Animal Care and Use: Case Study
The focus of discussion in this paper is part A. This part features the proposal by professor XYZ to test the effect of extreme nutrient deprivation on fat metabolism and muscles in young pigs at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% grades, to develop a better grower diet for the pork industry. I would disapprove of this study owing to the scientific non-importance of the study, the potential of causing a high level of distress to young pigs through nutritional deprivation for up to two months, and the sentience (consciousness) of the animals.
An essential aspect of the proposed study is the need to maintain the diets of pigs at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% until the death of those on the most impoverished diet. Professor XYZ estimates that this period shall be 60 days (two months). In essence, the study features the process of offering nutrient-deficient diets to young pigs at different grades. The young pigs need adequate nutrients and diets for appropriate development. Professor XYZ proposes to deprive the young pigs of vital nutrients to determine the effect that such deprivation would have on fat metabolism and muscle. The provision of nutrient-deficient diets is likely to undermine the development and wellbeing of the animals. Animal rights advocates argue that animals have a right to possession of their existence and that the avoidance of suffering is an essential consideration for their wellbeing (Cochrane 298-299). Depriving the young pigs of vital nutrients would cause them physical suffering – malnutrition, starvation, emaciation, and death. Depriving the animals of essential nutrients until death would be cruel treatment. Mainly, this is primarily because professor XYZ proposes to use young pigs in the experiment.
The stated objective in the proposed study to develop better grower diets for the pork industry does not necessitate or fit the plan to deprive young pigs of nutrients. This objective is non-urgent, has little scientific importance, and promises little benefit for the society. A third important aspect to consider in the case is the sentience of pigs. Sentience concerns the capacity to have feelings. Research has demonstrated evidence for sophisticated cognitive concepts in a broad range of non-human animals, particularly mammals. Broom (14) notes research findings that pigs, alongside other animals such as parrots, cattle, and dogs, have a significant ability for cognition, recognition, cognitive awareness, emotions, feelings, and assessment awareness. Researchers have observed the use of information from a mirror among pigs and other animals (Broom 8). These findings illustrate the potential of pigs, like human beings, to have the capacity for self-awareness and the ability to feel their states. It implies the ability of pigs to feel the pain and suffering under the proposed study than the extreme deprivation of nutrients and starvation shall cause. The implication is that the pigs are likely to be aware of, feel, and experience the cruelty of processes in the proposed study. In this way, the proposed study features a significant level of brutality to the young pigs, especially considering that professor XYZ intends to deprive them of nutrients until those in the poorest diet die.
An alternative way to achieve the objective in the study without causing extreme suffering to young pigs is possible. Professor XYZ could try controlled experiments in which there is a minimum risk for the health and wellbeing of the young pigs to achieve the same objective. For instance, Professor XYZ can try the provision of different nutrients or diet types to assess which diet or nutrient combinations are most suitable for the pork industry.
Works Cited
Broom, Donald. Considering Animals’ Feelings: Précis of Sentience and Animal Welfare. Animal Sentience, 2014.
Cochrane, Alisdair. Animal Rights and Animal Experiments: An Interest-based Approach. Res Publica vol. 13, 2007, pp. 293-318.