I write in response to a letter arguing that slaughter without stunn= ing is humane and efficient and is followed by immediate death (Sunday Times, 1= 5th March 2009)

An edited ver= sion of this letter was published in The Sunday Times (Irish Edition), 22nd March 2009.

Letter from Compassion in World Farming - Ireland

ALL ANIMAL= S SHOULD BE STUNNED BEFORE SLAUGHTER

I write in response to the claim that slaughter without stunning is “humane and efficient” (Letter, Sunday Times, 15^thMarch 2009). Whilst respecting religious views,= on this matter we must be guided by science.

The European Food Safety Authority’s Scientific = Panel for Animal Health and Welfare, which is made up of highly respected scientists,= recommends that: “all animals whic= h are slaughtered should be adequately stunned in a humane way, whenever possible, so as to avoid poor welfare in the period be= fore unconsciousness ensues.”

The Panel’s report states there is a high risk t= hat animals feel extreme pain during the cutting of the throat, and says that:<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> “During the period when the animal, whose throat has been cut, is still conscious, serious welfare prob= lems are highly likely to occur since the animal can feel anxiety, pain, distress and other suffering.” T= ime to insensibility was judged to be up to 2 minutes for cattle.

Veterinarians have also come out against slaughter wit= hout stunning: the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe says that it finds the practice “unacceptable under any circumstances” from an ethical and animal welfare viewpoint= .

Compassion in World Farming is satisfied that the scie= ntific evidence overwhelmingly shows that slaughter without stunning is not humane, and therefore we advocate that all animals should be stunned before they are killed.

Mary-Anne Bartlett

Director

Compassion in World Farming - Ireland

&n= bsp;