Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:13:48.080Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of religious slaughter of sheep with methods that include pre-slaughter stunning, and the lack of differences in exsanguination, packed cell volume and meat quality parameters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

MH Anil ,
T Yesildere ,
H Aksu ,
E Matur ,
JL McKinstry ,
O Erdogan ,
S Hughes  and
C Mason
MH Anil*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY, UK
T Yesildere
Affiliation:
Chamber of Veterinary Surgeons of Istanbul (IVHO), Sofyali Sok, Hamson Apt. 26/3, Asmali Mescit, Tunel, Beyoglo, Istanbul, Turkey
H Aksu
Affiliation:
Chamber of Veterinary Surgeons of Istanbul (IVHO), Sofyali Sok, Hamson Apt. 26/3, Asmali Mescit, Tunel, Beyoglo, Istanbul, Turkey
E Matur
Affiliation:
Chamber of Veterinary Surgeons of Istanbul (IVHO), Sofyali Sok, Hamson Apt. 26/3, Asmali Mescit, Tunel, Beyoglo, Istanbul, Turkey
JL McKinstry
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY, UK
O Erdogan
Affiliation:
Chamber of Veterinary Surgeons of Istanbul (IVHO), Sofyali Sok, Hamson Apt. 26/3, Asmali Mescit, Tunel, Beyoglo, Istanbul, Turkey
S Hughes
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY, UK
C Mason
Affiliation:
Humane Slaughter Association, The Old School, Brewhouse Hill, Wheathampstead, Hertfordshire AL4 8AN, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

UK legislation requiring pre-slaughter stunning has certain exemptions for religious slaughter. Supporters of both Muslim (Halal) and Jewish (Shechita) slaughter methods claim that the efficiency of the bleed out is adversely affected by stunning. In this study, electrical stunning followed by neck cutting, and captive bolt stunning followed by neck cutting, were compared with the Muslim slaughter method (neck cutting without stunning) in sheep. Total blood loss and percentage blood loss, expressed as a percentage of live weight, were calculated and compared between groups. In addition, the time taken to reach 25%, 50%, 75% and 90% of total blood loss was calculated and compared. There was no apparent difference in the packed cell volume levels between groups. Slaughter method did, however, affect meat pH and colour. The results show that the bleed out after neck cutting is not adversely affected by electrical or captive bolt stunning; nor is an improved bleed out achieved by neck cutting without stunning.

Keywords

animal welfareblood lossHalalreligious slaughterShechitastunning
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , November 2004 , pp. 387 - 392
Copyright
© 2004 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Anil, MH and Sheard, P 1994 Welfare aspects of religious slaughter. Meat Focus International, October: 404-405Google Scholar
Anil, MH, McKinstry, JL, Gregory, NG, Wotton, SB and Symonds, H 1995 Welfare of calves. 2. Increase in vertebral artery blood flow following exsanguination by neck sticking and evaluation of chest sticking as an alternative slaughter method. Meat Science 41: 101–102CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bager, F, Braggins, TJ, Devine, CE, Graafhuis, AE, Mellor, DJ, Tavener, A and Upsdell, MP 1992 Onset of insensibility at slaughter in calves: effects of electroplectic seizure and exsanguination on spontaneous electrocortical activity and indices of cerebral metabolism. Resource Veterinary Science 52: 162–173CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blackmore, DK 1984 Differences in behaviour of sheep and calves during slaughter. Resource Veterinary Science 37: 223–226CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daly, CC, Kallweit, E and Ellendorf, F 1988 Cortical function in cattle during slaughter: conventional captive bolt stunning followed by exsanguination compared with Shechita slaughter. Veterinary Record 122: 325–329CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, CS 1990 Stress reactions of cattle undergoing ritual slaughter using two methods of restraint. Veterinary Record 126: 522–525Google ScholarPubMed
FAWC 2003 Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing Part 1: Red Meat Animals. Farm Animal Welfare Council: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1988 Double rail restrainer/conveyor for livestock handling. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 41: 327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1994 Religious slaughter and animal welfare. Meat Focus International 3: 115–123Google Scholar
Gregory, NG and Wotton, SB 1984 Time to loss of brain responsiveness following exsanguination in calves. Resource Veterinary Science 37: 141–143CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, GL, McGrath, M, Softly, A and Jones, C 1985 Blood content of broiler chicken carcases prepared by different slaughter methods. Veterinary Record 117: 382–385CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grunfeld 1972 The Jewish Dietary Laws. Sonano: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Kalweit, E, Ellendorf, F, Daly, C and Smidt, D 1989 Physiological reactions during slaughter of cattle and sheep with and without stunning. Deutsch Tierarztl Wochenschr 96: 89–92Google Scholar
Kotula, AW and Helbacka, NV 1966 Blood retained by chicken carcasses and cut-up parts as influenced by slaughter method. Poultry Science 45: 404–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinger, IM 1976 Physiological and general medical aspects of Shechita. In: Munk, ML and Munk, E (eds) Shechita pp 101–214. Gur Aryeh: JerusalemGoogle Scholar
Levinger, IM 1995 Shechita in the Light of the Year 2000. Critical View of the Scientific Aspects of Methods of Slaughter and Shechita. Mahon Maskil L'David: JerusalemGoogle Scholar
MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food) 1995 The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations. No. 731. Her Majesty's Stationery Office: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Masri, BA 1989 Animals in Islam. The Athene Trust: Petersfield, UKGoogle Scholar
Munk, ML, Munk, E and Levinger, IM 1976 Shechita: Religious and Historical Research on the Jewish Methods of Slaughter and Medical Aspects of Shechita. Feldham Distributors: JerusalemGoogle Scholar
Warriss, PD 1978 Factors affecting residual blood content of meat. Meat Science 2: 155–159CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warriss, PD and Leach, TM 1978 The influence of slaughter method on the residual blood content of meat. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 29: 608–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar