Thoughts on Using Animals for Food

Temple Grandin
Dept. of Animal Science
Colorado State University

Abstract

In 1978, the first GMO was insulin. By creating a new form of life, cattle and pig slaughter was no longer required to obtain life saving insulin. Maybe in the distant future, raising animals for food might become obsolete. This may occur when genetic engineering methods for creating totally novel animals and plants becomes reality. Then the ethnical questions would become much greater than raising livestock. Animal welfare issues on today's farms can be corrected. Environmental issues should be addressed by integrating crops with livestock and better grazing management. The best soils in the U.S. were created by grazing bison. The animals are part of the land.

When I first started in the cattle industry in the early 1970'S, I had many concerns about the ethics of killing animals for food. At this time, a 4-H leader named Billie Hart was concerned about the members in her club, who raised steers and pigs. Her students became upset when they sold the animals they had carefully raised for slaughter. Billie explained to her students that their steers and pigs provided lifesaving insulin for diabetics. Slaughter of their animal was justified to provide a lifesaving pharmaceutical. Eli Lilly had a brochure that showed that each steer provided a ten-day supply of insulin and each pig provided a five-clay supply. Pancreas glands were harvested at slaughter plants and shipped to Eli Lilly. Learning that lifesaving pharmaceuticals came from animals justified killing them for food.

For several years, I felt at peace using animals for food and I was highly motivated to improve cattle handling. There were some ranchers and cattle feeders in Arizona who provided good living conditions for their animals and careful low stress handling. However, in the 1970'S and 1980's, cattle handling was ATROCIOUS in many places. I viewed that as a solvable problem because a few people handled cattle well. Arizona feedlots had shade and the desert conditions kept the pens dry. Early in my career, I was not exposed to cattle slogging around in mud. The living conditions were good. Cattle handling problems could be fixed.

Recombinant DNA Insulin

A few years later during the late 70'S, I was shocked to learn that scientists had figured out how to replace beef and pork insulin with insulin made by genetically modified bacteria (Genetech, 1978; Keen et al., 1980; Johnson, 1983). This was the first GMO (genetically modified organism) before the word GMO got invented. In 1978 it was called recombinant DNA. This made me think deeply. To replace lifesaving insulin from cattle and pigs, a new form of life was now required. The first recombinant DNA insulin came on the market in the early 1980s. To eliminate the need for killing an animal to save people, a new form of life had to be created. I let my mind wander. Someday in the distant future, scientists will completely crack the genetic code. We will be able to make any plant or animal with computer programming and writing new DNA code. When it becomes possible to create totally new animals or plants, this will create an ethical dilemma that may be much more serious than killing animals for food. In the early 1980's, I thought when slaughterhouses become obsolete, the greatest ethnical questions will begin. We will have the power to create any form of life that we desire. Today scientists are growing meat in the lab, but science is still not able to create totally new types of animals, by using a computer to write DNA code. Most GMO's today consist of plants or animals where new genetic material is added to existing plants and animals.

Animal Welfare Has Improved

Handling of cattle and pigs has greatly improved since the 1970S and 1980s (Grandin; 2000,2005,2006). A major driving force since the year 2000 has been major buyers such as McDonald's and Wendy's. They began the drive to improve the conditions for farm animals. Today many major retailers and restaurants have animal welfare standards. Conditions today are much better.

Learning About Broader issues

Early in my career in the seventies and eighties, I had no knowledge of environmental concerns about animal agriculture. As my knowledge increased, my thoughts have further developed. Animal welfare issues may be easier to remedy (Grandin, 2015). The environmental issues may be more difficult. When I read about methane emissions and high water usage associated with animal agriculture, I became increasingly concerned about environmental issues. Further digging into the data showed that the famous paper titled "Livestock's Long Shadow Overestimated Emissions from Livestock" (Gerber et al., 2007). Today transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas. Pitesky et al. (2009) analyzed the data and found that the authors had failed to include the entire life cycle of the car. This would include making the steel and refining the gasoline. For cattle, the entire life cycle was included. Some people have suggested making vast wildlife preserves. What they forget is that wildlife such as bison, deer, and elk also emit methane.

I Learned That Grazing Animals are Part of the Land

A major problem in science is knowledge silos. There is very little interaction and sharing of literature between crop science academia and animal science academia. Two years ago, when I was in my late 60'S, our Animal Science Department at Colorado State University had the wisdom to invite a crop scientist to one of our livestock meetings. His talk totally changed how I think about grazing animals and the environment. I learned from him that the best soils in the U.S. in Iowa and Illinois were created by herds of grazing bison. A light bulb went off in my head. Grazing animals are a natural part of the land. Livestock grazing done right with modern rotational grazing will improve the land (Pananostasis, 2009). Grazing done wrong can wreck land. I have seen the results of both good and bad grazing because I have travelled in rural areas in every state. Crops and grazing animals together should be used as an integrated system, which will also improve soil health and biodiversity (Carvalho et ai, 2014; Borer et al., 2014; Moraes et al., 2014; Broom et al., 2013; Lemaire et al., 2014). This would be much better for the environment than monoculture of soybeans and corn. Crop rotation with livestock and cover crops will reduce the use of chemicals. I am not in favor of banning chemicals on crops but methods that would reduce their use would be beneficial to the environment. When I talked privately to about ten crop scientists at a recent plant disease conference, they all told me that we must have greater diversity. There needs to be more rotation of different kinds of crops. Rotation of the right crops will also reduce plant diseases. I learned from discussions with innovative farmers that grazing livestock as part of a crop rotation system improved both soil health and they were able to use fewer chemicals. In conclusion, to justify using animals for food, I had to learn a tiny amount of crop science. The bottom line is animals are part of the land.

What is Sustainability?

Many people argue what is sustainability? It is the hot topic today. I got to thinking, maybe it is better to state what is definitely not sustainable. Everyone would agree that the following practices are not sustainable.

Depleting a water aquifer that does not renew or renews slowly (Taylor and Nel, 2014).
Starving animals and neglecting their health (Dawkins, 2016; Grandin, 2015)
Poor welfare caused by a high percentage of lame animals or sores and injuries on animals (Grandin, 2015). Monitor animal welfare outcome measures (Lioch et aI., 2015; Wray et al., 2003, 2007; Velarde et aI., 2012; Saraiva et al., 2016).
Abuse by people such as beating
Overgrazing a pasture until it is a barren bare ground
Contamination of ground water with chemicals
Polluting a river by letting manure run into it.
Failure to stop loss of topsoil

I will let you ponder about the things I have said in this short paper. Over the years, my views have changed. Animal welfare problems can be corrected. The next challenge is integrating animals and crops. Some farmers are already doing this. This trend needs to continue. I am past retirement age now. The students today will have greater issues to face. Maybe they will have an app for their phone where they can play with DNA and make any animal they want.

References

Broom, D.M., Gaindo, F.A. and Murqueitio, E. (2013) Sustainable efficient livestock production, high biodiversity and good welfare of animals, Proceedings ofthe Royal Society of Biological Sciences, 280.

Borer, E.T. et al. (2014) Herbivores and nutrients control grassland plant diversity via light limitation, Nature 508:517-520 doi:10.1038/nature13144.

Carvalho, N., Luis, J., Guilherme-Silva, R., Leidivan-Almeida, F. et al. (2014) Croppasture rotation: A strategy to reduce soil greenhouse gas emissions in Brazilian Cerrada, Agrlc, Eco. Enviro. 183:167-176.

Dawkins, M.S. (2016) Animal welfare and efficient farming: Is Conflict Inevitable? Anim. Prod. Sd. 57(2)201-208 .

Genentech (1978) First successful laboratory production of human insulin announced, www.gene.com (accessed September 20,2017).

Gerber, P. et al, (2007) Livestock's Long Shadow FAO Animal Production and Health Division.

Grandin, T. (2006) Progress and challengers in animal handling and slaughter in the u.s. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 100:129-139.

Grandin, T. (2000) Effect of animal welfare audits of slaughter plants by a major fast food company on cattle handling and stunning practices, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 216:848-851.

Grandin, T. (2005) Maintenance of good animal welfare standards in beef slaughter plants by use of auditing programs, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 226:370-373.

Grandin, T. (2015) Improving Animal Welfare: A Practical Approach, CABllnternational Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK.

Johnson, 1.5. (1983) Human insulin from recombinant DNA Technology, Sdence, 17:632-637.

Keen, H. et al. (1980) Human insulin produced by recombinant DNA technology, safety hypoglycaemic potency in healthy men, The Lancet 316:398-401.

Lemaire, G., Franzluebbers, A., Carvalho, P.C.F. and Dedieu, B. (2014) Integrated crop livestock systems: Strategies to achieve synergy between agricultural production and environmental quality, Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 190:4-8.

Lionch, P., King, LM., Clarke, K.A., Downer, J.M, and Green, L.E. (2015) A systematic review of animal based indicators of sheep welfare on farm to market, during transport, and qualitative appraisal of their validity and feasibility for use in UK abattoirs, Vet. J. 206(3):289-297.

Moraes, A., Carvalho, P.C.F., Lustosa, S.B.C., Lang, C.R., and Deiss, L. (2014) Research on integrated crop livestock systems in Brazil, Revista Ciencia Agronomka, 45(5).

Papanastasis, V.P. (2009) Restoration of degraded grazing lands through grazing management: Can it work? Restoration Ecology, 17:441-445.

Saraiva, S., Saraiva, C. and G. Stilwell (2016) Feather condition and clinical scores as indicators of broiler welfare at the slaughter house, Research in Veterinary Science.

Pitesky,M.E., Mitloehner, F".M., and Stackhouse, K.R. (2009) Chapter 1, Clearing the Air: Livestock's Contrlbqtlon to Climate Change, Advances in Agronomy, 103:1-40.

Taylor, R. and Nel, L.H. (2014) When wells run dry, Nature 516:179-180.

Velarde, A., and Dalmau, A. (2012) Animal welfare assessment at slaughter in Europe: Moving from inputs to outputs, Meat Science 92:244-251.

Whay, H.R., Main, D.C.J., Green, L.E. and Webster, A.J.E. (2003) Assessment ofthe welfare of dairy cattle using animal based measurements: Direct observations and investigation of farm records, Veterinary Record 153:197-202

Whay, H.R., Leeb, c., Main, D.C.J., Green, L.E. and Webster, A.J.F. (2007) Preliminary assessment of finishing pig welfare using animal-based measurements, Animal Welfare, 16:209-211.

Click here to return to the Homepage for more information on animal behavior, welfare, and care.