| Survey 1 |
|
Pain and Suffering
|
Causing unnecessary suffering to the animal is unacceptable, even more having effective methods for the same purpose (257, M, SC). I believe that castration is not the problem, but the pain that animals feel (161, M, SC). As a meat consumer I would be reassured knowing that the animal’s suffering has been minimized (376, F, SC+PC). Only with the use of medication to relieve pain, even so partially acceptable. The postoperative period is unlikely to be well done (186, M, SC). Minimization does not extinguish the animal’s pain, therefore, I consider this practice of castration unacceptable, even with the use of medications to minimize animal suffering, regardless of the associated costs (420, F, SC+PC).
|
|
Ethical and Animal Welfare Concerns
|
Nowadays, with so many techniques and the advancement of science, it is unacceptable that medieval procedures are still practiced! (258, M, SC). Every life is important, the animal supports us, the least to do is to treat it with respect and minimize its suffering (311, F, SC+PC). Animal welfare should be a priority, since we already use them as food. Their time in life should be as dignified and painless as possible (51, F, IC). I think that the food industry should seek new solutions to these issues mentioned above. Unfortunately, these issues are rarely considered and the financial aspects are valued at the expense of the animals’ quality of life (87, M, IC).
|
|
Impact on Cost of Meat for Consumers
|
Society must understand that the implementation of better treatment conditions for animals must be shared by all. If we are consumers, we are also responsible and we have to assume that (351, M, SC+PC). Regardless of the final cost, we should think about animals first, as it is cruel to castrate them like this. Those who want to consume meat must pay the price, because the animals cannot “pay the price’ (351, M, SC+PC). I think it is fair to increase the price to reduce animal suffering (416, M, SC+PC). I wouldn’t mind paying extra for something that will improve the quality of the meat and avoid pain in the animal (312, F, SC+PC). With the current economy, we do not want to pay more than we are used to, but considering the fact that the animal will not suffer pain, I believe we can pay more (49, F, IC). I would like to pay more to stop a practice that causes pain to animals. But I think it is important not to raise the price too much, to allow poor families to consume meat (13, F, CI). Priorities need to be weighed. Rising pork costs hurt the poorest (29, M, IC). Poor people have no income to support price increases (32, M, IC). If there is a big difference in price, it can make the product inaccessible to part of the population (52, F, IC). I believe that the welfare of the animal must be highly taken into account and I wouldn’t mind paying extra for it. However, I am aware that other individuals may not agree with this (overpaying) (309, F, SC+PC). From an economic point of view, pork is chosen as a favorable option, considering the cost of beef. By changing production costs, this amount will certainly be passed on to the consumer. I believe that it is up to the state to subsidize the costs of surgical castration to maintain the viability of production (356, M, SC+PC). Meat is already very expensive and the technique must be the responsibility of the government (71, F, IC).
|
|
Effects on Production
|
Knowing the socio-economic situation and the disparities between the regions, different ways of dealing with the issue are necessary in order to serve all producers and thus try to standardize production systems (219, M, SC). If there are conditions for the farmer he must do the ’chemical’ castration. But knowing the situation of many farmers, I believe that the cost of this castration would be very high for them (177, M, SC). Because there are small producers who probably do not have enough money for castration with vaccination (184, M, SC). I believe that surgical castration is cruel, because most of the time it is done without anesthesia, but I believe it is the most viable/practical/cheap method (234, F, SC).
|
|
Naturalness
|
Using a method like this leaves me in doubt as to whether it is really healthy, since it is not natural (118, F, IC). I imagine the physiological changes suffered by the animal given that it is a non-natural process of castration. Any non-normal action follows an abnormal reaction. Yes, for traditional castration (logically, done with hygiene and safety against pain and suffering of the animal) (133, M, IC). In my opinion, the production time of the pig should be natural, and not accelerated, reducing the time for fattening and slaughter in the shortest possible time as it is today. Regarding castration, it should be the most beneficial to the pig (399, F, SC+PC).
|
|
Risks for Consumers (Residues in Meat)
|
Until now, I did not know about chemical castration, I do not know the side effects (if any) in the pig when it grows, but if no side effects are proven, even for humans, I believe it would be the best alternative (199, M, SC). There should certainly be pain control. However, I do not know the costs/risks/benefits of immunocastration, so it is difficult to compare (194, F, SC). It does not seem healthy to animals and future meat consumers, as more substances would be introduced into the animals, and therefore more poisons that we eat (120, M, IM). I wonder about the spread of the “medicine” to the consumer’s table in immunocastration (233, F, SC). Even if the immunocastration does not contain hormones, will it really not come later to bring some ills to people? (390, SC+PC).
|
| Survey 2 |
|
Pain and Suffering
|
It is the “least worst” of all other forms of castration, and I believe the animal feels the least pain (611, F, IC). I do not disapprove of castration, as long as it is painless for the animal (617, F, IC). Wrong. But castration is not wrong, what is wrong is not relieving pain (704, M, SC). It is not justifiable to castrate piglets without control of pain, but it is possible to castrate with anesthesia and post-surgical treatment, just as it is done for dogs and cats (903, F, SC). When they are young they will not feel much pain as they say (840, M, SC).
|
|
Ethical and Animal Welfare Concerns
|
The castration technique is very brutal, no matter how (80, M, EM). I think that pigs in Brazil are raised in a cruel and inhuman way. For me castration, trimming of the hooves and tail docking must be done with anesthesia to avoid pain in the animals (121, F, EM). I believe that measures that cause suffering to the animal will become increasingly unacceptable over time. Not adapting to the new demands can be a bad decision, since meat prepared in the laboratory and vegetables have been developing with speed (46, M, EM). It is unethical to cause pain to the animal. If there are other painless techniques, even if they increase costs or reduce production, these techniques MUST be used (784, M, SC). Castration is recommended in dogs. Why not pigs? (66, M, EM). If the cats I have at home are spayed, I cannot be against pigs’ castration (395, M, IC).
|
|
Organoleptic Traits of Meat
|
If it is done to avoid the odor in the meat, then the best thing to do is to castrate and solve the case (182, F, EM). If it leaves an odor in the meat, they must be castrated; however, painlessly (214, F, EM). I have no technical knowledge on the subject, but it seems to be a good way to remove the sexual odor from the meat (404, M, IC). I support castration because pain is inevitable in the animal, but it will be temporary and the product arrives at the consumer’s table with quality and no residual odors in the meat (887, M, SC). Surgical castration is an old practice and it (referring to raising entire males) can also cause repulsive meat (155, F, EM).
|
|
Effects on Production
|
According to the texts, I came to the conclusion that immunocastration appears to be the best alternative that causes the least possible stress to the animal while maintaining the production pace, appearing to be the most economically viable option and the easiest to accept in the pig market (563, F, IC). I think it is only acceptable if the cost of this procedure is much lower than those that do not cause pain because, in that case, the pain is relatively temporary (729, M, SC). While I disagree with the method, we need to consider small producers’ access to other castration techniques (731, M, SC). I support the method of injections to reduce the suffering of the animal and not decrease the productivity for the producer (since, being realistic, no producer will choose a practice that will decrease its production so much, unfortunately) (119, F, EM).
|
|
Naturalness
|
It would be a shorter course of the pig’s life, but more natural (41, F, EM). To maintain naturalness and the animal’s characteristic (52, M, EM). If it is the nature of the animal, I have no right to change it but it is just my opinion (68, F, EM). Castration is unnatural for any species (595, F, IC). For me, the ideal is for the animal to grow as natural as possible, a surgery without treatment of pain does not fit the ideal for me (667, M, SC).
|
|
Risks for Consumers (Residues in Meat)
|
I am against the introduction of substances in meat for consumption because I do not believe in their total elimination, and there is increasing accumulation in the consumer throughout his life (49, M, EM). I’m not sure about the residues from the hormone (390, M, IC). If it is with hormones, I don’t believe they will not stay in the meat afterwards (608, F, IC). We cannot keep modifying its nature to supply our selfishness, making the animal suffer and injecting medicines that go to meat and are absorbed by humans and that are not eliminated from our organism (184, F, EM). I support castration because pain is inevitable in animals, but it will be temporary, and the product will arrive at the consumer’s table with quality and without residual odors (887, M, SC).
|
