Lederman Zohar, Magalhães-Sant'Ana Manuel, Voo Teck Chuan
Rambam Medical Campus, 3109601 Haifa, Israel.
CIISA-Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Lisbon, 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal.
J Agric Environ Ethics. 2021;34(5):27. doi: 10.1007/s10806-021-09868-x. Epub 2021 Aug 29.
Culling is used in traditional public health policies to control animal populations. These policies aim primarily to protect human interests but often fail to provide scientific evidence of effectiveness. In this article, we defend the need to move from a strictly anthropocentric approach to disease control towards a One Health ethics, using culling practices as an example. We focus on the recent badger culls in the UK, claiming that, based on data provided by the English Government, these culls may be unjustified, all thing considered. We highlight the relevance of ethical reasoning rooted in One Health for this discussion, and make several suggestions including a moratorium on culling until data are provided to support the effectiveness of culling; to conduct a randomized trial to compare proactive culling with alternative methods; to apply deliberative democratic methods to assess public opinion towards the culls, and to find in Brexit an opportunity for aiming for more effective control measures.
扑杀被用于传统公共卫生政策中以控制动物数量。这些政策主要旨在保护人类利益,但往往未能提供有效性的科学证据。在本文中,我们以扑杀做法为例,捍卫从严格以人类为中心的疾病控制方法转向“同一健康”伦理的必要性。我们聚焦于英国近期的獾捕杀行动,声称综合考虑英国政府提供的数据,这些捕杀行动可能毫无道理。我们强调基于“同一健康”的伦理推理对此次讨论的相关性,并提出了一些建议,包括在未提供支持扑杀有效性的数据之前暂停扑杀;进行随机试验以比较主动扑杀与其他替代方法;应用协商民主方法评估公众对捕杀行动的看法,以及在英国脱欧中寻找机会以寻求更有效的控制措施。