Steiner Aline R, Flammer Shannon Axiak, Beausoleil Ngaio J, Berg Charlotte, Bettschart-Wolfensberger Regula, Pinillos Rebeca García, Golledge Huw D W, Marahrens Michael, Meyer Robert, Schnitzer Tobias, Toscano Michael J, Turner Patricia V, Weary Daniel M, Gent Thomas C
Department of Clinical and Diagnostic Services, Section of Anaesthesiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 258c, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Section of Anesthesia and Analgesia, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Berne, Laenggassstrasse 124, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
Animals (Basel). 2019 Nov 2;9(11):911. doi: 10.3390/ani9110911.
The use of carbon dioxide (CO) for stunning and killing animals is considered to compromise welfare due to air hunger, anxiety, fear, and pain. Despite decades of research, no alternatives have so far been found that provide a safe and reliable way to induce unconsciousness in groups of animals, and also cause less distress than CO. Here, we revisit the current and historical literature to identify key research questions that may lead to the identification and implementation of more humane alternatives to induce unconsciousness in mice, rats, poultry, and pigs. In addition to the evaluation of novel methods and agents, we identify the need to standardise the terminology and behavioural assays within the field. We further reason that more accurate measurements of consciousness state are needed and serve as a central component in the assessment of suffering. Therefore, we propose a roadmap toward improving animal welfare during end-of-life procedures.
由于空气饥饿、焦虑、恐惧和疼痛,使用二氧化碳(CO)使动物昏迷和致死被认为会损害动物福利。尽管经过了数十年的研究,但迄今为止尚未找到能提供一种安全可靠的方法来使成群动物失去意识,且比二氧化碳造成更少痛苦的替代方法。在此,我们重新审视当前和历史文献,以确定可能有助于识别和实施更人道的替代方法来使小鼠、大鼠、家禽和猪失去意识的关键研究问题。除了评估新方法和药剂外,我们还确定了该领域内规范术语和行为测定的必要性。我们进一步推断,需要更准确地测量意识状态,并将其作为痛苦评估的核心组成部分。因此,我们提出了一份在生命结束程序中改善动物福利的路线图。