by stunning before being slaughtered, but since the lines run so quickly, mistakes are inevitable. Many pigs are not properly stunned, and as a consequence are still alive when they reach the scalding tanks. This means they are effectively boiled alive.
+
==== Gas Chambers ====
  
Increasingly, pigs are slaughtered in carbon dioxide gas chambers rather than conventional slaughterhouses. This is considered the most humane method of slaughter, but undercover footage shows pigs panicking, gasping for air, and trying to escape.<ref>“WORLD FIRST: So-Called ‘humane’ Pig Slaughter Filmed. If This Is the ‘Best’ – What Is the Worst?” Accessed November 2, 2019. http://www.animalsaustralia.org/features/not-so-humane-slaughter/.</ref>
+
Increasingly, pigs are slaughtered in carbon dioxide gas chambers rather than conventional slaughterhouses.<ref>“Carbon Dioxide Stunning and Killing of Pigs .” Humane Slaughter Association, May 2007. https://www.hsa.org.uk/downloads/technical-notes/TN19-carbon-dioxide-pigs-HSA.pdf.</ref> This is considered the most humane method of slaughter, but undercover footage shows pigs panicking, gasping for air, and trying to escape.<ref>“WORLD FIRST: So-Called ‘humane’ Pig Slaughter Filmed. If This Is the ‘Best’ – What Is the Worst?” Accessed November 2, 2019. http://www.animalsaustralia.org/features/not-so-humane-slaughter/.</ref> Studies show that this form of slaughter causes both anxiety and pain in pigs.<ref>Llonch, P, A Dalmau, P Rodríguez, X Manteca, and A Velarde. “Aversion to Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide Mixtures for Stunning Pigs.” Animal Welfare 21, no. 1 (February 1, 2012): 33–39. https://doi.org/10.7120/096272812799129475.</ref>
  
 
=== Mutilations ===
 
=== Mutilations ===
Most piglets undergo painful routine procedures when they are less than a week old. For example, they may be tattooed or have their ears notched for identification purposes. Conventional tattooing is known to cause stress,<ref>
+
 
Brach, E.J., B.S. Scobie, and D.P. Raymond. “Hog Tattooing Techniques.” Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 41, no. 4 (December 1988): 339–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8634(88)90218-1.
+
==== Teeth Clipping ====
</ref> while ear notching is known to be painful.<ref>Torrey, S., N. Devillers, M. Lessard, C. Farmer, and T. Widowski. “Effect of Age on the Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Piglets to Tail Docking and Ear Notching1.” Journal of Animal Science 87, no. 5 (May 1, 2009): 1778–86. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1354.</ref> Piglets may also have their sharp "needle teeth" clipped to prevent them from injuring each other when fighting over teats.
+
 
 +
Piglets may also have their sharp “needle teeth” clipped to prevent them from injuring each other when fighting over teats, inducing severe pain in pigs as it would in humans.<ref>Hay, M. “Long-Term Detrimental Effects of Tooth Clipping or Grinding in Piglets: A Histological Approach.” Animal Welfare 13 (2004). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Armelle_Prunier/publication/233501058_Long-term_detrimental_effects_of_tooth_clipping_or_grinding_in_piglets_A_histological_approach/links/5576797f08ae75363751ad32/Long-term-detrimental-effects-of-tooth-clipping-or-grinding-in-piglets-A-histological-approach.pdf.</ref> Teeth clipping can also result in lasting damage. According to the American Veterinary Medical Association, "clipping has been shown to increase longer-term behaviors suggestive of discomfort such as chomping. Piglets whose teeth have been clipped may experience more gum and tongue injuries, and potentially painful inflammation or abscesses of the teeth."<ref>"Welfare Implications of Teeth Clipping, Tail Docking and Permanent Identification of Piglets." Accessed November 6, 2019. https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-implications-of-practices-performed-on-piglets.aspx.</ref>
 +
 
 +
==== Castration ====
 +
 
 +
Male piglets are castrated, primarily because their flesh can otherwise develop an unpleasant taste and smell. This is generally done by making an incision in the scrotum and pulling out the testes, before cutting the spermatic cord. In most countries, it is legal to carry out this procedure without anesthetic in the piglet's first week of life, despite the fact that this is known to be painful. Carrying out castration at this age is also risky as the testes are very small, which can lead to incomplete castration and increase the risk of prolapse of the intestine.<ref>Prunier, A. “A Review of the Welfare Consequences of Surgical Castration in Piglets and the Evaluation of Non-Surgical Methods.” Animal Welfare, no. 15 (2006): 277–89.</ref>
 +
 
 +
==== Tail Docking ====
  
 
Pigs sometimes bite each other's tails when stressed, so some farmers cut off pigs' tails to prevent this. However, studies suggest that this can cause acute and possibly chronic pain.<ref>Herskin, M. S., K. Thodberg, and H. E. Jensen. “Effects of Tail Docking and Docking Length on Neuroanatomical Changes in Healed Tail Tips of Pigs.” Animal 9, no. 4 (April 2015): 677–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731114002857.</ref> Though tail docking is thought to reduce the incidence of serious injuries, it does not eliminate them. In Ireland, where 99 percent of pigs have docked tails, 72.5 percent were still found to have tail lesions at slaughter.<ref>Harley, S, La Boyle, Ne O’Connell, Sj More, Dl Teixeira, and A Hanlon. “Docking the Value of Pigmeat? Prevalence and Financial Implications of Welfare Lesions in Irish Slaughter Pigs.” Animal Welfare 23, no. 3 (August 1, 2014): 275–85. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.23.3.275.
 
Pigs sometimes bite each other's tails when stressed, so some farmers cut off pigs' tails to prevent this. However, studies suggest that this can cause acute and possibly chronic pain.<ref>Herskin, M. S., K. Thodberg, and H. E. Jensen. “Effects of Tail Docking and Docking Length on Neuroanatomical Changes in Healed Tail Tips of Pigs.” Animal 9, no. 4 (April 2015): 677–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731114002857.</ref> Though tail docking is thought to reduce the incidence of serious injuries, it does not eliminate them. In Ireland, where 99 percent of pigs have docked tails, 72.5 percent were still found to have tail lesions at slaughter.<ref>Harley, S, La Boyle, Ne O’Connell, Sj More, Dl Teixeira, and A Hanlon. “Docking the Value of Pigmeat? Prevalence and Financial Implications of Welfare Lesions in Irish Slaughter Pigs.” Animal Welfare 23, no. 3 (August 1, 2014): 275–85. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.23.3.275.
 
</ref>
 
</ref>
  
Male piglets are castrated, primarily because their flesh can otherwise develop an unpleasant taste and smell. This is generally done by making an incision in the scrotum and pulling out the testes, before cutting the spermatic cord. In most countries, it is legal to carry out this procedure without anesthetic in the piglet's first week of life, despite the fact that this is known to be painful. Carrying out castration at this age is also risky as the testes are very small, which can lead to incomplete castration and increase the risk of prolapse of the intestine.<ref>Prunier, A. “A Review of the Welfare Consequences of Surgical Castration in Piglets and the Evaluation of Non-Surgical Methods.” Animal Welfare, no. 15 (2006): 277–89.</ref>
+
==== Ear Notching and Tattooing ====
 +
 
 +
Most piglets undergo painful routine procedures when they are less than a week old so they can be identified.
 +
 
 +
Ear notching is painful.<ref>Torrey, S., N. Devillers, M. Lessard, C. Farmer, and T. Widowski. “Effect of Age on the Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Piglets to Tail Docking and Ear Notching1.” Journal of Animal Science 87, no. 5 (May 1, 2009): 1778–86. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1354.</ref> Tattooing involves some degree of pain, but perhaps, more importantly, it is stressful.<ref>Brach, E.J., B.S. Scobie, and D.P. Raymond. “Hog Tattooing Techniques.” Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 41, no. 4 (December 1988): 339–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8634(88)90218-1.</ref> Unlike humans, when pigs are tattooed they are not consenting and don't understand what's happening to them.
 +
 
 +
=== Living Conditions ===
 +
 
 +
==== Gestation Crates ====
  
=== Confinement ===
 
 
Pregnant sows are often kept in metal stalls called gestation crates. The crates typically measure just 6.5 ft x 2.0 ft, meaning sows are not able to turn around.<ref>“Welfare Implications of Gestation Sow Housing.” Accessed November 1, 2019. https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-Implications-of-Gestation-Sow-Housing.aspx.
 
Pregnant sows are often kept in metal stalls called gestation crates. The crates typically measure just 6.5 ft x 2.0 ft, meaning sows are not able to turn around.<ref>“Welfare Implications of Gestation Sow Housing.” Accessed November 1, 2019. https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-Implications-of-Gestation-Sow-Housing.aspx.
 
</ref> Some larger sows are not even able to lie on their sides (the way pigs normally sleep) in the crates. The stalls typically do not contain bedding material, instead having metal, plastic, or concrete floors. Sows often chew on the bars, a sign of boredom and frustration.<ref>Cronin, G. M., P. R. Wiepkema, and J. M. van Ree. “Andorphins Implicated in Stereotypies of Tethred Sows.” Experientia 42, no. 2 (February 1986): 198–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01952467.</ref> Pigs prefer to relieve themselves a long way from where they eat and sleep, which is impossible when they are confined to crates.<ref>“Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a Request from the Commission Related to Welfare of Weaners and Rearing Pigs: Effects of Different Space Allowances and Floor.” The EFSA Journal 268 (October 28, 2005): 1–19.</ref>
 
</ref> Some larger sows are not even able to lie on their sides (the way pigs normally sleep) in the crates. The stalls typically do not contain bedding material, instead having metal, plastic, or concrete floors. Sows often chew on the bars, a sign of boredom and frustration.<ref>Cronin, G. M., P. R. Wiepkema, and J. M. van Ree. “Andorphins Implicated in Stereotypies of Tethred Sows.” Experientia 42, no. 2 (February 1986): 198–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01952467.</ref> Pigs prefer to relieve themselves a long way from where they eat and sleep, which is impossible when they are confined to crates.<ref>“Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a Request from the Commission Related to Welfare of Weaners and Rearing Pigs: Effects of Different Space Allowances and Floor.” The EFSA Journal 268 (October 28, 2005): 1–19.</ref>
  
A few days before they are due to give birth, sows are moved to farrowing crates. These are slightly larger to allow the sow to lie on her side and nurse her piglets. They also have an additional enclosure attached to prevent piglets from being accidentally crushed by the sow. The crates are said to reduce piglet mortality compared to keeping sows loose, but there is no convincing evidence that this is the case.<ref>Aland, Andres, and Thomas Banhazi, eds. Livestock Housing: Modern Management to Ensure Optimal Health and Welfare of Farm Animals. The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2013. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-771-4.</ref> Sows remain in farrowing crates for about a month, before being impregnated again and returned to the gestation crates. Gestation crates have been banned in nine US states, but farrowing crates remain legal across the country. Use of the crates has also been banned or restricted in many other regions, such as the EU, New Zealand,<ref>https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/11959</ref> and Canada.<ref>Humane Society International. “Canada Bans Lifelong Confinement for Pigs in Controversial Gestation Crates,” March 6, 2014. https://www.hsi.org/news-media/canada-gestation-crates-ban-30614/.</ref>
+
==== Farrowing Crates ====
 +
 
 +
A few days before they are due to give birth, sows are moved to farrowing crates. These are slightly larger to allow the sow to lie on her side and nurse her piglets. They also have an additional enclosure attached to prevent piglets from being accidentally crushed by the sow. The crates are said to reduce piglet mortality compared to keeping sows loose, but there is no convincing evidence that this is the case.<ref>Aland, Andres, and Thomas Banhazi, eds. Livestock Housing: Modern Management to Ensure Optimal Health and Welfare of Farm Animals. The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2013. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-771-4.</ref> Sows remain in farrowing crates for about a month, before being impregnated again and returned to the gestation crates. Gestation crates have been banned in nine US states, but farrowing crates remain legal across the country. Use of the crates has also been banned or restricted in many other regions, such as the EU and Canada.<ref>Humane Society International. “Canada Bans Lifelong Confinement for Pigs in Controversial Gestation Crates,” March 6, 2014. https://www.hsi.org/news-media/canada-gestation-crates-ban-30614/.</ref>
 +
 
 +
==== Crowded Pens ====
 +
 
 +
After being removed from their mothers, piglets are crowded into pens where they barely have room to move until they reach slaughter weight. Pigs may also develop arthritis from lack of exercise and be injured when their feet are caught in the floor slats. The stress of confinement can lead pigs to exhibit unnatural cannibalistic behavior.<ref>Fox, Michael. “Factory Farming.” The Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy, 1980. https://animalstudiesrepository.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=sturep.</ref>
 +
 
 +
=== Disease and High Mortality ===
 +
 
 +
==== African Swine Fever ====
 +
 
 +
African swine fever is one example of pigs' susceptibility to disease because of crowded filthy conditions. It has an extremely high mortality rate of 95-100 percent in pigs. There is no known treatment for the disease.<ref>Štukelj, Marina, and Jan Plut. “A Review of African Swine Fever – Disease That Is Now a Big Concern in Europe.” Contemporary Agriculture 67, no. 2 (July 1, 2018): 110–18. https://doi.org/10.2478/contagri-2018-0016.</ref> An outbreak in China in mid-2019 resulted in the deaths of millions of pigs.<ref>Gale, Jason, Hannah Dormido, and Adrian Leung. “Why Eliminating African Swine Fever Could Take Decades.” Bloomberg.Com. Accessed November 2, 2019. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-eliminating-african-swine-fever/.</ref>
 +
 
 +
==== Pneumonia and Mange ====
  
After being removed from their mothers, piglets are crowded into pens where they barely have room to move until they reach slaughter weight. The filthy, crowded conditions lead to the development of pneumonia and mange. Many pigs die and their bodies are sometimes left in the pens for extended periods. Pigs may also develop arthritis from lack of exercise and be injured when their feet are caught in the floor slats. The stress of confinement can lead pigs to exhibit cannibalistic behavior, which is not found in pigs' wild ancestors.
+
Pneumonia and mange  are other examples.<ref>Mercy, Ashley. “The Western Australian Pig Health Monitoring Scheme.” Journal of the Department of Agriculture, Western Australia 31, no. 3 (January 1, 1990). https://researchlibrary.agric.wa.gov.au/journal_agriculture4/vol31/iss3/7</ref> Mortality rates are high, and investigations have found that their bodies are sometimes left in the pens for extended periods.<ref>“Viva! Campaigns’ 2019 Investigation into Hogwood Pig Farm.” Text. Viva!, August 14, 2019. https://www.viva.org.uk/hogwood/2019.</ref>
  
=== Pigs Left to Die after Natural Disasters ===
+
=== Reproduction and Selective Breeding ===
  
<-- Discuss. I heard pigs have sometimes been left to die so that insurance can be collected after flooding and hurricanes. If you can find sources, include that. -->
+
==== Large Litters ====
 +
Modern sows have been bred to produce significantly larger litters than their wild counterparts. A study done on wild boars in Portugal found that litter sizes ranged from 2 to 8 piglets.<ref>Fonseca, Carlos, António Alves da Silva, Joana Alves, José Vingada, and Amadeu M. V. M. Soares. “Reproductive Performance of Wild Boar Females in Portugal.” ''European Journal of Wildlife Research'' 57, no. 2 (April 2011): 363–71. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-010-0441-6</nowiki>.</ref> Farmed sows produce far larger litters. Between 1986 and 2006, the average number of live piglets per litter increased from 10.5 to 12.7. The time between litters also decreased from 155.8 days to 148.7 days. Suckling so many piglets can put immense strain on the sow and cause her to lose body weight.<ref name="prunier">Prunier, A., M. Heinonen, and H. Quesnel. “High Physiological Demands in Intensively Raised Pigs: Impact on Health and Welfare.” Animal 4, no. 6 (June 2010): 886–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173111000008X.</ref>  
  
In the USA, pigs have been left to die in the floods following major hurricanes. An estimated 5500 pigs drowned following Hurricane Florence,<ref>[http://www.ncagr.gov/paffairs/release/2018/NCDACSmovingintocommunitiestoassessdamageassistinrecovery.htm “NCDA&CS Moving into Communities to Assess Damage & Assist in Recovery.” Accessed October 25, 2019. http://www.ncagr.gov/paffairs/release/2018/NCDACSmovingintocommunitiestoassessdamageassistinrecovery.htm.]</ref> and 21,000 were killed by Hurricane Floyd.
+
==== Weight Gain ====
  
== Humane Labels and Certifications ==
+
Like factory-farmed chickens, pigs have been bred to gain weight so rapidly that they sometimes struggle to support their own body weight. On average, pigs who are being fattened now gain 770g a day, compared to 670g two decades ago. This rapid weight gain can lead to joint and leg problems.<ref name="prunier" /> In 1997, a study showed that pigs more closely related to wild boar gained 47g less per day.<ref>Casas-Carrillo, E, A Prill-Adams, S G Price, A C Clutter, and B W Kirkpatrick. “Mapping Genomic Regions Associated with Growth Rate in Pigs.” ''Journal of Animal Science'' 75, no. 8 (1997): 2047. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.7582047x</nowiki>.</ref>
Many believe that we are not harming animals when we use them for food as long as we treat them well while they are living. The justification given for this view is that animals don't have a sense of the future, and thus don’t have an interest in continuing to live. However, current research in cognitive ethology and neurobiology, as shown below, says otherwise.
 
  
But if one holds this belief in spite of the science, and wants to live by their own values, they might, with good intentions, decide to buy only animal products that have some sort of humane label or certification.  
+
Pigs' increased muscle mass means their hearts and lungs are proportionally smaller than those of their ancestors, which can cause strain. As a result, even young pigs sometimes die from heart attacks.<ref>Broom, Donald. “THE ROLES OF INDUSTRY AND SCIENCE, INCLUDING GENETIC SELECTION, IN IMPROVING ANIMAL WELFARE.” Animal Science and Biotechnologies 42, no. 2 (2009): 532–46.</ref> Selective breeding for lean muscle has led to the prevalence of a gene which makes pigs very sensitive to stress.<ref name="prunier" />
  
In the sections that follow, we show that standards are weak and unenforced, audits and inspections are rarely done, and if they are done and violations are found, which is infrequent, no one gets fined.
+
==== Artificial Insemination ====
 +
The use of artificial insemination rather than natural breeding is common,<ref>National Hog Farmer. “Proper AI Techniques, Semen Handling,” October 15, 2007. <nowiki>https://www.nationalhogfarmer.com/genetics-reproduction/artificial-insemination/proper-ai-techniques</nowiki>.</ref> as it gives farmers more control over the characteristics of the piglets. Artificial insemination is a stressful procedure<ref>Grandin, Temple. “Reduce Stress of Handling to Improve Productivity of Livestock.” Veterinary Medicine, June 1984.</ref> that sows cannot consent to, making it a violation of their rights.
  
So even if you buy into the idea that it’s OK to eat animal products as long as the animals are treated well, there is virtually no chance that the animals have, in fact, been treated well, regardless of what label is on the package. While certain labels may represent less suffering for some of the abuses, other abuses remain. The mitigation of some of the cruelties does not justify the remaining ones.
+
=== Cruel Handling ===
  
Humane labels and certifications are, for the most part, marketing ploys. They are designed to assuage our guilt, and they can engender higher profits because the industry knows that concerned, kind-hearted consumers are willing to pay more for products they perceive to be humanely produced.
+
Prior to slaughter, many pigs become nonambulatory. This is thought to be due to the stress of transport and handling combined with the change of environment.<ref>Ritter, M.J., M. Ellis, N.L. Berry, S.E. Curtis, L. Anil, E. Berg, M. Benjamin, et al. “Review:Transport Losses in Market Weight Pigs: I. A Review of Definitions, Incidence, and Economic Impact.” The Professional Animal Scientist 25, no. 4 (August 2009): 404–14. https://doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30735-X.</ref> Pigs who are unable to move may be {{jfa-highlight | beaten, dragged, or shocked with electric prods to move them through the killing line.}}<ref name="hormel">Compassion Over Killing. “Hormel.” Accessed November 2, 2019. https://cok.net/investigations/hormel/.</ref>
  
The life of any farmed animal can only be described as one of commodified, abusive servitude ending in brutal slaughter. When viewed objectively, free from the fog of our cultural norms, their treatment and slaughter, by any standard of fairness and justice—cannot be considered humane.
+
It's not just in the slaughterhouse that such abuses occur. Undercover investigations have shown that pigs on factory farms endure cruel, rough handling. Multiple investigations conducted by Mercy for Animals and others have recorded pigs being:<ref name="Walmart" />
  
=== Global Animal Partnership 5-Step Certification ===
+
* punched
This certification has five different levels, with certain practices permitted at some stages but not others. As a result, it is difficult for consumers to work out exactly how the animals have been treated. For example, castration of piglets is permitted before 10 days of age in levels 1-4, but banned entirely at level 5. The use of anesthetic is "strongly encouraged" but not required. Likewise, painful ear notching is permitted at levels 1-4 only.<ref name="gap">“Global Animal Partnership’s 5‐Step Animal Welfare Rating Standards for Pigs.” Global Animal Partnership, July 9, 2018. https://globalanimalpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/5-Step-Animal-Welfare-Rating-Standards-for-Pigs-v2.3-20180712.pdf.</ref>
+
* kicked
 +
* beaten
 +
* shouted at  
 +
* having their hair pulled out
 +
* violently shaken
 +
* poked in the eyes
 +
* hit with wooden boards.
  
Artificial insemination is permitted at all levels. This is an uncomfortable procedure that sows cannot consent to, making it a violation of their rights. Restraining them in stalls for as long as 4 hours while carrying out the procedure is allowed. Additionally, feed can be withheld from pigs for up to 8 hours before they are transported at all levels.<ref name="gap" />
+
Sick piglets were {{jfa-highlight | denied veterinary care}} and thrown into piles and {{jfa-highlight | left to die slowly}}.<ref name="Walmart">WalmartTorturesAnimals.com. “VIDEO: Pigs Punched and Beaten for Walmart.” Accessed November 4, 2019. http://www.walmarttorturesanimals.com/.</ref>
  
=== Animal Welfare Approved Standard ===
+
=== Transportation ===
Like the GAP, the AWS standard permits artificial insemination. Surgical castration is permitted for piglets under a week old, and both tattooing and painful ear notching are also allowed.
 
  
The AWS standard states that piglets lighter than 12 lbs can be euthanized using a blow to the head with a blunt instrument. It also recommends that pigs be slaughtered in carbon dioxide gas chambers;<ref>“Animal Welfare Approved Standards for Pigs.” A Greener World, n.d. https://agreenerworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/AWA-Pig-Standards-2018-v3.pdf.</ref> as mentioned previously, this is extremely painful and distressing.
+
Pigs are often transported hundreds of miles in extreme temperatures to be slaughtered. This can lead to deaths due to frostbite or heat stress.<ref>Grandin, T. “The Welfare of Pigs during Transport and Slaughter.” Pig News and Information 24, no. 3 (2003): 83–90.</ref> Legally, pigs can be transported for up to 28 hours at a time with no rest, food, or water. This has been shown to be very stressful.<ref>Garcia, Arlene, Glenna Pirner, Guilherme Picinin, Matthew May, Kimberly Guay, Brittany Backus, Mhairi Sutherland, and John McGlone. “Effect of Provision of Feed and Water during Transport on the Welfare of Weaned Pigs.” Animals 5, no. 2 (June 4, 2015): 407–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani5020363.</ref>
  
=== Certified Humane ===
+
Being transported is also stressful for pigs. In particular, they find vibration very uncomfortable and often suffer from travel sickness.<ref>Bradshaw, R. H., R. F. Parrott, M. L. Forsling, J. A. Goode, D. M. Lloyd, R. G. Rodway, and D. M. Broom. “Stress and Travel Sickness in Pigs: Effects of Road Transport on Plasma Concentrations of Cortisol, Beta-Endorphin and Lysine Vasopressin.” Animal Science 63, no. 3 (December 1996): 507–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S135772980001540X.</ref>
The Certified Humane standard permits artificial insemination and tattooing. It also allows up to a third of piglets' needle teeth to be cut off in some cases. Castration without anesthetic is allowed when piglets are under a week old.<ref name="hfac">“Humane Farm Animal Care Standards - Pigs.” Humane Farm Animal Care, January 2018. https://certifiedhumane.org/wp-content/uploads/Std19.Pigs_.2H-1.pdf.</ref>
 
  
The standard allows pigs to be transported for up to 8 hours at a time. They are usually not given any food during transport, as this could cause vomiting. For this reason, food may also be withheld for several hours prior to transport. In total, the standard states that pigs can be deprived of food for up to 18 hours at a time.<ref name="hfac" />
+
=== Pigs Left to Die after Natural Disasters ===
 +
In the USA, factory-farmed pigs have been left to die in the floods following major hurricanes. For example, an estimated 5500 pigs drowned following Hurricane Florence,<ref>[http://www.ncagr.gov/paffairs/release/2018/NCDACSmovingintocommunitiestoassessdamageassistinrecovery.htm “NCDA&CS Moving into Communities to Assess Damage & Assist in Recovery.” Accessed October 25, 2019. http://www.ncagr.gov/paffairs/release/2018/NCDACSmovingintocommunitiestoassessdamageassistinrecovery.htm.]</ref> and thousands more were killed by Hurricane Floyd.<ref>“Pork’s Dirty Secret: The Nation’s Top Hog Producer Is Also One of America’s Worst Polluters - Global ResearchGlobal Research.” Accessed November 2, 2019. https://www.globalresearch.ca/pork-s-dirty-secret-the-nation-s-top-hog-producer-is-also-one-of-america-s-worst-polluters/13479?print=1.</ref>
  
The Certified Humane standard does not have its own slaughter guidelines, but instead requires that producers adhere to the American Meat Institute guidelines. These allow pigs to be slaughtered in carbon dioxide gas chambers or conventional slaughterhouses. When gas chambers are used, it is considered acceptable for pigs to gasp for breath or exhibit "strange vocalization and sudden, involuntary reflexes including muscle jerks or twitches."<ref name="nami">Grandin, Temple. “Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines.” North American Meat Association, September 2019. https://www.animalhandling.org/sites/default/files/forms/Animal_Handling_Guide091719.pdf.</ref>
+
== Humane Labels and Certifications ==
 +
{{Embed:Humane labels and certifications meaningless}}
 +
{{Embed:Collapse extra - suggested script for discussing humane labels and certifications}}
  
When slaughtered conventionally, the guidelines require that pigs are properly stunned so that they are unconscious when their throats are slit. However, numerous investigations and worker accounts have shown that the speeds at which the lines operate make it impossible for all animals to be properly stunned, and that many are still conscious when they are killed.
+
=== North American Meat Guidelines ===
 +
{{Embed:Humane label North American Meat Guidelines}}
  
=== American Humane Certified ===
+
=== Global Animal Partnership 5-Step Certification ===
This standard, created by the American Humane Farm program, is perhaps the weakest on the list. It allows tattooing for identification, and cutting off up to a third of piglets' needle teeth is permitted if farmers consider it necessary. Tail docking is also allowed when piglets are under a week old. Though the standard states that pain mitigation should be used if possible, it is not a requirement. Piglets can also be castrated without anesthetic when they are younger than 7 days old.<ref name="ahfp">“Animal Welfare Standards for Swine.” American Humane Farm Program, April 2017.</ref>
+
{{Embed:Humane label GAP}}
  
If pigs need to be euthanized, it must be done according to the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. These allow suckling piglets to be killed by "blunt force trauma"  to the head. Electrocution, gassing, and gunshots are listed as acceptable for pigs of all ages.<ref>“AVMA Guidelines  for the Euthanasia  of Animals: 2013 Edition.” American Veterinary Medical Association, 2013. https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Documents/euthanasia.pdf.</ref>
+
=== Certified Humane Raised and Handled ===
 +
{{Embed:Humane label certified humane}}
  
Even confining sows in breeding stalls is permitted under this standard. After being impregnated, sows can be kept in the stalls for up to 10 days. There is no requirement for these stalls to be large enough to allow sows to turn around.<ref name="ahfp" />
+
=== Animal Welfare Approved Standard ===
 +
{{Embed:Humane label Animal Welfare Approved}}
  
Food may be withheld from pigs for up to 18 hours before they are slaughtered. Slaughter is required to be carried out according to the North American Meat Institute guidelines. As mentioned above, these allow the use of gas chambers or conventional slaughter, where pigs are often improperly stunned. <ref name="ahfp" />
+
=== American Humane Certified ===
 +
{{Embed:Humane label American Humane Certified}}
  
 
== Sentience and Cognition ==
 
== Sentience and Cognition ==
Line 112: Line 142:
 
While we are not suggesting that the degree of moral consideration given to an animal be based on their cognitive capacity, it seems that most people are not fully aware of the rich cognitive, emotional, and psychological lives that pigs experience.
 
While we are not suggesting that the degree of moral consideration given to an animal be based on their cognitive capacity, it seems that most people are not fully aware of the rich cognitive, emotional, and psychological lives that pigs experience.
  
Studies have shown that pigs can distinguish between objects and remember objects for at least five days. This shows that they have long-term memory. They are also able to learn the meaning of symbols representing actions and objects. In one experiment, pigs were able to understand and respond to combinations of symbols that represented phrases such as “fetch the ball.”<ref name="review">Marino, Lori, and Christina M. Colvin. “Thinking Pigs: A Comparative Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Personality in Sus Domesticus.” International Journal of Comparative Psychology, no. 28 (2015). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8sx4s79c.</ref> They have also been recorded using tools.<ref>Root-Bernstein, Meredith, Trupthi Narayan, Lucile Cornier, and Aude Bourgeois. “Context-Specific Tool Use by Sus Cebifrons.” Mammalian Biology 98 (September 2019): 102–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.08.003.</ref>
+
=== Object Recognition and Long-Term Memory ===
 +
Studies have shown that pigs can distinguish between objects and remember objects for at least five days. This shows that they have long-term memory. They are also able to think abstractly, learning the meaning of symbols representing actions and objects. In one experiment, pigs were able to understand and respond to combinations of symbols that represented phrases such as “fetch the ball.”<ref name="review">Marino, Lori, and Christina M. Colvin. “Thinking Pigs: A Comparative Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Personality in Sus Domesticus.” International Journal of Comparative Psychology, no. 28 (2015). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8sx4s79c.</ref> They have also been recorded using tools.<ref>Root-Bernstein, Meredith, Trupthi Narayan, Lucile Cornier, and Aude Bourgeois. “Context-Specific Tool Use by Sus Cebifrons.” Mammalian Biology 98 (September 2019): 102–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.08.003.</ref>
  
Few studies have been done on time perception in pigs, but there is evidence that they can anticipate the future. For example, one study found that pigs reacted negatively with high-pitched vocalizations when they knew a negative event was coming. They are also skilled at using spatial information — navigating mazes, for example.<ref name="review" />
+
=== Anticipation of the Future ===
 +
Few studies have been done on time perception in pigs, but there is evidence that they can anticipate the future. For example, one study found that pigs reacted negatively with high-pitched vocalizations when they knew a negative event was coming.<ref name="review" />
  
Pigs also engage in play, considered to be an indication of cognitive complexity. When raised without enough stimulation, they can develop behavioral abnormalities. They have been shown to make more positive decisions when given more stimulation, which is evidence that environmental enrichment can make them more optimistic.<ref name="review" />
+
=== Cognitive Complexity ===
 +
Dr. Donald Broom of the University of Cambridge has been quoted as saying that pigs are cognitively capable of being more sophisticated than three-year-olds.<ref>Cambridge Daily News, “New Slant on Chump Chops,” Cambridge Daily News, 29 Mar. 2002. Quoted in Curado, Manuel, and Steven S Gouveia. ''Automata’s Inner Movie: Science and Philosophy of Mind'', 2019, 301.</ref>
  
Studies show that pigs can discriminate between individuals, whether human or other pigs. Though it is not clear whether they can recognize their reflections, pigs in some studies have been able to find food that was only visible in a mirror. They have also been taught to play video games, controlling the joysticks with their mouths or snouts. This provides some evidence of self-awareness, as the pigs understood that their actions were causing the cursor to move. Many animals, such as dogs, do not show these capabilities.<ref name="review" />
+
Pigs also engage in play, considered to be an indication of cognitive complexity. When raised without enough stimulation, they can develop behavioral abnormalities. They have been shown to make more positive decisions when given more stimulation, which is evidence that environmental enrichment can make them more optimistic.<ref name="review" /> They are also skilled at using spatial information — navigating mazes, for example.<ref name="review" />
  
In one study, some pigs were trained to anticipate negative events when a certain piece of music was played. Others were not trained, but exhibited similar stress responses to the nearby trained pigs when the music was played. This provides evidence that pigs can recognize and pick up on each other's emotions, which may mean they experience empathy. It also shows that they have a sense of the future. Additionally, pigs show a range of personality traits such as sociability, exploration, and aggression.<ref name="review" />
+
=== Awareness of Self and Others ===
 +
Studies show that pigs can discriminate between individuals, whether human or other pigs. Pigs in some studies have been able to find food that was only visible in a mirror. They have also been taught to play video games, controlling the joysticks with their mouths or snouts. This provides some evidence of self-awareness, as the pigs understood that their actions were causing the cursor to move. Many animals, such as dogs, do not show these capabilities.<ref name="review" />
  
According to Dr. Donald Broom of the University of Cambridge, pigs are cognitively capable of being more sophisticated than three-year-olds.<ref>Cambridge Daily News, “New Slant on Chump Chops,” Cambridge Daily News, 29 Mar. 2002</ref>
+
=== Emotional Lives and Personality Traits ===
 +
In one study, some pigs were trained to anticipate negative events when a certain piece of music was played. Others were not trained but exhibited similar stress responses to the nearby trained pigs when the music was played. This provides evidence that pigs can recognize and pick up on each other's emotions, which may mean they experience empathy. It also shows that they have a sense of the future. Additionally, pigs show a range of personality traits such as sociability, exploration, and aggression.<ref name="review" />
  
 
== Environmental Consequences ==
 
== Environmental Consequences ==
 +
The breeding, confinement, and slaughter of pigs have a profoundly negative impact on the environment.
 +
 +
=== Waste ===
 +
Factory farms raise thousands of pigs at a time, and each one produces 2-4 times as much waste as a human. The production of such huge quantities of waste in a relatively small area makes it difficult to manage effectively. Usually, waste from industrial pig farms is dumped untreated into vast lagoons that may leak or overflow.<ref name=":2" />
 +
 +
Untreated pig waste is often spread over nearby fields in an attempt to dispose of it. These excessive amounts of manure can pollute the soil. When the soil becomes saturated, manure may run off the fields and into waterways. This, along with overflow from lagoons, can contaminate water and kill [[fish]]. Pollutants from pig slaughterhouses may also be released into waterways.<ref name=":2" />
  
The breeding, confinement, and slaughter of pigs have a profoundly negative impact on the environment. Factory farms raise thousands of pigs at a time, and each one produces 2-4 times as much waste as a human. The production of such huge quantities of waste in a relatively small area makes it difficult to manage effectively. Usually, waste from industrial pig farms is dumped untreated into vast lagoons that may leak or overflow.<ref name=":2" />
+
Waste lagoons and the spraying of manure pollute the air with toxins and greenhouse gases such as hydrogen sulfide, methane, and ammonia.<ref name=":2" /> Nitrogen in the waste may also contribute to acid rain.<ref>Steeves, Michael. “The EPA’s Proposed CAFO Regulations Fall Short of Ensuring the Integrity of Our Nation’s Waters.” JOURNAL OF LAND, RESOURCES, AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 22 (2002). https://nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/bibarticles/steeves_cafo.pdf.</ref>
  
Untreated pig waste is often spread over nearby fields in an attempt to dispose of it. These excessive amounts of manure can pollute the soil. When the soil becomes saturated, manure may run off the fields and into waterways. This, along with overflow from lagoons, can contaminate water and kill fish. Pollutants from pig slaughterhouses may also be released into waterways. After flowing into rivers, nitrogen from manure can reach lakes and oceans, where it causes algae to bloom and use up much of the oxygen in the water. This makes it difficult or impossible for other aquatic species to survive.<ref name=":2" />
+
==== Eutrophication ====
 +
After flowing into rivers, nitrogen from manure can reach lakes and oceans, where it causes algae to bloom and use up much of the oxygen in the water. This process is known as eutrophication, and it makes it difficult or impossible for other aquatic species to survive.<ref name=":2" />
  
Waste lagoons and the spraying of manure pollute the air with toxins and greenhouse gases such as hydrogen sulfide, methane, and ammonia.<ref name=":2" /> Nitrogen in the waste may also contribute to acid rain.
+
=== Feed Production ===
 +
Factory-farmed pigs are fed largely on grains, which also causes environmental problems. Huge areas of land are needed to grow this grain, leading to deforestation and habitat destruction. According to the FAO, 47 percent of emissions from pig-rearing are caused by feed production. Another 13 percent is related to land-use change due to the growing of crops.<ref>“Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Pig and Chicken Supply Chains: A Global Life Cycle Assessment.” FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, 2013. <nowiki>http://www.fao.org/3/i3460e/i3460e.pdf</nowiki>.</ref> Large quantities of water, fertilizers, and fossil fuels are also used in this process.<ref>Steinfeld, Henning, Pierre Gerber, T. D. Wassenaar, Vincent Castel, Mauricio Rosales M. , and Cees de Haan. Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006.</ref> Farmed pigs are also sometimes fed on fishmeal,<ref>Dórea, José G. “Fish Meal in Animal Feed and Human Exposure to Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic Substances.” Journal of Food Protection 69, no. 11 (November 2006): 2777–85. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-69.11.2777.</ref> contributing to overfishing.
  
Factory-farmed pigs are fed largely on grains, which also causes environmental problems. Huge areas of land are needed to grow this grain, leading to deforestation and habitat destruction. According to the FAO, 47 percent of emissions from pig-rearing are caused by feed production. Another 13 percent is related to land use change due to the growing of crops.<ref>“Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Pig and Chicken Supply Chains: A Global Life Cycle Assessment.” FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, 2013. <nowiki>http://www.fao.org/3/i3460e/i3460e.pdf</nowiki>.</ref> Large quantities of water, fertilizers, and fossil fuels are also used in this process. Farmed pigs are also sometimes fed on fishmeal, contributing to overfishing.
+
== Human Health and Nutrition ==
  
== Human Health, Nutrition ==
+
=== Food Safety ===
  
<!-- discuss pig meat. It's ok to use the euphemistic word "pork" sparingly after using ''pig meat'' -->
+
Though USDA inspectors must legally be present at slaughterhouses, some inspectors complain that the design of plants makes it impossible for them to see the slaughter area. Because of the speed of the lines, it is also very difficult for inspectors to spot abnormalities or diseases in the carcasses.<ref>Foer, Jonathan Safran. Eating Animals. 1st Back Bay pbk. ed. New York: Back Bay Books/Little, Brown and Co, 2010, 151.</ref>
 +
=== Diseases ===
  
=== Cardiovascular Disease ===
+
==== Cardiovascular Disease ====
 
Pig meat contains saturated fat, cholesterol, and heme iron, which contribute to an increased risk of heart disease.<ref>Hu, Frank B., Meir J. Stampfer, JoAnn E. Manson, Eric Rimm, Graham A. Colditz, Bernard A. Rosner, Charles H. Hennekens, and Walter C. Willett. “Dietary Fat Intake and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Women.” New England Journal of Medicine 337, no. 21 (November 20, 1997): 1491–99. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199711203372102.</ref><ref>Kannel, William B. “Serum Cholesterol, Lipoproteins, and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease: The Framingham Study.” Annals of Internal Medicine 74, no. 1 (January 1, 1971): 1. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-74-1-1.</ref><ref>A, Daphne L. van der, Petra H. M. Peeters, Diederick E. Grobbee, Joannes J. M. Marx, and Yvonne T. van der Schouw. “Dietary Haem Iron and Coronary Heart Disease in Women.” European Heart Journal 26, no. 3 (February 2005): 257–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehi027.</ref><ref>Tzonou, A., P. Lagiou, A. Trichopoulou, V. Tsoutsos, and D. Trichopoulos. “Dietary Iron and Coronary Heart Disease Risk: A Study from Greece.” American Journal of Epidemiology 147, no. 2 (January 15, 1998): 161–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009429.</ref> In 2012, a meta-analysis concluded that both red and processed meat are linked to an increased risk of stroke.<ref>Kaluza, Joanna, Alicja Wolk, and Susanna C. Larsson. “Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.” Stroke 43, no. 10 (October 2012): 2556–60. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.663286.</ref> A Finnish study carried out between 1972 and 1992 found that heart disease rates in the country dropped dramatically when the intake of saturated fat and cholesterol decreased.<ref>Pietinen, Pirjo, Erkki Vartiainen, Ritva Seppänen, Antti Aro, and Pekka Puska. “Changes in Diet in Finland from 1972 to 1992: Impact on Coronary Heart Disease Risk.” Preventive Medicine 25, no. 3 (May 1996): 243–50. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1996.0053.</ref>
 
Pig meat contains saturated fat, cholesterol, and heme iron, which contribute to an increased risk of heart disease.<ref>Hu, Frank B., Meir J. Stampfer, JoAnn E. Manson, Eric Rimm, Graham A. Colditz, Bernard A. Rosner, Charles H. Hennekens, and Walter C. Willett. “Dietary Fat Intake and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Women.” New England Journal of Medicine 337, no. 21 (November 20, 1997): 1491–99. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199711203372102.</ref><ref>Kannel, William B. “Serum Cholesterol, Lipoproteins, and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease: The Framingham Study.” Annals of Internal Medicine 74, no. 1 (January 1, 1971): 1. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-74-1-1.</ref><ref>A, Daphne L. van der, Petra H. M. Peeters, Diederick E. Grobbee, Joannes J. M. Marx, and Yvonne T. van der Schouw. “Dietary Haem Iron and Coronary Heart Disease in Women.” European Heart Journal 26, no. 3 (February 2005): 257–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehi027.</ref><ref>Tzonou, A., P. Lagiou, A. Trichopoulou, V. Tsoutsos, and D. Trichopoulos. “Dietary Iron and Coronary Heart Disease Risk: A Study from Greece.” American Journal of Epidemiology 147, no. 2 (January 15, 1998): 161–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009429.</ref> In 2012, a meta-analysis concluded that both red and processed meat are linked to an increased risk of stroke.<ref>Kaluza, Joanna, Alicja Wolk, and Susanna C. Larsson. “Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.” Stroke 43, no. 10 (October 2012): 2556–60. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.663286.</ref> A Finnish study carried out between 1972 and 1992 found that heart disease rates in the country dropped dramatically when the intake of saturated fat and cholesterol decreased.<ref>Pietinen, Pirjo, Erkki Vartiainen, Ritva Seppänen, Antti Aro, and Pekka Puska. “Changes in Diet in Finland from 1972 to 1992: Impact on Coronary Heart Disease Risk.” Preventive Medicine 25, no. 3 (May 1996): 243–50. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1996.0053.</ref>
  
=== Cancer ===
+
==== Cancer ====
 
In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) evaluated 800 studies and concluded that processed meat (such as sausages, bacon, and ham) is a Group 1 carcinogen, meaning it definitely causes cancer. The processing and cooking of meat was found to form various carcinogenic chemicals.<ref name="who">Bouvard, Véronique, Dana Loomis, Kathryn Z. Guyton, Yann Grosse, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha, Heidi Mattock, and Kurt Straif. “Carcinogenicity of Consumption of Red and Processed Meat.” The Lancet Oncology 16, no. 16 (December 1, 2015): 1599–1600. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00444-1.</ref> Other Group 1 carcinogens include tobacco and asbestos.<ref>“Known and Probable Human Carcinogens.” Accessed November 1, 2019. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/general-info/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens.html.</ref>
 
In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) evaluated 800 studies and concluded that processed meat (such as sausages, bacon, and ham) is a Group 1 carcinogen, meaning it definitely causes cancer. The processing and cooking of meat was found to form various carcinogenic chemicals.<ref name="who">Bouvard, Véronique, Dana Loomis, Kathryn Z. Guyton, Yann Grosse, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha, Heidi Mattock, and Kurt Straif. “Carcinogenicity of Consumption of Red and Processed Meat.” The Lancet Oncology 16, no. 16 (December 1, 2015): 1599–1600. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00444-1.</ref> Other Group 1 carcinogens include tobacco and asbestos.<ref>“Known and Probable Human Carcinogens.” Accessed November 1, 2019. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/general-info/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens.html.</ref>
  
 
The report also concluded that unprocessed red meat (including pig meat) is Group 2A carcinogen, meaning it is a probable cause of cancer. It has been linked to colorectal, prostate, and pancreatic cancer.<ref name="who" />
 
The report also concluded that unprocessed red meat (including pig meat) is Group 2A carcinogen, meaning it is a probable cause of cancer. It has been linked to colorectal, prostate, and pancreatic cancer.<ref name="who" />
  
=== Type 2 Diabetes ===
+
==== Type 2 Diabetes ====
  
 
Red meat is associated with an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes, especially if it is processed. This is thought to be because it contains high levels of fat, heme iron, nitrites, and other harmful substances.<ref>Pan, An, Qi Sun, Adam M Bernstein, Matthias B Schulze, JoAnn E Manson, Walter C Willett, and Frank B Hu. “Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: 3 Cohorts of US Adults and an Updated Meta-Analysis.” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 94, no. 4 (October 1, 2011): 1088–96. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.111.018978.</ref>
 
Red meat is associated with an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes, especially if it is processed. This is thought to be because it contains high levels of fat, heme iron, nitrites, and other harmful substances.<ref>Pan, An, Qi Sun, Adam M Bernstein, Matthias B Schulze, JoAnn E Manson, Walter C Willett, and Frank B Hu. “Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: 3 Cohorts of US Adults and an Updated Meta-Analysis.” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 94, no. 4 (October 1, 2011): 1088–96. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.111.018978.</ref>
  
=== Animal Protein ===
+
=== Animal Protein Risks ===
  
All animal protein, pig meat or otherwise, carries risks that are not associated with plant protein. A review by Dr. Sofia Ochoa cites 42 studies showing that animal protein<ref>Ochoa, MD, Sofia Pineda. “7 Ways Animal Protein Is Damaging Your Health.” Forks Over Knives, December 31, 2016. Accessed October 22, 2019. https://www.forksoverknives.com/animalproteindangers/.</ref>
+
All animal protein, pig meat or otherwise, carries risks that are not associated with plant protein. {{Embed:Animal protein risks}}
  
* elevates hormone insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), which stimulates cell division and growth in both healthy and cancer cells and "has been consistently associated with increased cancer risk, proliferation, and malignancy"
+
== Social Consequences of Pig Production ==
 
+
The vast majority of pigs in industrialized nations are raised on factory farms. This has profound consequences for those who live nearby. The farms are disproportionately located in low-income communities inhabited largely by ethnic minorities.<ref>Edwards, Bob, and Anthony Ladd. “Race, Poverty, Political Capacity and the Spatial Distribution of Swine Waste in North Carolina, 1982-1997.” ''The North Carolina Geographer'' 9 (2001): 51–70.</ref><ref name="gbiz"> Sacoby Wilson, “Rural Americans’ Struggles against Factory Farm Pollution Find Traction in Court,” Text, GreenBiz, August 6, 2018. Accessed January 2, 2020. https://www.greenbiz.com/article/rural-americans-struggles-against-factory-farm-pollution-find-traction-court.</ref>
* "results in us having higher circulating levels of trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO)," which "injures the lining of our vessels, creates inflammation, and facilitates the formation of cholesterol plaques in our blood vessels"
 
 
 
* causes the overproduction of the hormone fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23), which damages our blood vessels, can "lead to enlargement of the cardiac ventricle, and is associated with heart attacks, sudden death, and heart failure"
 
 
 
* can result in the overabsorption of heme iron, causing the conversion of other oxidants into highly reactive free radicals that "can damage different cell structures like proteins, membranes, and DNA" (heme iron "has also been associated with many kinds of gastrointestinal cancers")
 
  
* can result in a higher incidence of bone fractures because of animal protein's high concentrations of sulfur
+
=== Foul Odors ===
 +
One of the most studied cases is in North Carolina, the second-largest hog-producing state. Those who live near factory farms complain of foul odors that invade their homes and force them to cover their mouths and noses when they step outside. Some even spend nights in motels to escape it if they can afford to do so. The smell can permeate clothes and upholstery, making it difficult to remove.<ref name=":0" />
  
* contributes to atherosclerosis—plaques of cholesterol that accumulate in the lining of our vessels; this condition is far less common on a vegan diet because absorbable cholesterol is not found in plants
+
=== Land and Water Contamination ===
 
+
'''Contamination from airborne manure:''' Excess manure from factory farms is spread over nearby fields. In some areas, manure is spread so close to communities that a mist of it covers houses, cars, and laundry left out to dry.<ref name=":0">Wing Steve. “Social Responsibility and Research Ethics in Community-Driven Studies of Industrialized Hog Production.” Environmental Health Perspectives 110, no. 5 (May 1, 2002): 437–44. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.02110437.</ref>
== Social Consequences of Pig Production ==
 
  
The vast majority of pigs in industrialized nations are raised on factory farms. This has profound consequences for those who live nearby. One of the most studied cases is North Carolina, the second-largest hog producing state. Those who live near factory farms complain of foul odors that invade their homes and force them to cover their mouths and noses when they step outside. Some even spend nights in motels to escape it if they can afford to do so. The smell can permeate clothes and upholstery, making it difficult to remove.<ref name=":0" /> The farms are disproportionately located in low-income communities inhabited largely by ethnic minorities.<ref>Edwards, Bob, and Anthony Ladd. “Race, Poverty, Political Capacity and the Spatial Distribution of Swine Waste in North Carolina, 1982-1997.” ''The North Carolina Geographer'' 9 (2001): 51–70.</ref>
+
'''Contimination of water supply:''' Other waste is stored in lagoons, which can leak or overflow and contaminate the local water supply.<ref name=":2" />
  
Excess manure from factory farms is spread over nearby fields. In some areas, manure is spread so close to communities that a mist of it covers houses, cars, and laundry left out to dry.<ref name=":0">Wing Steve. “Social Responsibility and Research Ethics in Community-Driven Studies of Industrialized Hog Production.” Environmental Health Perspectives 110, no. 5 (May 1, 2002): 437–44. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.02110437.</ref> Other waste is stored in lagoons, which can leak or overflow and contaminate the local water supply. Factory-farmed pig manure often contains pathogens, antibiotic-resistant bacteria, toxic chemicals, and heavy metals, which can cause illness if inhaled or ingested.<ref name=":2">Marks, Robbin. “CESSPOOLS OF SHAME: How Factory Farm Lagoons and Sprayfields Threaten Environmental and Public Health.” Natural Resources Defense Council and the Clean Water Network, July 2001. <nowiki>https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/cesspools.pdf</nowiki>.</ref> Studies show that these substances can contribute to decreased quality of life, higher blood pressure,<ref>Wing, Steve, Rachel Avery Horton, and Kathryn M. Rose. “Air Pollution from Industrial Swine Operations and Blood Pressure of Neighboring Residents.” ''Environmental Health Perspectives'' 121, no. 1 (January 2013): 92–96. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205109</nowiki>.</ref> respiratory problems, and mental stress. The odors can also lead to headaches, nausea, and vomiting, among other symptoms.<ref>Wing, Steve, Rachel Avery Horton, Stephen W. Marshall, Kendall Thu, Mansoureh Tajik, Leah Schinasi, and Susan S. Schiffman. “Air Pollution and Odor in Communities Near Industrial Swine Operations.” ''Environmental Health Perspectives'' 116, no. 10 (October 2008): 1362–68. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11250</nowiki>.</ref> Factory farm workers may also have an increased risk of health problems, such as asthma.<ref>Dosman, J. A., J. A. Lawson, S. P. Kirychuk, Y. Cormier, J. Biem, and N. Koehncke. “Occupational Asthma in Newly Employed Workers in Intensive Swine Confinement Facilities.” ''The European Respiratory Journal'' 24, no. 4 (October 2004): 698–702. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.04.00112102</nowiki>.</ref>
+
'''Health problems from manure:''' Factory-farmed pig manure often contains pathogens, antibiotic-resistant bacteria, toxic chemicals, and heavy metals, which can cause illness if inhaled or ingested.<ref name=":2">Marks, Robbin. “CESSPOOLS OF SHAME: How Factory Farm Lagoons and Sprayfields Threaten Environmental and Public Health.” Natural Resources Defense Council and the Clean Water Network, July 2001. <nowiki>https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/cesspools.pdf</nowiki>.</ref><ref name="gbiz"/> Studies show that these substances can contribute to decreased quality of life, higher blood pressure,<ref>Wing, Steve, Rachel Avery Horton, and Kathryn M. Rose. “Air Pollution from Industrial Swine Operations and Blood Pressure of Neighboring Residents.” ''Environmental Health Perspectives'' 121, no. 1 (January 2013): 92–96. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205109</nowiki>.</ref> respiratory problems, and mental stress. The odors can also lead to headaches, nausea, and vomiting, among other symptoms.<ref>Wing, Steve, Rachel Avery Horton, Stephen W. Marshall, Kendall Thu, Mansoureh Tajik, Leah Schinasi, and Susan S. Schiffman. “Air Pollution and Odor in Communities Near Industrial Swine Operations.” ''Environmental Health Perspectives'' 116, no. 10 (October 2008): 1362–68. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11250</nowiki>.</ref> Factory farm workers may also have an increased risk of health problems, such as asthma.<ref>Dosman, J. A., J. A. Lawson, S. P. Kirychuk, Y. Cormier, J. Biem, and N. Koehncke. “Occupational Asthma in Newly Employed Workers in Intensive Swine Confinement Facilities.” ''The European Respiratory Journal'' 24, no. 4 (October 2004): 698–702. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.04.00112102</nowiki>.</ref>
  
 +
=== Exploitation of Slaughterhouse Workers ===
 
Slaughterhouse workers have some of the highest injury rates of any industry, as lines move at unsafe speeds and workers handle very sharp knives. Several workers have even been killed in US slaughterhouses. Workers are also prone to repetitive strain injuries from repeating the same movements for hours on end. They are often dismissed when they become injured, leading many to hide their injuries and continue working.<ref name=":1">“Blood, Sweat, and Fear | Workers’ Rights in U.S. Meat and Poultry Plants.” Human Rights Watch, January 24, 2005. https://www.hrw.org/report/2005/01/24/blood-sweat-and-fear/workers-rights-us-meat-and-poultry-plants.</ref>
 
Slaughterhouse workers have some of the highest injury rates of any industry, as lines move at unsafe speeds and workers handle very sharp knives. Several workers have even been killed in US slaughterhouses. Workers are also prone to repetitive strain injuries from repeating the same movements for hours on end. They are often dismissed when they become injured, leading many to hide their injuries and continue working.<ref name=":1">“Blood, Sweat, and Fear | Workers’ Rights in U.S. Meat and Poultry Plants.” Human Rights Watch, January 24, 2005. https://www.hrw.org/report/2005/01/24/blood-sweat-and-fear/workers-rights-us-meat-and-poultry-plants.</ref>
  
 
Those who work in slaughterhouses are often undocumented immigrants who speak little English. They may not be aware of their rights and often fear deportation if they try to improve their conditions. Workers may be forced to work excessively long shifts and threatened with dismissal if they refuse. Some are expected to work as much as twelve hours a day, six days a week. This can lead to fatigue and depression.<ref name=":1" />
 
Those who work in slaughterhouses are often undocumented immigrants who speak little English. They may not be aware of their rights and often fear deportation if they try to improve their conditions. Workers may be forced to work excessively long shifts and threatened with dismissal if they refuse. Some are expected to work as much as twelve hours a day, six days a week. This can lead to fatigue and depression.<ref name=":1" />
  
 +
=== Violence in Slaughterhouse Communities ===
 
Committing violent acts against animals leads many workers to develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).<ref>Dillard, Jennifer. “A Slaughterhouse Nightmare:  Psychological Harm Suffered by Slaughterhouse Employees  and the Possibility of Redress through Legal Reform .” ''Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy'' XV, no. 2 (Summer 2008).</ref> It may also lead them to commit violence against humans. Rates of violent crime, including domestic abuse and rape, are higher in communities located near a slaughterhouse.<ref>Fitzgerald, Amy J., Linda Kalof, and Thomas Dietz. “Slaughterhouses and Increased Crime Rates: An Empirical Analysis of the Spillover From ‘The Jungle’ Into the Surrounding Community.” ''Organization & Environment'' 22, no. 2 (June 2009): 158–84. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026609338164</nowiki>.</ref>
 
Committing violent acts against animals leads many workers to develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).<ref>Dillard, Jennifer. “A Slaughterhouse Nightmare:  Psychological Harm Suffered by Slaughterhouse Employees  and the Possibility of Redress through Legal Reform .” ''Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy'' XV, no. 2 (Summer 2008).</ref> It may also lead them to commit violence against humans. Rates of violent crime, including domestic abuse and rape, are higher in communities located near a slaughterhouse.<ref>Fitzgerald, Amy J., Linda Kalof, and Thomas Dietz. “Slaughterhouses and Increased Crime Rates: An Empirical Analysis of the Spillover From ‘The Jungle’ Into the Surrounding Community.” ''Organization & Environment'' 22, no. 2 (June 2009): 158–84. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026609338164</nowiki>.</ref>
 
== Footnotes ==
 
<references />
 
  
 
== Meta ==
 
== Meta ==
Line 185: Line 223:
 
This article was originally authored by [[User:Bethany.Chester | Bethany Chester]] with contributions by [[User:Greg.Fuller | Greg Fuller]] . The contents may have been edited since that time by others.
 
This article was originally authored by [[User:Bethany.Chester | Bethany Chester]] with contributions by [[User:Greg.Fuller | Greg Fuller]] . The contents may have been edited since that time by others.
  
{{jfa-expand | Open Graph Share Image}}
+
{{jfa-expand | Open Graph (OG) Share Image}}
 
[[File:Pig-share.png]]
 
[[File:Pig-share.png]]
 
{{jfa-expand-end}}
 
{{jfa-expand-end}}
  
 
{{jfa-meta
 
{{jfa-meta
| meta-keywords = veganism, animal rights
+
| meta-title= Pigs
 +
| meta-keywords = veganism, animal rights, pig, hog
 
| meta-image = {{filepath:{{PAGENAME:File:Pig-share.png}}}}
 
| meta-image = {{filepath:{{PAGENAME:File:Pig-share.png}}}}
| meta-description = This article covers various aspects of farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to workers and neighborhoods.
+
| meta-description = This article provides summarized information about farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to workers and neighborhoods.
 
}}
 
}}
  
Line 200: Line 239:
 
[[ Category: Earth ]]
 
[[ Category: Earth ]]
 
[[ Category: Humanity ]]
 
[[ Category: Humanity ]]
 +
 +
== Footnotes ==
 +
<references />

Latest revision as of 10:11, 8 January 2020

This article provides summarized information about farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to communities and workers.

General Information

Lineage

Pigs were domesticated approximately 9000 years ago from various subspecies of the Eurasian wild boar.[1] Domestication occurred separately in Europe and Asia, though there is evidence that interbreeding later took place.[2] Pigs were brought to North America by Spanish explorers in the 16th century.[3]

Numbers

Worldwide, over two billion pigs are slaughtered for meat each year. In the United States alone, over 121 million are killed annually.

Using data from the USDA Census of Agriculture and the EPA's definitions of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, the Sentience Institute estimates that 98.3 percent of pigs in the USA are factory-farmed.[4] The figures for other industrialized nations are likely to be similar.

Injustices and Suffering

The injustices inherent in exploiting pigs and other non-human animals stem from seeing them as commodities having only instrumental value, lacking any inherent worth apart from their usefulness to humans.

As Tom Regan put it, the animals we use "have a life of their own that is of importance to them, apart from their utility to us. They are not only in the world, they are aware of it and also of what happens to them. And what happens to them matters to them. Each has a life that fares experientially better or worse for the one whose life it is."

As shown in the section on sentience and cognition, pigs not only have a will to live and value their lives, just as humans do, but also have desires, preferences, emotions, families, social communities, natural behaviors, a sense of themselves, and a sense of the future.

The injustices discussed below—all arising from a failure to recognize the inherent worth of other sentient beings—are either standard practice or not unusual. And, as shown in the section below on humane labels and certifications, this is true even for products with a humane label or certification. To omit a significant number of these injustices would likely render the cost of such products unaffordable by all but the most affluent, and we would still have to slaughter them.

Loss of Life

We have no nutritional need for pork, so denying pigs their lives is unnecessary, as are the other forms of suffering enumerated here. Not only are we taking their lives—we are doing so after allowing them to live only about three percent of their natural life spans. Pigs are slaughtered after living only 5 to 6 weeks of a 10 to 12-year natural lifespan.

To take the life of any sentient being is to harm that being by depriving them of opportunities for fulfillment, even if it is done suddenly and painlessly (which it is not, as explained below).

Slaughter

Boiling Alive

Many slaughterhouses kill 1000 pigs or more per hour, and the USDA is attempting to remove limits on slaughter line speeds.[5] Legally, pigs are required to be rendered unconscious by stunning before slaughter. However, lines run so quickly that mistakes are inevitable. Many pigs are not properly stunned, and investigations show that as a consequence they are still conscious when they reach the scalding tanks which remove their hair.[6] This means they are effectively boiled alive.

Gas Chambers

Increasingly, pigs are slaughtered in carbon dioxide gas chambers rather than conventional slaughterhouses.[7] This is considered the most humane method of slaughter, but undercover footage shows pigs panicking, gasping for air, and trying to escape.[8] Studies show that this form of slaughter causes both anxiety and pain in pigs.[9]

Mutilations

Teeth Clipping

Piglets may also have their sharp “needle teeth” clipped to prevent them from injuring each other when fighting over teats, inducing severe pain in pigs as it would in humans.[10] Teeth clipping can also result in lasting damage. According to the American Veterinary Medical Association, "clipping has been shown to increase longer-term behaviors suggestive of discomfort such as chomping. Piglets whose teeth have been clipped may experience more gum and tongue injuries, and potentially painful inflammation or abscesses of the teeth."[11]

Castration

Male piglets are castrated, primarily because their flesh can otherwise develop an unpleasant taste and smell. This is generally done by making an incision in the scrotum and pulling out the testes, before cutting the spermatic cord. In most countries, it is legal to carry out this procedure without anesthetic in the piglet's first week of life, despite the fact that this is known to be painful. Carrying out castration at this age is also risky as the testes are very small, which can lead to incomplete castration and increase the risk of prolapse of the intestine.[12]

Tail Docking

Pigs sometimes bite each other's tails when stressed, so some farmers cut off pigs' tails to prevent this. However, studies suggest that this can cause acute and possibly chronic pain.[13] Though tail docking is thought to reduce the incidence of serious injuries, it does not eliminate them. In Ireland, where 99 percent of pigs have docked tails, 72.5 percent were still found to have tail lesions at slaughter.[14]

Ear Notching and Tattooing

Most piglets undergo painful routine procedures when they are less than a week old so they can be identified.

Ear notching is painful.[15] Tattooing involves some degree of pain, but perhaps, more importantly, it is stressful.[16] Unlike humans, when pigs are tattooed they are not consenting and don't understand what's happening to them.

Living Conditions

Gestation Crates

Pregnant sows are often kept in metal stalls called gestation crates. The crates typically measure just 6.5 ft x 2.0 ft, meaning sows are not able to turn around.[17] Some larger sows are not even able to lie on their sides (the way pigs normally sleep) in the crates. The stalls typically do not contain bedding material, instead having metal, plastic, or concrete floors. Sows often chew on the bars, a sign of boredom and frustration.[18] Pigs prefer to relieve themselves a long way from where they eat and sleep, which is impossible when they are confined to crates.[19]

Farrowing Crates

A few days before they are due to give birth, sows are moved to farrowing crates. These are slightly larger to allow the sow to lie on her side and nurse her piglets. They also have an additional enclosure attached to prevent piglets from being accidentally crushed by the sow. The crates are said to reduce piglet mortality compared to keeping sows loose, but there is no convincing evidence that this is the case.[20] Sows remain in farrowing crates for about a month, before being impregnated again and returned to the gestation crates. Gestation crates have been banned in nine US states, but farrowing crates remain legal across the country. Use of the crates has also been banned or restricted in many other regions, such as the EU and Canada.[21]

Crowded Pens

After being removed from their mothers, piglets are crowded into pens where they barely have room to move until they reach slaughter weight. Pigs may also develop arthritis from lack of exercise and be injured when their feet are caught in the floor slats. The stress of confinement can lead pigs to exhibit unnatural cannibalistic behavior.[22]

Disease and High Mortality

African Swine Fever

African swine fever is one example of pigs' susceptibility to disease because of crowded filthy conditions. It has an extremely high mortality rate of 95-100 percent in pigs. There is no known treatment for the disease.[23] An outbreak in China in mid-2019 resulted in the deaths of millions of pigs.[24]

Pneumonia and Mange

Pneumonia and mange are other examples.[25] Mortality rates are high, and investigations have found that their bodies are sometimes left in the pens for extended periods.[26]

Reproduction and Selective Breeding

Large Litters

Modern sows have been bred to produce significantly larger litters than their wild counterparts. A study done on wild boars in Portugal found that litter sizes ranged from 2 to 8 piglets.[27] Farmed sows produce far larger litters. Between 1986 and 2006, the average number of live piglets per litter increased from 10.5 to 12.7. The time between litters also decreased from 155.8 days to 148.7 days. Suckling so many piglets can put immense strain on the sow and cause her to lose body weight.[28]

Weight Gain

Like factory-farmed chickens, pigs have been bred to gain weight so rapidly that they sometimes struggle to support their own body weight. On average, pigs who are being fattened now gain 770g a day, compared to 670g two decades ago. This rapid weight gain can lead to joint and leg problems.[28] In 1997, a study showed that pigs more closely related to wild boar gained 47g less per day.[29]

Pigs' increased muscle mass means their hearts and lungs are proportionally smaller than those of their ancestors, which can cause strain. As a result, even young pigs sometimes die from heart attacks.[30] Selective breeding for lean muscle has led to the prevalence of a gene which makes pigs very sensitive to stress.[28]

Artificial Insemination

The use of artificial insemination rather than natural breeding is common,[31] as it gives farmers more control over the characteristics of the piglets. Artificial insemination is a stressful procedure[32] that sows cannot consent to, making it a violation of their rights.

Cruel Handling

Prior to slaughter, many pigs become nonambulatory. This is thought to be due to the stress of transport and handling combined with the change of environment.[33] Pigs who are unable to move may be beaten, dragged, or shocked with electric prods to move them through the killing line.[6]

It's not just in the slaughterhouse that such abuses occur. Undercover investigations have shown that pigs on factory farms endure cruel, rough handling. Multiple investigations conducted by Mercy for Animals and others have recorded pigs being:[34]

  • punched
  • kicked
  • beaten
  • shouted at
  • having their hair pulled out
  • violently shaken
  • poked in the eyes
  • hit with wooden boards.

Sick piglets were denied veterinary care and thrown into piles and left to die slowly.[34]

Transportation

Pigs are often transported hundreds of miles in extreme temperatures to be slaughtered. This can lead to deaths due to frostbite or heat stress.[35] Legally, pigs can be transported for up to 28 hours at a time with no rest, food, or water. This has been shown to be very stressful.[36]

Being transported is also stressful for pigs. In particular, they find vibration very uncomfortable and often suffer from travel sickness.[37]

Pigs Left to Die after Natural Disasters

In the USA, factory-farmed pigs have been left to die in the floods following major hurricanes. For example, an estimated 5500 pigs drowned following Hurricane Florence,[38] and thousands more were killed by Hurricane Floyd.[39]

Humane Labels and Certifications

Investigations by Consumer Reports and the Open Philanthropy Project (and others) reveal that humane-sounding labels and certifications are largely meaningless, as shown below. In general, these investigations reveal that the standards are weak and unenforced, audits and inspections are rarely done, and if they are done and violations are found, which is infrequent, no one gets fined.[40][41]

North American Meat Guidelines

Some certifications rely on the North American Meat Institute slaughter guidelines for standards relating to slaughter. These allow pigs to be slaughtered in carbon dioxide gas chambers or conventional slaughterhouses. When gas chambers are used, it is considered acceptable for pigs to gasp for breath or exhibit “strange vocalization and sudden, involuntary reflexes including muscle jerks or twitches.”[44] Evidence shows that in conventional slaughterhouses, pigs are often improperly stunned.[45]

Global Animal Partnership 5-Step Certification

The Open Philanthropy Project criticized Whole Foods' Global Animal Partnership (GAP) for having weak enforcement and for providing only slight improvements over standard factory farming conditions.[46]

Certified Humane Raised and Handled

Consumer Reports says that "we do not rate Certified Humane as a highly meaningful label for animal welfare, because the standards do not have certain requirements that a majority of consumers expect from a 'humanely raised' label, such as access to the outdoors."[47]

Animal Welfare Approved Standard

On their Greener Choices website, Animal Welfare Approved is the only certification that Consumer Reports says has strong standards, yet the standards still allow for mutilations[48] and other injustices.

Also, products with this label are challenging to find. A search using their own product finder reveals that it's unlikely you will find any products with this label at a grocery store near you.[49]

American Humane Certified

According to Consumer Reports, "the requirements fall short in meeting consumer expectations for a 'humane' label in many ways."[50]

Sentience and Cognition

While we are not suggesting that the degree of moral consideration given to an animal be based on their cognitive capacity, it seems that most people are not fully aware of the rich cognitive, emotional, and psychological lives that pigs experience.

Object Recognition and Long-Term Memory

Studies have shown that pigs can distinguish between objects and remember objects for at least five days. This shows that they have long-term memory. They are also able to think abstractly, learning the meaning of symbols representing actions and objects. In one experiment, pigs were able to understand and respond to combinations of symbols that represented phrases such as “fetch the ball.”[51] They have also been recorded using tools.[52]

Anticipation of the Future

Few studies have been done on time perception in pigs, but there is evidence that they can anticipate the future. For example, one study found that pigs reacted negatively with high-pitched vocalizations when they knew a negative event was coming.[51]

Cognitive Complexity

Dr. Donald Broom of the University of Cambridge has been quoted as saying that pigs are cognitively capable of being more sophisticated than three-year-olds.[53]

Pigs also engage in play, considered to be an indication of cognitive complexity. When raised without enough stimulation, they can develop behavioral abnormalities. They have been shown to make more positive decisions when given more stimulation, which is evidence that environmental enrichment can make them more optimistic.[51] They are also skilled at using spatial information — navigating mazes, for example.[51]

Awareness of Self and Others

Studies show that pigs can discriminate between individuals, whether human or other pigs. Pigs in some studies have been able to find food that was only visible in a mirror. They have also been taught to play video games, controlling the joysticks with their mouths or snouts. This provides some evidence of self-awareness, as the pigs understood that their actions were causing the cursor to move. Many animals, such as dogs, do not show these capabilities.[51]

Emotional Lives and Personality Traits

In one study, some pigs were trained to anticipate negative events when a certain piece of music was played. Others were not trained but exhibited similar stress responses to the nearby trained pigs when the music was played. This provides evidence that pigs can recognize and pick up on each other's emotions, which may mean they experience empathy. It also shows that they have a sense of the future. Additionally, pigs show a range of personality traits such as sociability, exploration, and aggression.[51]

Environmental Consequences

The breeding, confinement, and slaughter of pigs have a profoundly negative impact on the environment.

Waste

Factory farms raise thousands of pigs at a time, and each one produces 2-4 times as much waste as a human. The production of such huge quantities of waste in a relatively small area makes it difficult to manage effectively. Usually, waste from industrial pig farms is dumped untreated into vast lagoons that may leak or overflow.[54]

Untreated pig waste is often spread over nearby fields in an attempt to dispose of it. These excessive amounts of manure can pollute the soil. When the soil becomes saturated, manure may run off the fields and into waterways. This, along with overflow from lagoons, can contaminate water and kill fish. Pollutants from pig slaughterhouses may also be released into waterways.[54]

Waste lagoons and the spraying of manure pollute the air with toxins and greenhouse gases such as hydrogen sulfide, methane, and ammonia.[54] Nitrogen in the waste may also contribute to acid rain.[55]

Eutrophication

After flowing into rivers, nitrogen from manure can reach lakes and oceans, where it causes algae to bloom and use up much of the oxygen in the water. This process is known as eutrophication, and it makes it difficult or impossible for other aquatic species to survive.[54]

Feed Production

Factory-farmed pigs are fed largely on grains, which also causes environmental problems. Huge areas of land are needed to grow this grain, leading to deforestation and habitat destruction. According to the FAO, 47 percent of emissions from pig-rearing are caused by feed production. Another 13 percent is related to land-use change due to the growing of crops.[56] Large quantities of water, fertilizers, and fossil fuels are also used in this process.[57] Farmed pigs are also sometimes fed on fishmeal,[58] contributing to overfishing.

Human Health and Nutrition

Food Safety

Though USDA inspectors must legally be present at slaughterhouses, some inspectors complain that the design of plants makes it impossible for them to see the slaughter area. Because of the speed of the lines, it is also very difficult for inspectors to spot abnormalities or diseases in the carcasses.[59]

Diseases

Cardiovascular Disease

Pig meat contains saturated fat, cholesterol, and heme iron, which contribute to an increased risk of heart disease.[60][61][62][63] In 2012, a meta-analysis concluded that both red and processed meat are linked to an increased risk of stroke.[64] A Finnish study carried out between 1972 and 1992 found that heart disease rates in the country dropped dramatically when the intake of saturated fat and cholesterol decreased.[65]

Cancer

In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) evaluated 800 studies and concluded that processed meat (such as sausages, bacon, and ham) is a Group 1 carcinogen, meaning it definitely causes cancer. The processing and cooking of meat was found to form various carcinogenic chemicals.[66] Other Group 1 carcinogens include tobacco and asbestos.[67]

The report also concluded that unprocessed red meat (including pig meat) is Group 2A carcinogen, meaning it is a probable cause of cancer. It has been linked to colorectal, prostate, and pancreatic cancer.[66]

Type 2 Diabetes

Red meat is associated with an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes, especially if it is processed. This is thought to be because it contains high levels of fat, heme iron, nitrites, and other harmful substances.[68]

Animal Protein Risks

All animal protein, pig meat or otherwise, carries risks that are not associated with plant protein. A review by Dr. Sofia Ochoa cites 42 studies showing that animal protein:[69]

  • elevates hormone-insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), which stimulates cell division and growth in both healthy and cancer cells and "has been consistently associated with increased cancer risk, proliferation, and malignancy"
  • "results in us having higher circulating levels of trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO)," which "injures the lining of our vessels, creates inflammation, and facilitates the formation of cholesterol plaques in our blood vessels"
  • causes the overproduction of the hormone fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23), which damages our blood vessels, can "lead to enlargement of the cardiac ventricle, and is associated with heart attacks, sudden death, and heart failure"
  • can result in the overabsorption of heme iron, causing the conversion of other oxidants into highly reactive free radicals that "can damage different cell structures like proteins, membranes, and DNA" (heme iron "has also been associated with many kinds of gastrointestinal cancers")
  • can result in a higher incidence of bone fractures because of animal protein's high concentrations of sulfur
  • contributes to atherosclerosis—plaques of cholesterol that accumulate in the lining of our vessels; this condition is far less common on a vegan diet because absorbable cholesterol is not found in plants

Social Consequences of Pig Production

The vast majority of pigs in industrialized nations are raised on factory farms. This has profound consequences for those who live nearby. The farms are disproportionately located in low-income communities inhabited largely by ethnic minorities.[70][71]

Foul Odors

One of the most studied cases is in North Carolina, the second-largest hog-producing state. Those who live near factory farms complain of foul odors that invade their homes and force them to cover their mouths and noses when they step outside. Some even spend nights in motels to escape it if they can afford to do so. The smell can permeate clothes and upholstery, making it difficult to remove.[72]

Land and Water Contamination

Contamination from airborne manure: Excess manure from factory farms is spread over nearby fields. In some areas, manure is spread so close to communities that a mist of it covers houses, cars, and laundry left out to dry.[72]

Contimination of water supply: Other waste is stored in lagoons, which can leak or overflow and contaminate the local water supply.[54]

Health problems from manure: Factory-farmed pig manure often contains pathogens, antibiotic-resistant bacteria, toxic chemicals, and heavy metals, which can cause illness if inhaled or ingested.[54][71] Studies show that these substances can contribute to decreased quality of life, higher blood pressure,[73] respiratory problems, and mental stress. The odors can also lead to headaches, nausea, and vomiting, among other symptoms.[74] Factory farm workers may also have an increased risk of health problems, such as asthma.[75]

Exploitation of Slaughterhouse Workers

Slaughterhouse workers have some of the highest injury rates of any industry, as lines move at unsafe speeds and workers handle very sharp knives. Several workers have even been killed in US slaughterhouses. Workers are also prone to repetitive strain injuries from repeating the same movements for hours on end. They are often dismissed when they become injured, leading many to hide their injuries and continue working.[76]

Those who work in slaughterhouses are often undocumented immigrants who speak little English. They may not be aware of their rights and often fear deportation if they try to improve their conditions. Workers may be forced to work excessively long shifts and threatened with dismissal if they refuse. Some are expected to work as much as twelve hours a day, six days a week. This can lead to fatigue and depression.[76]

Violence in Slaughterhouse Communities

Committing violent acts against animals leads many workers to develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).[77] It may also lead them to commit violence against humans. Rates of violent crime, including domestic abuse and rape, are higher in communities located near a slaughterhouse.[78]

Meta

This article was originally authored by Bethany Chester with contributions by Greg Fuller . The contents may have been edited since that time by others.

Footnotes

  1. Giuffra, E., J. M. Kijas, V. Amarger, O. Carlborg, J. T. Jeon, and L. Andersson. “The Origin of the Domestic Pig: Independent Domestication and Subsequent Introgression.” Genetics 154, no. 4 (April 2000): 1785–91.
  2. Larson, G. “Worldwide Phylogeography of Wild Boar Reveals Multiple Centers of Pig Domestication.” Science 307, no. 5715 (March 11, 2005): 1618–21. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106927.
  3. Singer, Francis J. “Wild Pig Populations in the National Parks.” Environmental Management 5, no. 3 (May 1981): 263–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01873285.
  4. “US Factory Farming Estimates.” Sentience Institute. Accessed October 22, 2019. http://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estimates.
  5. Animal Legal Defense Fund. “Stopping Cruel High-Speed Pig Slaughter.” Accessed November 2, 2019. https://aldf.org/article/stopping-cruel-high-speed-pig-slaughter/.
  6. 6.0 6.1 Compassion Over Killing. “Hormel.” Accessed November 2, 2019. https://cok.net/investigations/hormel/.
  7. “Carbon Dioxide Stunning and Killing of Pigs .” Humane Slaughter Association, May 2007. https://www.hsa.org.uk/downloads/technical-notes/TN19-carbon-dioxide-pigs-HSA.pdf.
  8. “WORLD FIRST: So-Called ‘humane’ Pig Slaughter Filmed. If This Is the ‘Best’ – What Is the Worst?” Accessed November 2, 2019. http://www.animalsaustralia.org/features/not-so-humane-slaughter/.
  9. Llonch, P, A Dalmau, P Rodríguez, X Manteca, and A Velarde. “Aversion to Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide Mixtures for Stunning Pigs.” Animal Welfare 21, no. 1 (February 1, 2012): 33–39. https://doi.org/10.7120/096272812799129475.
  10. Hay, M. “Long-Term Detrimental Effects of Tooth Clipping or Grinding in Piglets: A Histological Approach.” Animal Welfare 13 (2004). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Armelle_Prunier/publication/233501058_Long-term_detrimental_effects_of_tooth_clipping_or_grinding_in_piglets_A_histological_approach/links/5576797f08ae75363751ad32/Long-term-detrimental-effects-of-tooth-clipping-or-grinding-in-piglets-A-histological-approach.pdf.
  11. "Welfare Implications of Teeth Clipping, Tail Docking and Permanent Identification of Piglets." Accessed November 6, 2019. https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-implications-of-practices-performed-on-piglets.aspx.
  12. Prunier, A. “A Review of the Welfare Consequences of Surgical Castration in Piglets and the Evaluation of Non-Surgical Methods.” Animal Welfare, no. 15 (2006): 277–89.
  13. Herskin, M. S., K. Thodberg, and H. E. Jensen. “Effects of Tail Docking and Docking Length on Neuroanatomical Changes in Healed Tail Tips of Pigs.” Animal 9, no. 4 (April 2015): 677–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731114002857.
  14. Harley, S, La Boyle, Ne O’Connell, Sj More, Dl Teixeira, and A Hanlon. “Docking the Value of Pigmeat? Prevalence and Financial Implications of Welfare Lesions in Irish Slaughter Pigs.” Animal Welfare 23, no. 3 (August 1, 2014): 275–85. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.23.3.275.
  15. Torrey, S., N. Devillers, M. Lessard, C. Farmer, and T. Widowski. “Effect of Age on the Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Piglets to Tail Docking and Ear Notching1.” Journal of Animal Science 87, no. 5 (May 1, 2009): 1778–86. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1354.
  16. Brach, E.J., B.S. Scobie, and D.P. Raymond. “Hog Tattooing Techniques.” Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 41, no. 4 (December 1988): 339–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8634(88)90218-1.
  17. “Welfare Implications of Gestation Sow Housing.” Accessed November 1, 2019. https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-Implications-of-Gestation-Sow-Housing.aspx.
  18. Cronin, G. M., P. R. Wiepkema, and J. M. van Ree. “Andorphins Implicated in Stereotypies of Tethred Sows.” Experientia 42, no. 2 (February 1986): 198–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01952467.
  19. “Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a Request from the Commission Related to Welfare of Weaners and Rearing Pigs: Effects of Different Space Allowances and Floor.” The EFSA Journal 268 (October 28, 2005): 1–19.
  20. Aland, Andres, and Thomas Banhazi, eds. Livestock Housing: Modern Management to Ensure Optimal Health and Welfare of Farm Animals. The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2013. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-771-4.
  21. Humane Society International. “Canada Bans Lifelong Confinement for Pigs in Controversial Gestation Crates,” March 6, 2014. https://www.hsi.org/news-media/canada-gestation-crates-ban-30614/.
  22. Fox, Michael. “Factory Farming.” The Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy, 1980. https://animalstudiesrepository.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=sturep.
  23. Štukelj, Marina, and Jan Plut. “A Review of African Swine Fever – Disease That Is Now a Big Concern in Europe.” Contemporary Agriculture 67, no. 2 (July 1, 2018): 110–18. https://doi.org/10.2478/contagri-2018-0016.
  24. Gale, Jason, Hannah Dormido, and Adrian Leung. “Why Eliminating African Swine Fever Could Take Decades.” Bloomberg.Com. Accessed November 2, 2019. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-eliminating-african-swine-fever/.
  25. Mercy, Ashley. “The Western Australian Pig Health Monitoring Scheme.” Journal of the Department of Agriculture, Western Australia 31, no. 3 (January 1, 1990). https://researchlibrary.agric.wa.gov.au/journal_agriculture4/vol31/iss3/7
  26. “Viva! Campaigns’ 2019 Investigation into Hogwood Pig Farm.” Text. Viva!, August 14, 2019. https://www.viva.org.uk/hogwood/2019.
  27. Fonseca, Carlos, António Alves da Silva, Joana Alves, José Vingada, and Amadeu M. V. M. Soares. “Reproductive Performance of Wild Boar Females in Portugal.” European Journal of Wildlife Research 57, no. 2 (April 2011): 363–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-010-0441-6.
  28. 28.0 28.1 28.2 Prunier, A., M. Heinonen, and H. Quesnel. “High Physiological Demands in Intensively Raised Pigs: Impact on Health and Welfare.” Animal 4, no. 6 (June 2010): 886–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173111000008X.
  29. Casas-Carrillo, E, A Prill-Adams, S G Price, A C Clutter, and B W Kirkpatrick. “Mapping Genomic Regions Associated with Growth Rate in Pigs.” Journal of Animal Science 75, no. 8 (1997): 2047. https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.7582047x.
  30. Broom, Donald. “THE ROLES OF INDUSTRY AND SCIENCE, INCLUDING GENETIC SELECTION, IN IMPROVING ANIMAL WELFARE.” Animal Science and Biotechnologies 42, no. 2 (2009): 532–46.
  31. National Hog Farmer. “Proper AI Techniques, Semen Handling,” October 15, 2007. https://www.nationalhogfarmer.com/genetics-reproduction/artificial-insemination/proper-ai-techniques.
  32. Grandin, Temple. “Reduce Stress of Handling to Improve Productivity of Livestock.” Veterinary Medicine, June 1984.
  33. Ritter, M.J., M. Ellis, N.L. Berry, S.E. Curtis, L. Anil, E. Berg, M. Benjamin, et al. “Review:Transport Losses in Market Weight Pigs: I. A Review of Definitions, Incidence, and Economic Impact.” The Professional Animal Scientist 25, no. 4 (August 2009): 404–14. https://doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30735-X.
  34. 34.0 34.1 WalmartTorturesAnimals.com. “VIDEO: Pigs Punched and Beaten for Walmart.” Accessed November 4, 2019. http://www.walmarttorturesanimals.com/.
  35. Grandin, T. “The Welfare of Pigs during Transport and Slaughter.” Pig News and Information 24, no. 3 (2003): 83–90.
  36. Garcia, Arlene, Glenna Pirner, Guilherme Picinin, Matthew May, Kimberly Guay, Brittany Backus, Mhairi Sutherland, and John McGlone. “Effect of Provision of Feed and Water during Transport on the Welfare of Weaned Pigs.” Animals 5, no. 2 (June 4, 2015): 407–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani5020363.
  37. Bradshaw, R. H., R. F. Parrott, M. L. Forsling, J. A. Goode, D. M. Lloyd, R. G. Rodway, and D. M. Broom. “Stress and Travel Sickness in Pigs: Effects of Road Transport on Plasma Concentrations of Cortisol, Beta-Endorphin and Lysine Vasopressin.” Animal Science 63, no. 3 (December 1996): 507–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S135772980001540X.
  38. “NCDA&CS Moving into Communities to Assess Damage & Assist in Recovery.” Accessed October 25, 2019. http://www.ncagr.gov/paffairs/release/2018/NCDACSmovingintocommunitiestoassessdamageassistinrecovery.htm.
  39. “Pork’s Dirty Secret: The Nation’s Top Hog Producer Is Also One of America’s Worst Polluters - Global ResearchGlobal Research.” Accessed November 2, 2019. https://www.globalresearch.ca/pork-s-dirty-secret-the-nation-s-top-hog-producer-is-also-one-of-america-s-worst-polluters/13479?print=1.
  40. Consumer Reports “Labels.” Greener Choices (blog). Accessed July 6, 2019. http://greenerchoices.org/labels/
  41. Global Animal Partnership.” Open Philanthropy Project, March 26, 2016. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/global-animal-partnership-general-support
  42. Consumer Reports “Labels.” Greener Choices (blog). Accessed July 6, 2019. http://greenerchoices.org/labels/
  43. Global Animal Partnership.” Open Philanthropy Project, March 26, 2016. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/global-animal-partnership-general-support
  44. Grandin, Temple. “Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines.” North American Meat Association, September 2019. https://www.animalhandling.org/sites/default/files/forms/Animal_Handling_Guide091719.pdf.
  45. “Animal Welfare Standards for Swine.” American Humane Farm Program, April 2017.
  46. “Global Animal Partnership.” Open Philanthropy Project, March 26, 2016. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/global-animal-partnership-general-support
  47. “Certified Humane Raised and Handled.” Consumer Reports—Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, January 30, 2017. Accessed October 2, 2018. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/01/30/certified-humane/
  48. “Animal Welfare Approved.” Greener Choices |Consumer Reports, November 16, 2016. Accessed October 2, 2018. http://greenerchoices.org/2016/11/16/awa-label-review/
  49. “Find Products.” A Greener World. Accessed October 4, 2018. https://agreenerworld.org/shop-agw/product-search/
  50. “American Humane Certified.” Consumer Reports—Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, January 11, 2017 Accessed October 2, 2018. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/01/11/american-humane-certified/
  51. 51.0 51.1 51.2 51.3 51.4 51.5 Marino, Lori, and Christina M. Colvin. “Thinking Pigs: A Comparative Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Personality in Sus Domesticus.” International Journal of Comparative Psychology, no. 28 (2015). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8sx4s79c.
  52. Root-Bernstein, Meredith, Trupthi Narayan, Lucile Cornier, and Aude Bourgeois. “Context-Specific Tool Use by Sus Cebifrons.” Mammalian Biology 98 (September 2019): 102–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.08.003.
  53. Cambridge Daily News, “New Slant on Chump Chops,” Cambridge Daily News, 29 Mar. 2002. Quoted in Curado, Manuel, and Steven S Gouveia. Automata’s Inner Movie: Science and Philosophy of Mind, 2019, 301.
  54. 54.0 54.1 54.2 54.3 54.4 54.5 Marks, Robbin. “CESSPOOLS OF SHAME: How Factory Farm Lagoons and Sprayfields Threaten Environmental and Public Health.” Natural Resources Defense Council and the Clean Water Network, July 2001. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/cesspools.pdf.
  55. Steeves, Michael. “The EPA’s Proposed CAFO Regulations Fall Short of Ensuring the Integrity of Our Nation’s Waters.” JOURNAL OF LAND, RESOURCES, AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 22 (2002). https://nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/bibarticles/steeves_cafo.pdf.
  56. “Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Pig and Chicken Supply Chains: A Global Life Cycle Assessment.” FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, 2013. http://www.fao.org/3/i3460e/i3460e.pdf.
  57. Steinfeld, Henning, Pierre Gerber, T. D. Wassenaar, Vincent Castel, Mauricio Rosales M. , and Cees de Haan. Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006.
  58. Dórea, José G. “Fish Meal in Animal Feed and Human Exposure to Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic Substances.” Journal of Food Protection 69, no. 11 (November 2006): 2777–85. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-69.11.2777.
  59. Foer, Jonathan Safran. Eating Animals. 1st Back Bay pbk. ed. New York: Back Bay Books/Little, Brown and Co, 2010, 151.
  60. Hu, Frank B., Meir J. Stampfer, JoAnn E. Manson, Eric Rimm, Graham A. Colditz, Bernard A. Rosner, Charles H. Hennekens, and Walter C. Willett. “Dietary Fat Intake and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Women.” New England Journal of Medicine 337, no. 21 (November 20, 1997): 1491–99. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199711203372102.
  61. Kannel, William B. “Serum Cholesterol, Lipoproteins, and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease: The Framingham Study.” Annals of Internal Medicine 74, no. 1 (January 1, 1971): 1. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-74-1-1.
  62. A, Daphne L. van der, Petra H. M. Peeters, Diederick E. Grobbee, Joannes J. M. Marx, and Yvonne T. van der Schouw. “Dietary Haem Iron and Coronary Heart Disease in Women.” European Heart Journal 26, no. 3 (February 2005): 257–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehi027.
  63. Tzonou, A., P. Lagiou, A. Trichopoulou, V. Tsoutsos, and D. Trichopoulos. “Dietary Iron and Coronary Heart Disease Risk: A Study from Greece.” American Journal of Epidemiology 147, no. 2 (January 15, 1998): 161–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009429.
  64. Kaluza, Joanna, Alicja Wolk, and Susanna C. Larsson. “Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.” Stroke 43, no. 10 (October 2012): 2556–60. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.663286.
  65. Pietinen, Pirjo, Erkki Vartiainen, Ritva Seppänen, Antti Aro, and Pekka Puska. “Changes in Diet in Finland from 1972 to 1992: Impact on Coronary Heart Disease Risk.” Preventive Medicine 25, no. 3 (May 1996): 243–50. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1996.0053.
  66. 66.0 66.1 Bouvard, Véronique, Dana Loomis, Kathryn Z. Guyton, Yann Grosse, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha, Heidi Mattock, and Kurt Straif. “Carcinogenicity of Consumption of Red and Processed Meat.” The Lancet Oncology 16, no. 16 (December 1, 2015): 1599–1600. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00444-1.
  67. “Known and Probable Human Carcinogens.” Accessed November 1, 2019. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/general-info/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens.html.
  68. Pan, An, Qi Sun, Adam M Bernstein, Matthias B Schulze, JoAnn E Manson, Walter C Willett, and Frank B Hu. “Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: 3 Cohorts of US Adults and an Updated Meta-Analysis.” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 94, no. 4 (October 1, 2011): 1088–96. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.111.018978.
  69. Ochoa, MD, Sofia Pineda. “7 Ways Animal Protein Is Damaging Your Health.” Forks Over Knives, December 31, 2016. Accessed October 22, 2019. https://www.forksoverknives.com/animalproteindangers/.
  70. Edwards, Bob, and Anthony Ladd. “Race, Poverty, Political Capacity and the Spatial Distribution of Swine Waste in North Carolina, 1982-1997.” The North Carolina Geographer 9 (2001): 51–70.
  71. 71.0 71.1 Sacoby Wilson, “Rural Americans’ Struggles against Factory Farm Pollution Find Traction in Court,” Text, GreenBiz, August 6, 2018. Accessed January 2, 2020. https://www.greenbiz.com/article/rural-americans-struggles-against-factory-farm-pollution-find-traction-court.
  72. 72.0 72.1 Wing Steve. “Social Responsibility and Research Ethics in Community-Driven Studies of Industrialized Hog Production.” Environmental Health Perspectives 110, no. 5 (May 1, 2002): 437–44. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.02110437.
  73. Wing, Steve, Rachel Avery Horton, and Kathryn M. Rose. “Air Pollution from Industrial Swine Operations and Blood Pressure of Neighboring Residents.” Environmental Health Perspectives 121, no. 1 (January 2013): 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205109.
  74. Wing, Steve, Rachel Avery Horton, Stephen W. Marshall, Kendall Thu, Mansoureh Tajik, Leah Schinasi, and Susan S. Schiffman. “Air Pollution and Odor in Communities Near Industrial Swine Operations.” Environmental Health Perspectives 116, no. 10 (October 2008): 1362–68. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11250.
  75. Dosman, J. A., J. A. Lawson, S. P. Kirychuk, Y. Cormier, J. Biem, and N. Koehncke. “Occupational Asthma in Newly Employed Workers in Intensive Swine Confinement Facilities.” The European Respiratory Journal 24, no. 4 (October 2004): 698–702. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.04.00112102.
  76. 76.0 76.1 “Blood, Sweat, and Fear | Workers’ Rights in U.S. Meat and Poultry Plants.” Human Rights Watch, January 24, 2005. https://www.hrw.org/report/2005/01/24/blood-sweat-and-fear/workers-rights-us-meat-and-poultry-plants.
  77. Dillard, Jennifer. “A Slaughterhouse Nightmare:  Psychological Harm Suffered by Slaughterhouse Employees  and the Possibility of Redress through Legal Reform .” Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy XV, no. 2 (Summer 2008).
  78. Fitzgerald, Amy J., Linda Kalof, and Thomas Dietz. “Slaughterhouses and Increased Crime Rates: An Empirical Analysis of the Spillover From ‘The Jungle’ Into the Surrounding Community.” Organization & Environment 22, no. 2 (June 2009): 158–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026609338164.