The Impact of Veganism/Vegetarianism on Animal Welfare Policy

Azrak, Lama El; Charlebois, Sylvain

doi:10.5296/jpmr.v6i2.17750

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From an economic perspective, it is important to consider that government intervention through regulation and information policies are needed to create awareness of the characteristics of products of animal origin and to enforce measures that contribute to reducing the number of animals affected by the meat industry and improving their quality of life (Azrak and Charlebois 2020). Moreover, people must understand that the dietary choices of a few individuals have no impact on the harm generated by the production and consumption of animal products; a handful or people who stop eating chicken, for example, will in no way affect the number of chickens produced or prevent harm (Bruckner 2020).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, people must understand that the dietary choices of a few individuals have no impact on the harm generated by the production and consumption of animal products; a handful or people who stop eating chicken, for example, will in no way affect the number of chickens produced or prevent harm (Bruckner 2020). Other measures are required to ensure the welfare of production animals, such as implemented and strictly enforced codes to ensure that industry standards are met (Azrak and Charlebois 2020). Regulatory reforms and legislation governing the production, transport, and slaughter of farm animals could contribute, especially if accompanied by inspection and certification programs, training courses for handlers, initiatives of corporate social responsibility for restaurants that include inspections to ensure that suppliers comply with standards and, finally, improving the technology in production systems by, for example, adding electronic feeding systems for gestating sows and providing environmentally-enriched cages for egglaying hens, to mention just two (Fraser 2008).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Veganism and animal welfare, scientific, ethical, and philosophical arguments

Mota-Rojas,

Whittaker,

De la Vega

et al. 2023

J. Anim. Behav. Biometeorol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The justification for this review article is to understand the position of vegans and those individuals who consume food of animal origin from an unbiased perspective but with a grounding in scientific evidence. This will provide people who eat meat with scientific and ethical arguments to defend their alimentary autonomy in the context of the moral conflict that has emerged in societies regarding the consumption of meat and animal products, which is criticized –sometimes even attacked– by activists, ovolactovegetarians, or vegetarians with alimentary habits that stress ethical and moral respect for animals. These individuals refuse to eat meat and animal products but sometimes show disrespect for those who do. In recent decades, veganism and vegetarianism have reached an apogee in some western societies where they are often considered a healthy option for humans that simultaneously fosters animal and environmental welfare. While those diets may provide numerous benefits, they can also entail health risks by failing to provide balance and necessary dietary supplements. Various researchers concur that they are not appropriate for pregnant women, children, or carnivorous or omnivorous pets. Our review of scientific articles in favor and against dietary regimens that lack protein of animal origin leads to the conclusion that these dietary changes, on their own, do not reduce animal suffering or the contamination generated by the meat, dairy, and poultry industries. Finally, it is important to consider that, despite the popular opinion that vegetarianism and veganism are healthy diet alternatives, the diet must be individualized and well-balanced according to each stage of their life cycle.

show abstract

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%