Cattle

 https://justiceforanimals.org/?curid=401

Share this page.

Share on social media:

• Share on Facebook…
• Share on Twitter…

Share a link to this page:

• Copy the page link (short URL) to your clipboard.

https://justiceforanimals.org/?curid=401

Share a plain text version of this page or portions of this page:

• Copy the following text to your clipboard:

This draft has been assigned to User:Bethany.Chester and will be moved to the main namespace when completed.

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

<-- Reminder: don't be hyperbolic, but it is not an exaggeration to use graphic, persuasive language that represents reality. -->

<-- Several references say "citation needed." The author will receive credit for the words the citation is provided for. -->

<-- as usual, avoid where possible animal rights sites for these sources—always better to use veterinary, animal ag, government, etc sources. Sites like PCRM, Harvard Public Health, etc are good-->

General Information

Definitions

Cattle are "domesticated quadrupeds held as property or raised for use," or more specifically "bovine animals on a farm or ranch." We use this word reluctantly because of its etymology from property, but related words, as shown below, don't adequately describe our topic, while cattle does.

Bovine is sometimes used as a synonym for cattle, but zoologically means "any of a subfamily (Bovinae) of bovids including oxen, bison, buffalo, and their close relatives."

Cow is sometimes used generically to refer to male and female cattle, but technically is "the mature female of cattle (genus Bos)." The word can also used for females of other species, such as elephants and whales.

<-- use the same MW reference for all definitions, unless good reason not to -->

Calf refers to "the young of the domestic cow." It is also used for the young of related species such as bison, as well as certain other mammals like whales and elephants.

Livestock denotes "animals kept or raised for use or pleasure." It is usually used for farm animals.

Heifer refers to "a young cow, especially one that has not had a calf."

Steer usually means "a male bovine animal and especially a domestic ox (Bos taurus) castrated before sexual maturity." It can also refer to "an ox less than four years old."

Bull means "a male bovine," particularly an uncastrated adult. It is also used to refer to adult males of various other species, such as whales and elephants.

Ox refers to "a domestic bovine mammal (Bos taurus)," or more broadly simply a bovine mammal. It is sometimes used to mean "an adult castrated male domestic ox."

Lineage

Numbers

<-- when referring to numbers slaughtered, link to this table instead of using a footnote. -->

Injustices and Suffering

The injustices inherent in exploiting cattle 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, cattle 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.

As shown below, the injustices and cruelties that cattle must endure are many and often draconian. The life of a dairy cow is particularly egregious because the cycle of artificial insemination, separation from offspring, and mechanical milking repeats for 4 or 5 years until she is slaughtered, often for hamburger meat.

Loss of Life

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).

We have no nutritional need for beef or for cow milk (or any animal product) so denying cattle 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 just a fraction of their natural lifespans. Dairy cows are slaughtered after living 20 percent of a 15-20-year natural lifespan, while cattle used for beef are slaughtered after living less than 7 percent of a 15-20-year natural lifespan.

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. —>

Method 1, etc.

<-- for each of the following cruelties, but only as applicable: to what extent is it performed?; when (what age, repeating?); how painful?; pain relief given?; lasting damage? -->

Mutilations

Dehorning and Disbudding

<-- point out it is performed on cows, not just bulls; try to find out the extent to which this doesn't occur because of selective breeding to eliminate horns. -->

Cows and calves often have their horns removed to prevent them from injuring people or other animals. This procedure is usually done without anesthetic, despite causing acute pain.

Dehorning. This process involves cutting through bone and horn tissue with either a wire, a saw, or a mechanical gouger, which has been shown to be painful. Calves may be in pain for several days or even weeks following the procedure.

Disbudding. In calves under two months of age, the horns have not yet attached to the skull. When the procedure is carried out at this stage, it is called "disbudding." It is usually done with either a hot iron or caustic paste.

Some farmers selectively breed for polled cattle, meaning those without horns. However, this is far from widespread and dehorning and disbudding procedures are still common. In 2007, a USDA report found that cattle were dehorned on 94 percent of American dairy farms.

Castration

Male calves are usually castrated to reduce aggression and prevent reproduction. This may be carried out physically, chemically, or hormonally, though physical methods are most typical. Pain relief is often not used for younger calves. However, studies show that the most common methods of physical castration (rubber ring, Burdizzo, and surgery) all cause acute pain.

Rubber ring method. This involves using an elastic band to prevent blood from flowing into the testicles and scrotum so that they eventually fall off. It is usually used on younger calves and can cause infections like tetanus and blackleg.

Burdizzo. A Burdizzo is a metal clamp used to crush the blood vessels leading to the testicles. This causes the testicles to initially swell and then shrivel.

Surgical castration. This involves making incisions in the scrotum and pulling out the testicles, then cutting the cord containing the blood vessels and spermatic cord. It results in an open wound, meaning there is a risk of infection.

Chemical castration. This means injecting chemicals into the testicular parenchyma to cause permanent damage. Studies suggest it is as painful or even more painful than surgical castration. Wounds take longer to heal and do not heal as well.

Hormonal castration. Usually, this involves injecting immunocontraceptives into the body. It is not common as it is considered less effective than physical methods of castration.

Other 1, etc.

Living Conditions

Feed Lots / CAFO

Mechanical Milking

<-- for how long at a time?; how many times a day?; cover discomfort and infection here, mention mastitis and say it's covered later -->

Other 1, etc.

Denial of Natural Behaviors

Nuturing and Being Nutured

<-- include at least these ideas: Mothers are separated from their calves soon after birth. Cows have strong maternal instincts and have been known to grieve and bellow for weeks after separation. Calves will never know the love of nurturing of their mothers. -->

Sex

Social Behaviours

<-- friendships, grooming, etc, how is it that these are denied? There may not be a strong case here, and if so, omit -->

Other 1, etc.

Reproduction and Breeding

Artificial Insemination

In industrialized countries, artificial insemination is the standard method of impregnating cows. The procedure calls for an entire human arm being inserted into the cow's anus to guide the semen injection gone which is inserted through the cow's vulva.

Semen Collection

Teaser Bull. To artificially inseminate a cow, semen must be collected. This involves a teaser-bull, usually a male, and an involuntary donor bull. In the process, female pheromones are released to get the "donor" bull aroused, compelling him to mount the teaser bull. In the process, the teaser bull often, to put it mildly, suffers tissue damage, as semen is collected in what the industry calls a loving cup.

Electroejaculation. <-- describe the process; how much is it used in comparison to the Teaser Bull method? -->

Veal

<-- point out that veal is a product of the dairy industry and would not exist with it; point out here that sometimes males born to dairy cows are sometimes slaughtered for waste soon after they are born, as veal is increasingly unpopular; -->

A separate article on veal will be available at some future date.

Other 1, etc.

Handling and Transport

Forced Movement

<-- beating, prodding, shocking, etc -->

Other 1, etc.

Cruel Transport

Disease and Mortality

Mastitis

Downers

Other 1, etc.

Humane Labels and Certifications

<— don’t do anything in this section. I’m redoing and will use embeds from other pages —>

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.

Here we address the most common labels and certifications. Some labels and certifications cover some forms of abuse, and others cover different forms of abuse, but none address all forms of abuse. But even if they did, the standards are often not enforced.

Extra: Suggested script for discussing humane labels and certifications

When discussing humane labels and certifications, in addition to providing some of the details presented in this section, conveying the ideas presented in the following script might be useful:

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. However, investigations by Consumer Reports, The Open Philanthropy Project, and numerous others reveal that these certifications and labels are largely meaningless.

These investigations show 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.

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.

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, kindhearted consumers are willing to pay more for products they perceive to be humanely produced.

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.

<-- using a different tactic here from the Pigs article: In general, instead of pointing out specific abuses allowed, just we just discredit the entire label or certification. copied from https://justiceforanimals.org/?curid=88 -->

<-- Oh crap. I just discovered that our Consumer Reports greenerchoices.org links now redirect to a general food labeling site, which is not as comprehensive and doesn't have statements that are as strong. Most don't have accessed dates, I think because they were done before CMOS 17. I checked and I do have access dates stored in the Zotero app, and I will retrofit. This illustrates the need to always have an access date in each citation that links to a web site. -->

<-- FYI, I plan to put the text pertaining to humane labels in templates or a custom namespace and then include them here and in other articles -->

Pasture raised

According to Consumer Reports, “government agencies have no common standard that producers have to meet to make a 'pasture raised' claim on a food label, no definition for ‘pasture,’ and no requirement for the claim to be verified through on-farm inspections.”

Grass fed

The USDA-regulated grass fed label in the United States requires that the bovine is fed grass their entire life. The designation has only to do with feeding and does not prohibit routine cruelties, such as dehorning, castration, confinement, harsh living conditions, rough handling, and lack of veterinary care.

Enforcement is weak, and the animals are still slaughtered at an early age.

Details: Enforcement

Enforcement is weak. The regulation states that "the addition of the grass fed claim for products formulated with grass fed beef is a type of claim that can be approved through a request for blanket approval." This means that an on-site audit is not required. Instead, the producer must submit documentation to FSIS, the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service.

Organic

Some have the perception that organic means humanely raised, but that is not the case. Organic farmers are free to treat their animals no better than non-organic farmers. This is because the USDA, which controls the organic label in the United States, ruled that the label does not allow "broadly prescriptive, stand-alone animal welfare regulations."

Consumer Reports informs us that while there are organic standards relating to animals, they lack clarity and precision, letting producers with poor standards sell animal products.

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."

Whole Foods' Global Animal Partnership (GAP) certified

The Open Philanthropy Project criticized GAP for having weak enforcement and for providing only slight improvements over standard factory farming conditions. For example, according to Consumer Reports, "standards for slaughter do not exist..."

GAP doesn't even publish standards for dairy cows, arguably the most abused of any of the farmed mammals.

American Humane Certified

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

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 cattle experience.

Trait 1, etc.

A Sense of the Future

Environmental Consequences

The breeding, confinement, and slaughter of cattle have a profoundly negative impact on the environment. It accounts for a large percentage of the environmental damage done by animal agriculture

You would think that might have some ramifications for personal action, and it does:

• Researchers from the University of Chicago determined that you reduce your personal contribution to global warming more by changing to a vegan diet than you do by switching to a Prius

• In 2017, over 15,000 scientists from 184 countries issued a "Warning to Humanity," promoting plant-based eating as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

• The Oxford Study was published in 2018 and called the most comprehensive analysis to date of its kind. Joseph Poore, who led the research said "A vegan diet is probably the single biggest way to reduce your impact on planet Earth"—"It is far bigger than cutting down on your flights or buying an electric car.”

Global Warming

A United Nations study in 2006, Livestock's Long Shadow, said that livestock accounts for 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but a study by World Watch Institute three years later said the U.N. report failed to consider some of the factors, and put the figure at 51%.

Even at the lower number, animal agriculture contributes more to global warming than all cars, trucks, trains, buses, airplanes, and ships combined—more than the entire transportation sector, which the EPA pegs at 14% globally.

Land Use

Deforestation

Eutrophication

Species Extension

Other, etc.

Human Health, Nutrition

Food Safety

Food Safety Topic, etc.

<-- each topic could be meat or milk related, or a single topic could relate to both. -->

Deseases and Conditions =

Disease or Condition Risk Topic 1, etc.

<-- each topic could be meat or milk related, or a single topic could relate to both. -->

Animal Protein Risks

All animal protein, including the protein found in beef and cow milk, carries risks that are not associated with plant protein. A review by Dr. Sofia Ochoa cites 42 studies showing that animal protein:

• 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 Cattle Production

Worker Injustice 1, etc

Community Injustice 1, etc

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.