Ideas within the animal welfare science arena have evolved continuously throughout the last 30 years, and will continue to do so. This paper outlines some of these developments. These included reformulation of the five freedoms concept into the five domains of potential welfare compromise. This accommodated weaknesses in the former by distinguishing between the physical/functional and the mental factors that contribute to an animal's welfare state. This development reflected a rising scientific acceptance that the mental experiences of animals were legitimate foci for study and highlighted that what the animal itself experiences represents its welfare status. Initially, most concepts of animal welfare emphasised predominantly negative subjective experiences, such as thirst, hunger and pain, and negative affective states or feelings including anxiety, fear and boredom, but today positive experiences or emotions such as satiety, vitality, reward, contentment, curiosity and playfulness are also considered to be important. During the same period, the focus shifted from evaluating the impacts of individual mental subjective experiences or emotions towards seeking a more comprehensive, multifactorial understanding. The five domains concept was specifically designed to achieve this. Subsequent notions about quality of life (QoL) had the same objective, and emphasised the importance of positive experiences. However, some approaches to QoL assessment relied heavily on empathetic speculation about what animals may experience subjectively and this raised concerns about inappropriate anthropomorphic projections. Such pitfalls may be minimised when informed personnel rigorously apply objectively based methodologies to QoL assessments limited to a short time frame. It is clear that both formal and somewhat less formal QoL assessments of this type are already used to guide decision-making about the ongoing care and therapeutic management of animals on a daily basis. However, application of the recently introduced concepts of 'a life not worth living', 'a life worth avoiding', 'a life worth living' and 'a good life' is problematical, because extending the assessment time scale to the whole of life is attended by a number of as yet unresolved difficulties. Accordingly, their value in the practical management of animals is limited so that, at present, reliance on the minimum standards and recommendations for best practice outlined in codes of practice or welfare will continue to be necessary and worthwhile. Nevertheless, these concepts have value in providing a contextual theme that strongly focuses attention on the promotion of a lifelong QoL with an overall balance that is positive.

No abstract

The prevalence of radiographic signs of degenerative joint disease (including appendicular osteoarthritis) among a hospital population of 218 cats was 33.9 per cent (74 cats), and the prevalence of signs of appendicular joint osteoarthritis was 16.5 per cent (36 cats). Half of the cases of appendicular joint osteoarthritis had no apparent radiographic or historical cause, and clinical signs of lameness were recorded in only six of them, all of which had an apparent radiographic cause. The 74 cats with radiographic signs of degenerative joint disease were on average significantly older than the 144 cats in which there were no radiographic signs of the disease.

Animal welfare is a state within the animal and a scientific perspective provides methodologies for evidence-based assessment of an animal's welfare. A simplistic definition of animal welfare might be how the animal feels now. Affective experiences including emotions, are subjective states so cannot be measured directly in animals, but there are informative indirect physiological and behavioural indices that can be cautiously used to interpret such experiences. This review enunciates several key science-based frameworks for understanding animal welfare. The biological functioning and affective state frameworks were initially seen as competing, but a recent more unified approach is that biological functioning is taken to include affective experiences and affective experiences are recognised as products of biological functioning, and knowledge of the dynamic interactions between the two is considered to be fundamental to managing and improving animal welfare. The value of these two frameworks in understanding the welfare of group-housed sows is reviewed. The majority of studies of the welfare of group-housed sows have employed the biological functioning framework to infer compromised sow welfare, on the basis that suboptimal biological functioning accompanies negative affective states such as sow hunger, pain, fear, helplessness, frustration and anger. Group housing facilitates social living, but group housing of gestating sows raises different welfare considerations to stall housing, such as high levels of aggression, injuries and stress, at least for several days after mixing, as well as subordinate sows being underfed due to competition at feeding. This paper highlights the challenges and potential opportunities for the continued improvement in sow management through well-focused research and multidisciplinary assessment of animal welfare. In future the management of sentient animals will require the promotion of positive affective experiences in animals and this is likely to be a major focus for animal welfare science activity in the early twenty-first century.

Fetal bovine serum (FBS) is a common supplement to in vitro culture media. A workshop was organized to discuss whether or not fetuses might suffer when blood is withdrawn, and to discuss serum replacement methods. When bovine fetuses are exposed after slaughter of the dam, they can suffer only if they inflate their lungs with air and increase their blood oxygen to levels compatible with awareness. Preventing fetuses from breathing air or killing them by an efficient method, according to clearly defined safeguards, ensures that fetal blood collection is humane. Since serum is a supplement of unknown composition, which could be contaminated with unwanted factors, there are scientific and safety reasons for omitting FBS from culture media. Several media have been developed in which minimal or no animal derived components are present. Also, different cell types have been adapted to serum-free media. As yet, no standard serum free media are present, and each cell type requires its own medium composition. Among other recommendations, the establishment of a public database with information on cell types and their serum-free medium composition is proposed.