Author
Tutor
Course
Date
Introduction
The importance of food sufficiency in any country cannot be gainsaid as far as the health of the citizens is concerned. It is widely recognized that the ability of people to create wealth is highly dependent on their health. In the recent times, animal products have occupied a large part of the people’s diets. As much as many people enjoy animal products, few people pay any attention to the ways in which the products have been produced. This is especially as pertaining to the rearing of animals. These are some of the concerns that Peter Singer and Jim Mason address in the book, “The Ethics of What We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter”. This book balances and integrates the concerns as to the lives of the animals with the need to think, as well as live in planetary harmony with the ecological systems. In recognition of the fact that the consumers drive the market, Singer and Mason call unto people to make dietary adjustments. The book counsels vegetarianism, but acknowledges that many people may find going vegan too large a step (Singer and Mason, 279). In essence, Singer and Mason appeal to people that they become conscientious omnivores who will be ready to support sustainable, humane, as well as marketable family farms. Singer and Mason, therefore, provoke the continuing debate pertaining to animal welfare in factory farms.
Factory farming refers to the practice of raising numerous animals in high density and close confinement units with the aim of producing eggs, milk and meat in the cheapest, most efficient, as well as fasted possible way for human consumption. The industrial operations are, in essence, corporate agribusiness institutions that are also known as CAFOs an acronym for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. In the United States, more than ten billion animals are bred and killed every year for food. These include 9 billion chickens, 100 million pigs, 250 million turkeys, and 35 million cows (D’Silva, 56). It is noteworthy that, a large number of these animals are not bred in small family farms rather they are raised in vast agricultural facilities known as factory farms. Recent times have seen a decrease or reduction in the number of animal farms in the United States. However, this does not mean that less animal products are being consumed than in the past (D’Silva, 67). Rather, it means that less space is used to rear and bred these animals. Research shows that today, one worker today supplies over 90 consumers with meat products. The principal or key four food companies in United States produce 73% of sheep, 81% of cows, 50% of Chicken and 57% of pigs. Factory farming started in 1920 after vitamin A and D were discovered. When these vitamins were blended with animal feed, the farm animals were able to grow without exercise or sunlight (D’Silva, 78). In essence, this allowed for more efficient production of animals throughout the year. The population growth since 1920s led to a tremendous increase in meat eating, which consequently led to widespread factory farming to the point of dominating the meat production industry. It is worth noting that the main idea behind factory farming, whereby it operates under the notion that is it less costly to breed animals in confined units using assembly-line techniques than managing them in open and large areas. The increased competition in the meat industry has given the farmers an incentive to incorporate the most cost-effective techniques of raising their animals, all in an effort to stay in business (D’Silva, 99). In cutting the cost of production, factory farming has proved to be notoriously neglectful of the welfare of animals, especially as far as chickens, turkeys, pigs, and cows are concerned. This not only endangers the health of the consumers but is also detrimental to the lives of the animals in various ways.
Chicken in a crowded factory farm
Source: http://www.belsandia.com/factory-farming.html
First, it is worth noting that the tightly confined units hold an excessive number of farm animals. These units are mostly metal buildings that do not allow any access to fresh air, sunlight or vegetation. In addition, the animals are prevented from carrying out their normal behaviors such as moving around. More often than not, the animal farms hold such a large number of animals to such an extent that they are unable to turn around so as to satisfy natural inclinations pertaining to self-grooming. The confinement of animals in such restricted areas tends to encourage cannibalism in chickens, turkeys and even pigs. More often than not, the farmers clip the beaks of poultry to reduce their cannibalism (Nagaraja and Chengappa, 47).
In addition, such restricted areas have been seen to allow the rapid spread of diseases and pathogens, thanks to the congestion and the unsanitary living conditions. These dense and confined environments are ideal breeding grounds for contagious diseases and lethal viruses. It is noteworthy that the virus spreads easily and faces little or no resistance, thanks to the gene-manipulated uniformity that the confined animals incorporate. In most cases, the factory farms undergo standardization so as to enhance efficiency. Monoculture of feed crops and animals are established to be unified via gene manipulation so as to assist in the production of consistent yield every year (Nagaraja and Chengappa, 53). This is because low variety and diversity of the agricultural products enhances the ease of regulation and management of food quality. In addition, the confined factory farm animals usually lie or stand on their own manure, or even next to sick or dead animals. These animals may be having largely untreated wounds since the farmers consider veterinary care as an extra and unnecessary cost for the animals.
Another concern about factory farming pertains to the feeds that these animals ingest. It is worth noting that genetic engineering, growth hormones, as well as other breeding programs are incorporated in an effort to bring consistent and desirable animal anatomies, as well as enhance the speed of growth of the animals (Carnell, 67). Unfortunately, the potent chemical cocktail is known to fatten only the parts for which the consumers pay. In addition, vast amounts of pesticides and antibiotics are used in fighting the multiplication of bacteria and disease-causing pathogens. This is especially because the farm animals get sick often, thanks to the humidity and dirt in their pens, as well as the crowded conditions (Carnell, 89). The farm animal feed is, with no doubt, a far cry from the animal feed to which such animals would naturally be entitled. This feed incorporates enormous amounts of rich soy and corn, animal waste, plastics, metals, chemicals, drugs, as well as rendered parts or components of other animals, which may or may not be of the same species. These feeds are known to cause liver and digestive problems to the animals, which is essentially a torturous affair. It is also worth noting that as much as the high-yield soy and corn come at a low price, they have low nutritional value. The remains of other animals and antibiotics, as well as hormones, are responsible for the quick fattening up of animals for the market. Antibiotics are used just to sustain the animals before they are butchered, while hormones are injected to the animals to bring them to market size. However, these hormones and antibiotics are known to weaken the immune system of animals to disease-causing pathogens thereby affecting their capacity to fight bacteria (Johnson, 68). It is worth noting that these chemicals are consequently transferred to the bodies of consumers, and incorporates the same effects. Carcass meal has also been acknowledged as one of the key contributors to the spread of the mad cow disease. This is because diseased animals are kept in the food chain when their remains are fed to other cows or animals. It is worth noting that the mad cow disease poses severe danger to human beings when they ingest the meat of infected animals.
On the same note, the immune system of the animals is extremely weakened by overbreeding. This is also propelled by the growth hormones that propel the creation of weakened bodies of the animals. This amounts to animal cruelty especially because the legs of the animals are unable to support or carry the unnatural heavy weight of the animals’ upper bodies.
In addition, one cannot ignore the ammonia levels to which the factory farm animals are exposed. It is noteworthy that the level of ammonia in factory farms is not supposed to go beyond 35 parts per million (ppm), so that workers can spend fifteen minutes in the animal pen without the threat of lung problems. However, research shows that the levels of ammonia in factory farms are, more often than not, twice the set amount. As much as the studies have mainly concentrated on the effects of these levels of ammonia on the workers, it goes without saying that the animals are also affected (Arson and Animal Welfare Institute, 34). The high amounts of toxic gases and ammonia in the animals houses often causes severe respiratory diseases, especially because the animals spends a long time in such environment without the privilege of ever breathing fresh air. It is noteworthy that this cruelty to animals causes enormous mortality rates for chickens. Unfortunately, farm industry calculations have deemed it essential to ignore the mortality and bred the biggest birds (Arson and Animal Welfare Institute, 44). On the same note, 70 percent of pigs in factory farms suffer from pneumonia by the time they get to the slaughterhouse. In fact, more than 25 percent of pigs are said to suffer from mange, thanks to the filthy living conditions. Unfortunately, many farmers would deem it, not only inappropriate and unnecessary to uplift the living conditions of the animals but also to provide them with veterinary care, as such a thing would eat into their profits. In essence, most animals are left by themselves without any treatment when they are sick.
Cow infected with mastitis as a result of hormones
Source: HYPERLINK “http://www.belsandia.com/factory-farming.html” http://www.belsandia.com/factory-farming.html
Evidently, factory farming is extremely harmful to the comfort of the animals. As much as the farmers are concerned with the profit, it is imperative that they are concerned about the animals’ welfare. Giving them conducive environments to live in, appropriate feeds, and enough space to enhance their comfort would be imperative (Herscovici, 89). With the above points in mind, it becomes apparent why Singer and Mason are asking people to go slow on meat and animal products, and turn to vegetables for their food. Unfortunately, such calls are likely to go unheeded or produce minimal results. Many consumers are unwilling to give up meat products for vegetables.
In conclusion, factory farming has come in handy as one of the most appropriate ways for attaining food sufficiency in the United States. Many people have always had a deep liking for animal products. However, few people pay attention or are concerned as to the origin of the animal products. Unfortunately, most of these animals are bred in factory farms, where they undergo extreme torture before they reach the market. They are confined in small spaces where they do not have space to turn, which affects their growth. In addition, they are fed with cheap and iron-rich feeds that also incorporate drugs and plastics. These feeds weaken the immunity of the animals. Moreover, the crowding of animals in small pens exposes them to high levels of toxic gases such as ammonia. Research shows that these gases cause the death of numerous chickens in the United States (Nagaraja and Chengappa, 67). In addition, a vast number of pigs suffer from relentless liver and lungs conditions by the time they face the butcher, thanks to these gases. Unfortunately, many farmers would be unwilling to uplift the standards of these animals or even treat them for the ailments since this would have a bearing on their profitability.
Works cited
Singer, Peter and Mason, Jim. The Ethics of What We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter. New York: Rodale Books. 2007. Print
D’Silva, Joyce. “Faster, Cheaper, Sicker,” New Scientist, 2003. Print
T. G. Nagaraja and M. M. Chengappa, “Liver Abscessed in Feedlot Cattle: A Review,” Journal of Animal Science, 1998
Johnson, Andrew. Factory farming. New York: B. Blackwell, 1991. Print
Carnell, Paul. Alternatives to factory farming. New York: Earth Resources Research, 1983. Print
Herscovici, Alan. Second nature: the animal-rights controversy. New York: CBC Enterprises/Les Entreprises Radio-Canada, 1985
Carson, Rachel and Animal Welfare Institute. Factory farming: the experiment that failed : a compilation of articles and photographs. New York: Animal Welfare Institute, 1987
(Herscovici) (Carnell) (Johnson) (Nagaraja and Chengappa) (D’Silva)
