Ethical Challenges of Using bST and Transgenic Animal

This article examines whether using Bovine Somatotrophin (bST) and Transgenic Animal is compatible with the norms of animal welfare, environment, and public health. We cannot oppose its usefulness all on a sudden. Despite the usefulness of animal biotechnology, we cannot ignore the different adverse effects of this technology. All of these bring forth different ethical challenges. What is the environmental impact of this technology? Another ethical challenge is related to animal‘s welfare and human‘s health. In order to assessing the ethical challenges, this article has opted for Mepham‘s ethical matrix, which is a practical approach for addressing broader policy issues. I have focused on the application of this ethical matrix upon some contexts of animal biotechnology, such as bST and transgenic animal. Through the analysis, this article came to the conclusion that there are no short curt ways to reach an agreement on the application of animal biotechnology. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/bioethics.v4i3.17372 Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2013; 4(3):1-10

Pre-weaning growth of red deer calves is not determined by ability of hinds to produce milk

Three experiments were carried out to determine whether growth of suckling red deer calves is determined by the potential of their mothers to produce milk. In the first experiment red deer hinds (n = 10, calves 6 weeks old) were treated either with bovine somatotrophin (bST, 54 mg s.c. injected every 2 weeks for 8 weeks then 108 mg every 2 weeks for a further 8 weeks) or saline. There was no effect of bST treatment on calf or hind liveweight, calf liveweight gain or body condition score of hinds. The second experiment used red and red-wapiti crossbred deer calves (n = 8–11) suckled by red deer dams that had been treated with bST or had received excipient only for 12 weeks from when the calves were 5 weeks old. Calf liveweight was affected by genotype (wapiti-red crossbreds were heavier than their red counterparts) but there was no effect of bST treatment of the hinds on calf growth in either of the genotypes. Although bST treatment of the suckled hinds elevated their plasma insulin-like growth factor-1 concentration it had no effect on milk yield. A third experiment ruled out the possibility that bST ingested by calves in milk from treated hinds would have had any influence on growth of calves in the other experiments. From these results it is concluded that the inherent demand from suckling calves, rather than the ability of adequately nourished hinds to produce milk, determines growth rate of red deer calves from birth to weaning.

Bovine somatotrophin stimulates milk production in red deer hinds

To determine its potential as a tool for studies of growth in suckling red deer calves, bovine somatotrophin (bST) was administered to lactating red deer hinds. The present study used twice-daily machine milking of bST-treated hinds (n = 10, 54 mg bST for 2 weeks then 108 mg for 1 week) and compared the milk yield with that of saline-treated controls (n = 9). Treatment with 54 mg bST tended to increase milk yield by ~16% and the 108-mg dose increased (P = 0.013) milk yield by ~32%. Both doses of bST increased (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively) plasma insulin-like growth factor-1 concentration but did not affect total solids or fat content of the milk, nor was there any effect on body condition score or liveweight of the hinds. This shows that milk production in red deer hinds is increased by administration of bST, which makes it a suitable experimental technique for investigating the lactational biology of red deer.

Regulation of expression of ovarian mRNA encoding steroidogenic enzymes and gonadotrophin receptors by FSH and GH in hypogonadotrophic cattle

A study was conducted to determine the effects of FSH and bovine somatotrophin on the expression of mRNA encoding the gonadotrophin receptors and steroidogenic enzymes in ovarian follicles of cattle rendered hypogonadotrophic by treatment with a GnRH agonist. Hereford x Friesian heifers were allotted into two pretreatment groups: controls (n = 10) and GnRH agonist-treated (n = 20). Ovaries of control cows were removed on day 2 of the first follicular wave after synchronized oestrus. GnRH agonist-treated heifers were given either FSH or no FSH. FSH was infused at 50 microg h(-1) for 48 h. Ovaries in GnRH agonist-treated heifers were removed at the end of exogenous hormone treatment. The control, GnRH agonist and GnRH agonist plus FSH treatment groups were divided further into bovine somatotrophin or no bovine somatotrophin treatments (n = 5 per treatment). Bovine somatotrophin (25 mg day(-1) by s.c. injection) was administered for 3 days. Ovaries were scanned once a day by ultrasonography. Blood samples for hormone measurements were collected three times a day from oestrus until the time of removal of ovaries. Expression of mRNAs for the FSH and LH receptors and cytochrome P450 side-chain cleavage (P450scc), cytochrome P450 17alpha-hydroxylase (P450c17) and cytochrome P450 aromatase (P450arom) enzymes was localized by in situ hybridization and quantified by image analysis. Ovarian follicular growth was arrested at < or = 4.5 mm in diameter in GnRH agonist-treated heifers. There was no effect of bovine somatotrophin on follicular dynamics, gonadotrophin secretion or expression of mRNA for either the gonadotrophin receptors or steroidogenic enzymes. Infusion of FSH to GnRH agonist-treated heifers increased FSH concentrations in serum to the physiological concentrations observed in controls and stimulated growth of follicles to a size similar (5.5-8.0 mm in diameter) to recruited follicles in control cows. FSH induced mRNA expression of P450scc and P450arom in granulosa cells of follicles at a smaller size (< or = 4.5 mm in diameter) than in controls and increased (P < 0.001) expression in larger (> 4.5 mm in diameter) follicles. Expression of mRNAs for P450scc and P450c17 increased (P < 0.001) with increasing follicle size and was higher (P < 0.01) in theca cells of GnRH agonist plus FSH-treated heifers than in the other groups. There were no treatment differences in expression of FSH receptor in granulosa cells or LH receptor in theca cells, but expression of both receptors increased with follicle size. There was no expression of LH receptor in the granulosa cells of cows from any treatment group. In conclusion, FSH treatment in GnRH agonist-treated heifers induced similar changes in follicular growth to those observed during the first follicular wave, but despite similar peak concentrations, prolonged exposure to high FSH induced precocious expression of mRNAs for P450scc and P450arom in granulosa cells from small follicles and markedly upregulated expression of these enzymes in granulosa cells from recruited follicles. The results of this study demonstrate the key role that FSH plays in the induction of follicular growth and differentiation.

Bioethical analysis of biotechnologies: lessons from automatic milking systems (AMS) and bovine somatotrophin (bST)

Technologies emerging from current bioengineering research areas may have a substantial impact on society and raise many ethical issues. Consequentially, there is a significant interest amongst public and private organisations to identify ethical issues, improve stakeholder participation, and develop frameworks and assessment procedures to aid decision-makers evaluate these complex issues. This paper explores a form of bioethical analysis that has been developed to aid decision-makers in the agricultural and food sectors. Two agricultural technologies will be used as case studies to examine the application of this form of bioethical analysis in technology assessment, viz automatic milking systems (AMS) and bovine somatotrophin (bST). The bioethical framework applied, the Ethical Matrix developed by Mepham (e.g. 1996; 2000), is based on a principled approach drawn from the concept of the ‘common morality’ where the ‘impacts’ of a technology are assessed in terms of respect for three ethical principles (wellbeing, autonomy and justice) as they apply to various interest groups.To explore stakeholder issues raised by the technologies, two workshops and separate postal surveys of farmers, consumers and retailers were conducted to examine the attitudes to the two technologies. Each survey included matched questions, so that attitudes could be cross-compared, with the Ethical Matrix used as a guiding framework. The three surveys highlighted specific attitudes of consumers, farmers and retailers to bST and AMS (response rates were 19.3%, 27.3% and 69% respectively), as well as identifying general trends in attitudes to technological development. Consumers distinguished clearly between what they considered to be more acceptable (AMS was largely acceptable with some caveats) and less acceptable technologies (bST). bST use in the UK was unacceptable to the majority of UK farmers whereas AMS was accepted with caution. Retailers, overall, had a cautious but considered approach to the technologies, applying a precautionary approach in their policies.Applying the Ethical Matrix aided the clarification of ethical issues which underlie differences in opinion on the acceptability and required legal control of the two technologies. In summary, bST supporters placed a greater emphasis on productivity and prosperity, whereas sceptics focused on perceived risks, and on producers' and consumers' lack of autonomy. Potential positive impacts of AMS were identified as improvements in dairy production efficiency and enhancement of dairy farmer and cow welfare, while concerns included impacts on rural employment, milk quality and the increasingly instrumental use of animals.The incorporation of bioethical analysis into technology assessment, specifically in the form of the Ethical Matrix, was generally regarded as providing a useful and valuable tool, helping to clarifying issues and encourage dialogue. Individuals with contrasting worldviews can use it effectively, allowing any conflicts and consistencies of the arguments to be cross-compared. This is particularly important for policy makers who need to be explicit and transparent and to justify their decisions by reference to widely accepted ethical norms. At a simplistic level, this method may act merely as a comprehensive check-list, but when applied more comprehensively it can encourage stakeholder dialogue and clarify the interactions of scientific and ethical aspects of a particular issue.

Ethical attitudes of consumers and farmers to the use of two dairy technologies : Bovine somatotrophin (BST) and Automated Milking Systems (AMS)

The importance of considering public opinion in technology development and use is widely recognised. Several studies have assessed public opinion on modern biotechnologies used in animal production systems (Eurobarometer, 1997), but few have focused on specific technologies. The aim of this study was to evaluate attitudes to two defined technologies, bovine somatotrophin (BST) and automated milking systems (AMS), as part of a wider study of the role of ethical analysis in technology assessment. The preliminary results described below highlight only certain aspects of a much more comprehensive survey.Postal surveys of consumers and farmers were conducted in the Spring/Summer of 1998. The farmers’ population sample (n=1,000) was randomly selected from the National Farmers Union Dairy Farmers database. The selection, based on an nth term sample, was stratified for geographical region only.