Tesco Eggs Cruelty

污穢、殘忍和歧視

好市多(Costco)雞蛋供應鏈令人震驚的一面

您會在好市多購物嗎?如果會的話,您可能要再想一想,把一個骯髒的事實考慮進去──好市多自稱是農場動物福利方面的領先企業,卻提供來自籠養蛋場的雞蛋給亞洲消費者。在籠養蛋場裡,母雞被飼養在骯髒、殘酷、不人道的籠子裡。

在籠養蛋場裡,糞便和污垢堆積在產蛋的籠子裡,距離雞蛋和母雞只有幾英吋的距離。母雞幾乎一生都被關在狹小的籠子裡,非常殘忍。死去的母雞會在籠子裡腐爛,和尸體擠在一起的活禽仍繼續產蛋供人類食用。這種籠養的飼養方式在世界上很多國家都是非法的。

好市多已承諾在美國、加拿大和歐洲只售賣更安全、品質更高且更人性化的放養雞蛋 ,但他們似乎認為亞洲消費者不應該享有相同品質的食品。世界上數十間領先的食品公司已經承諾在亞洲僅使用放養雞蛋,但是好市多卻還未承諾,它仍繼續向亞洲消費者供應來自骯髒、殘忍的籠養農場的雞蛋。

是時候讓好市多停止虐待動物,並不再歧視亞洲消費者。好市多應該向同行看齊,承諾最遲於2025年前在亞洲僅售賣放養雞蛋。

一起簽名聯署吧!

好市多: 我們不會再去你那裡購物,直到你向其他領先的食品公司看齊,於2025年前停止在亞洲售賣骯髒殘酷的籠養雞蛋。好市多是時候平等對待亞洲消費者,並實現100%售賣放養雞蛋!

Egg safety - Food safety risks

籠養雞蛋的食品安全隱患

超過15份比較籠養雞蛋與放養雞蛋的食物安全科學研究均發現,籠養蛋場的沙門氏菌污染率明顯較高。歐洲食品安全局(European Food Safety Authority)在這個問題上進行了有史以來規模最大的研究,他們分析了來自24個國家5000個蛋場的數據,得到完全相同的結論:籠養蛋場更容易感染沙門氏菌。事實上,歐洲食品安全局發現相對於放養的母雞,被飼養在籠子的母雞感染各種沙門氏菌的可能性高出25倍。 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17)

將母雞飼養在籠子裡會增加食品安全隱患的原因很多,英國獸醫實驗室機構(British Veterinary Laboratories Agency)及丹麥獸醫和食品管理局(Danish Veterinary and Food Administration)一致發現籠子特別難以被清潔和消毒,導致籠子上有「大量的糞便和灰塵」。美國農業部研究(United States Department of Agriculture)則顯示一生被限制在狹小的籠子裡對母雞造成的壓力也使其更容易患病。(18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23)

籠養雞蛋是殘忍的

就像狗和貓一樣,雞也是聰明的、會感到快樂和痛苦的個體。把母雞一生都禁錮在狹小的籠子裡以至於牠們幾乎無法轉身,更無法自由活動的行為是殘忍的。(24)

由於籠養的飼養方式太過殘忍,所以這在世界許多國家都是被禁止的,包括美國許多州份(好市多的發源地)。好市多的總部華盛頓也已經禁止使用籠養雞蛋,但他們卻仍然在亞洲供應該產品。

世界各地每一個主流的動物保護組織都強烈譴責將母雞關在籠子裡的行為,認為這十分殘忍。(25, 26, 27)

以下是幾個動物保護組織對於籠養雞蛋的論述:

RSPCA

「格子籠飼養蛋雞極不人道,不僅飼養密度高,也剝奪了蛋雞洗沙浴、築巢的權利。飲食業應開始選用人道的放養雞蛋,讓台灣能夠盡快地跟上國際社會的步伐,確保動物福利。」

台灣防止虐待動物協會

WAP

「在這類籠養蛋場的【格子籠】裡,蛋雞連伸展翅膀或飛上枝頭棲息這些最簡單的自然行為都無法進行。愛護動物協會深切關注這數以百萬計蛋雞的福利。」

香港愛護動物協會

Humane Society International

「對母雞這種群居、聰明、活躍的動物來說,被限制在如此小的籠子裡是不人道的,它們一生幾乎連一英寸的距離都移動不了。」

人道社會國際

我們引用來自這些組織過去已公開發布的內容,這些組織與此網站或與廣告無關

Battery Cage Photo 1 - Battery Cages

籠養母雞

好市多至今仍供應亞洲消費者殘忍且骯髒的籠養雞蛋

Battery Cage Photo 2 - Dirty

骯髒

亞洲的籠養農場裡,死去的母雞在與產蛋母雞相同的籠子裡腐爛

Battery Cage Photo 3 - Animal Cruelty

殘忍

每一隻母雞幾乎一生都被禁錮在狹小的籠子裡,根本無法活動。

文獻資料

Equitas 是一家總部在英國的慈善組織,在全球供應鏈中促進食品公司平等對待顧客並重視動物福利。

以下是針對籠養雞蛋食品安全和動物虐待部分的科學研究引文

1: Van Hoorebeke S, Van Immerseel F, Schulz J, et al. 2010. Determination of the within and between flock prevalence and identification of risk factors for Salmonella infections in laying hen flocks housed in conventional and alternative systems. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 94(1-2):94-100.

2: Snow LC, Davies RH, Christiansen KH, et al. 2010. Investigation of risk factors for Salmonella on commercial egg-laying farms in Great Britain, 2004-2005. Veterinary Record 166(19):579-86.

3: 2010. Annual Report on Zoonoses in Denmark 2009. National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark.

4: Van Hoorebeke S, Van Immerseel F, De Vylder J et al. 2010. The age of production system and previous Salmonella infections on farm are risk factors for low-level Salmonella infections in laying hen flocks. Poultry Science 89:1315-1319.

5: Huneau-Salaün A, Chemaly M, Le Bouquin S, et al. 2009. Risk factors for Salmonella enterica subsp. Enteric contamination in 5 French laying hen flocks at the end of the laying period. Preventative Veterinary Medicine 89:51-8.

6: Green AR, Wesley I, Trampel DW, et al. 2009 Air quality and bird health status in three types of commercial egg layer houses. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 18:605-621.

7: Schulz J, Luecking G, Dewulf J, Hartung J. 2009. Prevalence of Salmonella in German battery cages and alternative housing systems. 14th International congress of the International Society for Animal Hygiene: Sustainable animal husbandry : prevention is better than cure. pp. 699-702. http://www.safehouse-project.eu/vars/fichiers/pub_defaut/Schulz_Salmonella_ISAH%202009.ppt.

8: Namata H, Méroc E, Aerts M, et al. 2008. Salmonella in Belgian laying hens: an identification of risk factors. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 83(3-4):323-36.

9: Mahé A, Bougeard S, Huneau-Salaün A, et al. 2008. Bayesian estimation of flock-level sensitivity of detection of Salmonella spp. Enteritidis and Typhimurium according to the sampling procedure in French laying-hen houses. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 84(1-2):11-26.

10: Pieskus J, et al. 2008. Salmonella incidence in broiler and laying hens with the different housing systems. Journal of Poultry Science 45:227-231.

11: European Food Safety Authority. 2007. Report of the Task Force on Zoonoses Data Collection on the Analysis of the baseline study on the prevalence of Salmonella in holdings of laying hen flocks of Gallus gallus. The EFSA Journal 97. www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178620761896.htm.

12: Snow LC, Davies RH, Christiansen KH, et al. 2007. Survey of the prevalence of Salmonella species on commercial laying farms in the United Kingdom. The Veterinary Record 161(14):471-6.

13: Methner U, Diller R, Reiche R, and Böhland K. 2006. [Occurence of salmonellae in laying hens in different housing systems and inferences for control]. Berliner und Münchener tierärztliche Wochenschrift 119(11-12):467-73.

14: Much P, Österreicher E, Lassnig. H. 2007. Results of the EU-wide Baseline Study on the Prevalence of Salmonella spp. in Holdings of Laying Hens in Austria. Archiv für Lebensmittelhygiene 58:225-229.

15: Stepien-Pysniak D. 2010. Occurrence of Gram-negative bacteria in hens’ eggs depending on their source and storage conditions. Polish Journal of Veterinary Sciences 13(3):507-13.

16: Humane Society International, “An HSI Report: Food Safety and Cage Egg Production” (2010). HSI Reports: Farm Animal Protection. 3. http://animalstudiesrepository.org/hsi_reps_fap/3

17: European Food Safety Authority. 2007. Report of the Task Force on Zoonoses Data Collection on the Analysis of the baseline study on the prevalence of Salmonella in holdings of laying hen flocks of Gallus gallus. The EFSA Journal 97. www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178620761896.htm

18: The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration. 2004. The national Salmonella control programme for the production of table eggs and broilers 1996-2002. Fødevare Rapport 6, March.

19: Davies R and Breslin M. 2003. Observations on Salmonella contamination of commercial laying farms before and after cleaning and disinfection. The Veterinary Record 152(10):283-7.

20: Methner U, Rabsch W, Reissbrodt R, and Williams PH. 2008. Effect of norepinephrine on colonisation and systemic spread of Salmonella enterica in infected animals: Role of catecholate siderophore precursors and degradation products. International Journal of Medical Microbiology 298(5-6):429-39.

21: Bailey MT, Karaszewski JW, Lubach GR, Coe CL, and Lyte M. 1999. In vivo adaptation of attenuated Salmonella Typhimurium results in increased growth upon exposure to norepinephrine. Physiology and Behavior 67(3):359-64.

22: Shini S, Kaiser P, Shini A, and Bryden WL. 2008. Biological response of chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) induced by corticosterone and a bacterial endotoxin. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. Part B. 149(2):324-33.

23: Rostagno MH. 2009. Can stress in farm animals increase food safety risk? Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 6(7):767-76.

24: Marino, L. 2017. Thinking chickens: a review of cognition, emotion, and behavior in the domestic chicken. Animal Cognition 20(2): 127–147.

25: “European_Union_Council_Directive_1999/74/EC.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Web 03 August 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Council_Directive_1999/74/EC

26: “Farm Animal Confinement Bans.” American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Web. 03 August 2018, www.aspca.org/animal-protection/public-policy/farm-animal-confinement-bans

27: World Organization for Animal Health, “Terrestrial Animal Health Code” (2017). www.rr-africa.oie.int/docspdf/en/Codes/en_csat-vol1.pdf