ArticleJournal of agricultural & environmental ethics2021
Stamping Out Animal Culling: From Anthropocentrism to One Health Ethics.
Article in Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Zoonoethics and Inclusive One Health Governance for H5N1 Panzootic: From Animal Culling to Co-responsibility.Public health ethics · 2026Article
- Applying One Health Bioethical Principles to Climate Change: The Planetary Patient Paradigm.Cureus · 2026Article
- Strict Biosecurity and Epidemiological Segmentation Enable Partial Culling During a Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Outbreak.Veterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- One health's "Jurassic Park moment": tempered reasons for optimism.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2025Article
- Article
- One Health Ethics and the Ethics of Zoonoses: A Silent Call for Global Action.Veterinary sciences · 2024Review
- Uncovering associations between interest in One Health and pre-existing conditions and behaviours: Evidence from a UK survey.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Integrating animal welfare into the WHO pandemic treaty: a thematic analysis of civil society perspectives and comparison with treaty drafting.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Simulation of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Spread and Effects of Mitigation Strategies to Support Veterinary Contingency Planning in Denmark.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- One Health Requires a Theory of Agency.Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees · 2022Article
- Classic Psychedelics and Human-Animal Relations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Culling is used in traditional public health policies to control animal populations. These policies aim primarily to protect human interests but often fail to provide scientific evidence of effectiveness. In this article, we defend the need to move from a strictly anthropocentric approach to disease control towards a One Health ethics, using culling practices as an example. We focus on the recent badger culls in the UK, claiming that, based on data provided by the English Government, these culls may be unjustified, all thing considered. We highlight the relevance of ethical reasoning rooted in One Health for this discussion, and make several suggestions including a moratorium on culling until data are provided to support the effectiveness of culling; to conduct a randomized trial to compare proactive culling with alternative methods; to apply deliberative democratic methods to assess public opinion towards the culls, and to find in Brexit an opportunity for aiming for more effective control measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.