ReviewHeliyon2023
The use of animal by-products in a circular bioeconomy: Time for a TSE road map 3?
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of Legal Barriers to the Rearing and Processing of Insects in the EU-Implications Based on a Case Study.Insects · 2026Article
- Beyond Side Effect: Immuno-Ethical Risk Analysis of Animal-Derived Ingredients in Pharmaceuticals.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Review
- Bovine spongiform encephalopathy: A review of current knowledge and challenges.Open veterinary journal · 2025Review
- Marine Animal Co-Products-How Improving Their Use as Rich Sources of Health-Promoting Lipids Can Foster Sustainability.Marine drugs · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2005 and 2010, the European Commission (EC) published two subsequent 'Road Maps' to provide options for relaxation of the bans on the application of animal proteins in feed. Since then, the food production system has changed considerably and demands for more sustainability and circularity are growing louder. Many relaxations envisioned in the second Road Map have by now been implemented, such as the use of processed animal proteins (PAPs) from poultry in pig feed and vice versa. However, some legislative changes, in particular concerning insects, had not been foreseen. In this article, we present a new vision on legislation for increased and improved use of animal by-products. Six current legislative principles are discussed for the bans on animal by-products as feed ingredients: feed bans; categorization of farmed animals; prohibition unless explicitly approved; approved processing techniques, the categorization of animal by-products, and monitoring methods. We provide a proposal for new guiding principles and future directions, and several concrete options for further relaxations. We argue that biological nature of farmed animals in terms of dietary preferences should be better recognised, that legal zero-tolerance limits should be expanded if safe, and that legislation should be revised and simplified.
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.