farmfreund cattle immobiliser

[pine_guy]

Just randomly came across this.
http://www.farmfreund.de

Anyone used one? Can you even get them/ use the legally in the uk?

Interesting concept, not sure how it's wide spread use would be seen by the consumers of the end product.

 

[bovine]

Illegal.

Cruel.

Don't even go there.

 

[spin cycle]

Illegal.

Cruel.

Don't even go there.

not doubting you but why?

 

[pine_guy]

Illegal.

Cruel.

Don't even go there.

Also thought that might be the case, hence asking, just looking for some facts.

 

[bovine]

Under Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007:

Electrical immobilisation

30. An electrical current must not be applied to an animal for the purpose of immobilisation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/2078/schedule/1/made
​

It's why electeroejaculation is an act of veterinary surgery - so anyone can't insert a rectal probe and apply current to animals. It is undoubtedly painful and works by tensing muscles making the animal unable to kick.

 

[spin cycle]

seems like a godsend to me...cattle are dangerous animals and if animal is constrained in crush it's stressful surely and treatment takes longer?...lots of stuff we can't get in uk for no decent reason...like the half rate terramycin spray for pinkeye JMO and not a cattle keeper

 

[bovine]

seems like a godsend to me...cattle are dangerous animals and if animal is constrained in crush it's stressful surely and treatment takes longer?...lots of stuff we can't get in uk for no decent reason...like the half rate terramycin spray for pinkeye JMO and not a cattle keeper

It would appear we need such legislation to protect cows from people like you, with views like that?

The device is cruel. What part of that is difficult to accept?

 

[spin cycle]

well other countries seem to disagree????...made in germany ...do europeans use it?....i'm up for the debate and to be put right so no need to get 'hoighty'....what evidence is there that the technique is cruel?

 

[Gulli]

If crush makers started thinking about making cushes a bit quieter like the foottriming ones instead of adding yet another bit that you can swing out of the way but can't fix tightly enough that it doesn't crash and bang when the animal goes in, cattle handling would be much safer and more efficient.
Immobilizers undoubtedly work but that's not the point they are illegal on welfare grounds. They still routinely dock cows tails in the us and I don't know anyone who thinks that's acceptable here?

 

[bovine]

If we are talking about inserting a probe into an animal's rectum and applying electricity - then I think it is up to you to prove it is not!

You are not going to find any good UK evidence as they have been illegal for a long time.

About all I can find:

"Seemingly, electroimmobilization was a noxious event and was more noxious than a simple IM injection". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3490808

"Adult Holstein cows regarded electroimmobilization as a noxious event and were very strongly conditioned to this stimulus". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3756681​

 

[milkloss]

If we are talking about inserting a probe into an animal's rectum and applying electricity - then I think it is up to you to prove it is not!

You are not going to find any good UK evidence as they have been illegal for a long time.

About all I can find:

"Seemingly, electroimmobilization was a noxious event and was more noxious than a simple IM injection". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3490808

"Adult Holstein cows regarded electroimmobilization as a noxious event and were very strongly conditioned to this stimulus". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3756681​

Electricity huh? Could be like a tens machine, could be like an electric chair. Unless so called scientists start using less words such as 'seemingly' and refer to facts they won't get taken seriously.

These things need to be rationally quantified similar to the electric collars for dogs, yes they can hurt but that's not how they are supposed to be used is it! Local Anaesthesia has to be used for castrating calves older than a month (or whatever, that's not the argument here) but have you seen them jump when you inject the bollock? They don't do that when you just slice em and remove the bollock do they? Who's gaining here, the calf or the human servicing his own superiority complex?

 

[Gulli]

Electricity huh? Could be like a tens machine, could be like an electric chair. Unless so called scientists start using less words such as 'seemingly' and refer to facts they won't get taken seriously.

These things need to be rationally quantified similar to the electric collars for dogs, yes they can hurt but that's not how they are supposed to be used is it! Local Anaesthesia has to be used for castrating calves older than a month (or whatever, that's not the argument here) but have you seen them jump when you inject the bollock? They don't do that when you just slice em and remove the bollock do they? Who's gaining here, the calf or the human servicing his own superiority complex?

If you restrain them well enough and use a sharp needle they barely flinch.

I would question why anyone would need an immobiliser anyway if an animal is so wild you can't get near it to treat it how are you going to get a probe up its arse?

 

[Willy A]

As far as I know. They have not been proved to be cruel.
They have not been tested for EU approval.
It is illegal to use them in the UK.
The legislation was passed to ban the use of a barbaric electrical device that was clipped to a cows tail and her ear and a high voltage was applied to pass current through the cow.
This immobiliser seems to me a different thing all together. Like a tens machine. I have never used one but I have held one in my hand when it was turned on and it just tingled.
I am not saying they are not cruel. I don't know, but it has not been proved one way or the other.

 

[Sebastian]

I don't know about cows, but it seems handy to keep the Mrs in line.

 

[bovine]

They are illegal in the UK (there is similar legislation in Northern Ireland). It means there is no means to test the devices here. You would struggle to get such a study past an ethical review committee, and even if you did I suspect no one would publish it. The devices are simply not needed. They exist through laziness - pretty much my thoughts on electric collars.

We all know that one person, if these were legal, who would leave it turned to MAX for half an hour while they went for a cup of tea to teach something a lesson.

There is enough evidence already showing these are a noxious stimulation to cattle. Far, far more than a TENS machine. Remember cattle don't wear rubber soles and have 4 legs - they are vastly more sensitive to electricity than we are.

I can't believe we even need to have this discussion. Every-time we do my opinion of parts of the industry falls. Can't we stand together against such devices?

 

[milkloss]

They are illegal in the UK (there is similar legislation in Northern Ireland). It means there is no means to test the devices here. You would struggle to get such a study past an ethical review committee, and even if you did I suspect no one would publish it. The devices are simply not needed. They exist through laziness - pretty much my thoughts on electric collars.

We all know that one person, if these were legal, who would leave it turned to MAX for half an hour while they went for a cup of tea to teach something a lesson.

There is enough evidence already showing these are a noxious stimulation to cattle. Far, far more than a TENS machine. Remember cattle don't wear rubber soles and have 4 legs - they are vastly more sensitive to electricity than we are.

I can't believe we even need to have this discussion. Every-time we do my opinion of parts of the industry falls. Can't we stand together against such devices?

Until committees have the balls to commission these studies and someone has the balls to publish the results how are we supposed to take the idea of legislation seriously? A hell of a lot worse has been done to animals for our benefit and this could be for their own benefit if it would enable stress free handling and treatment.

 

[bovine]

Until committees have the balls to commission these studies and someone has the balls to publish the results how are we supposed to take the idea of legislation seriously? .

If you take the Vet Record ethical guidelines as an example (all journals have similar policies, I had that site open):

Welfare and ethics
All material published in Veterinary Record must adhere to high ethical standards concerning animal welfare.

Manuscripts will be considered for publication only if the work described:

• Follows international, national and institutional guidelines for the humane treatment of animals and complies with relevant legislation.
• Has been approved by the ethics review committee at the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted where such a committee exists;
• For studies using client-owned animals, demonstrates a high standard (best practice) of veterinary care and involves informed client consent.

Before acceptance of a manuscript, to verify compliance with the above policies, the authors must:

• Confirm that legal and ethical requirements have been met with regards to the humane treatment of animals described in the study;
• Specify in the Materials and Methods section the ethical review committee approval process and the international, national, and/or institutional guidelines followed.

The Editor retains the right to reject manuscripts on the basis of ethical or animal welfare concerns. Papers may be rejected on ethical grounds if the study involves unnecessary pain, distress, suffering or lasting harm to animals, or if the severity of the experimental procedure does not appear to be justified by the value of the work presented. We ask that the work would be likely to gain approval in Britain under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act or equivalent regulations.
​

I fail to see any justification for making animals suffer (as they clearly will - read the papers I linked!) to prove that these devices cause suffering. Do you suggest we abuse some children to check that is bad for them?

A hell of a lot worse has been done to animals for our benefit and this could be for their own benefit if it would enable stress free handling and treatment.

Standards improve, we move on. We improve. Crappy justification for anything. Go and watch the Monty Python 'Yorkshiremen' sketch.

Can you not see that your views are potentially harmful to your industry? Do you not think things have improved? 20 years ago no one would have thought of giving a cow a painkiller.

 

[Willy A]

They are illegal in the UK (there is similar legislation in Northern Ireland). It means there is no means to test the devices here. You would struggle to get such a study past an ethical review committee, and even if you did I suspect no one would publish it. The devices are simply not needed. They exist through laziness - pretty much my thoughts on electric collars.

We all know that one person, if these were legal, who would leave it turned to MAX for half an hour while they went for a cup of tea to teach something a lesson.

There is enough evidence already showing these are a noxious stimulation to cattle. Far, far more than a TENS machine. Remember cattle don't wear rubber soles and have 4 legs - they are vastly more sensitive to electricity than we are.

I can't believe we even need to have this discussion. Every-time we do my opinion of parts of the industry falls. Can't we stand together against such devices?

You may know everything but the bit about cattle not wearing rubber soles and having 4 legs is not relative. It is not a high voltage with respect to earth. It is a localized voltage around the nerve at the cows tail head. A bit like holding a cows tail up.
It may well be cruel but no one knows yet.
My guess is it will never be approved for UK.

 

[bovine]

I like evidence behind what we do, but not everything needs testing. Clearly it wouldn't be acceptable to do a cow caesarian without anaesthetic. We don't have to do a few to check this. The common sense approach to a device applied in the rectum that applies an electrical stimulation to immobilise a cow is that is is likely to be cruel. We have two studies that confirm that view point. I honestly cannot see any justification in any further testing. In my opinion we would be causing unnecessary suffering. That is why you wouldn't get ethical approval, and why you couldn't get it published.

Equally you couldn't get your anaesthetic free caesarian study approved or published.

Of course we will never have these devices in the UK. I'm certain we know they are cruel. I'm also certain that anaesthetic free castration is cruel - the suffering is caused afterwards.

 

[O'Reilly]

While I agree with a lot of what bovine says, especially about the odd person who would misuse this, I have a question.
Have you ever tubed a cow with an acute mastitis, who was so sore she tried to kick your head off as you tubed her? You can try and be as gentle and quiet as you like, but she doesn't understand that you are trying to help her. Often some ends up on the floor. She needs the tube, you need your head.
A cow of ours cut her leg, and the sedative the vet gave her hardly touched the cow. Fortunately the vet succeeded, with no personal injury to stitch her up, but only just, and she is still with us.
Would you prefer these cows to just be shot?
Apparently they use a similar device on women to encourage the pelvic floor muscles to redevelop after childbirth, in extreme cases.