Page 124 - The Welfare of Cattle

breedInG and WeLfare 101

transgenic animals has existed for over 30 years. Irrespective of the trans-generational implementa-
tion of biotechnology in animal agriculture, the general public is severely uninformed regarding
the role of biotechnology in their food (Hallman et al., 2016). Public acceptance of biotechnology
varies across cultures and continents, and many criticisms of biotechnology include the perception
that biotechnology is either intervening in “nature’s order” or that the product of the biotechnology
presents a risk to the environment and the humans that consume the product. The human response
to products of biotechnology may be influenced by cultural issues or affluence and the level of atten-
tion to biotechnology and food.
In his 1988 paper “Genetic Engineering Biotechnology: Animal Welfare and Environmental
Concerns,” Michael Fox describes the development of “super animals” that are genetically engi-
neered to create cattle weighing over 10,000 pounds, pigs that are 12-feet long and 5-feet high
through the use of genetic engineering. Contrary to his 1988 predictions, the use of biotechnology
has not created “super animals” and scientists are not “playing God”; conversely, many biotechno-
logical advancements have been developed and refined to optimize the animal’s biological system.
However, this imagery propagates the misconceptions regarding the role of biotechnology in agri-
culture, and has been recently depicted in the movie “Okja,” a story about a genetically modified
(GM) hippo-sized pig developed out of corporate greed to provide more food to more people across
the globe. While the story is fictional, the premise behind the film propagates the myth that humans
are utilizing biotechnology for corporate greed and without regard for the animal. Increased pro-
duction per unit of land based on larger animals is possible, but more production units of smaller
sized animals may also increase production per unit of land. The misrepresentation of how biotech-
nology is integrated into our food system and the public lack of understanding of how agricultural
biotechnology benefits the individual consumer impacts consumer acceptance of these practices.
Public acceptance of biotechnology in agriculture varies across continents, countries, and
cultures. Northern and central European countries do not believe the benefits of biotechnology
outweigh the risks of implementing them, while most of the public will accept transgenic food
in southern European countries (Costa-Font et al., 2008). Attitudes toward biotechnology are less
negative in the United States and Canada compared to European attitudes (Gaskell et al., 1999),
and countries (e.g., China) in which the middle class is growing and there is an increasing need to
produce more high-quality protein and use of devoted governmental resources to further develop
agricultural biotechnologies (Tizard et al., 2016). Attitudes and acceptance of biotechnologies
appear to be influenced by the country’s need for food safety and security. This suggests that even
if there are opponents to the implementation of agricultural biotechnology, their basic needs to
establish food security outweigh any concerns about the risks and ethical implications of utilizing
these new technologies.
Biotechnology and society. There are at least five overarching societal concerns regarding the
role of biotechnology in animal agriculture. The concerns are stated as follows: (1) can anything
theoretically go wrong with any of the technologies; (2) are food and other products of animal bio-
technology, whether genetically engineered or not, or from clones, substantially different from those
derived using traditional management of food animals; (3) what are the effects of biotechnologies on
the environment; (4) how do animal biotechnologies affect animal welfare; and (5) do governmental
regulatory agencies have the expertise and capacity to fully assess the risks associated with imple-
mentation of new biotechnologies? Animal biotechnology has enhanced production animal agricul-
ture and aquaculture including the development of transgenic salmon soon to be commercialized.
The question is whether these scientific advancements will be approved by governmental regulatory
agencies and whether they will be accepted by society.
EnviroPig. Judicious implementation of biotechnology has the potential to enhance animal
welfare, protect the environment and promote the overall sustainability of animal agriculture.
However, commercial adoption of these biotechnologies is slow. The Precautionary Principle dic-
tates that a new methodology or product not be implemented on a wide scale without intense scrutiny