Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 1;14(21):3141.
doi: 10.3390/ani14213141.

Commentary: A Comparison of the Methods of the Pre-Slaughter Stunning of Cattle in Australia-Mechanical, Electrical, and Diathermic Syncope

Affiliations

Commentary: A Comparison of the Methods of the Pre-Slaughter Stunning of Cattle in Australia-Mechanical, Electrical, and Diathermic Syncope

Gabrielle C Musk et al. Animals (Basel). .

Abstract

In adult cattle, there are various methods of pre-slaughter stunning, all requiring adequate restraint to ensure the accurate placement of a device to target the brain of the animal and create an unconscious state. For adult cattle, these methods include electrical stunning, mechanical stunning, and a novel system called diathermic syncope (DTS). Peer-reviewed publications, industry reports, government documents, and unpublished reports were considered for inclusion in this review of the attributes of the electrical, mechanical, and diathermic syncope methods of stunning. The parameters for comparison of the methods included Australian approval status, religious compliance, reliability, reversibility, time to effect, duration of effect, carcase damage, cardiovascular effects, logistics, and welfare implications. The pre-slaughter stunning of cattle with DTS is reliable, reversible, non-concussive, non-penetrating, does not cause carcase damage, and has a body of evidence extensive enough to inform appropriate practices in cattle processing facilities. These attributes optimise animal welfare in this context, align with Australian legislative requirements, and suggest that DTS might be a suitable stunning technique for consideration by religious authorities in terms of both halal and kosher slaughter criteria.

Keywords: animal welfare; cattle; slaughter; stunning.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Farouk M.M., Al-Mazeedi H.M., Sabow A.B., Bekhit A.E., Adeyemi K.D., Sazili A.Q., Ghani A. Halal and kosher slaughter methods and meat quality: A review. Meat Sci. 2014;98:505–519. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.05.021. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Velarde A., Rodriguez P., Dalmau A., Fuentes C., Llonch P., von Holleben K.V., Anil M.H., Lambooij J.B., Pleiter H., Yesildere T., et al. Religious slaughter: Evaluation of current practices in selected countries. Meat Sci. 2014;96:278–287. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.07.013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Australian Meat Industry Council . Industry Animal Welfare Standard for Livestock Processing Establishments Preparing Meat for Human Consumption. Australian Meat Industry Council; St. Leonards, Australia: 2020.
    1. Nielsen S.S., Alvarez J., Bicout D.J., Calistri P., Depner K., Drewe J.A., Garin-Bastuji B., Gonzales Rojas J.L., Schmidt C.G., Michel V., et al. Welfare of cattle at slaughter. EFSA J. 2020;18:e06275. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6275. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mellor D.J., Beausoleil N.J., Littlewood K.E., McLean A.N., McGreevy P.D., Jones B., Wilkins C. The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human-Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare. Animals. 2020;10:1870. doi: 10.3390/ani10101870. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources