Beekeeping provides products with nutraceutical and pharmaceutical characteristics. These products are characterized by abundance of bioactive compounds. For different reasons, honey, royal jelly, propolis, venom, and pollen are beneficial to humans and animals and could be used as therapeutics. The pharmacological action of these products is related to many of their constituents. The main bioactive components of honey include oligosaccharides, methylglyoxal, royal jelly proteins (MRJPs), and phenolics compounds. Royal jelly contains jelleins, royalisin peptides, MRJPs, and derivatives of hydroxy-decenoic acid, particularly 10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid (10-HDA), which possess antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, neuromodulatory, metabolic syndrome-preventing, and anti-aging properties. Propolis has a plethora of activities that are referable to compounds such as caffeic acid phenethyl ester. Peptides found in bee venom include phospholipase A2, apamin, and melittin. In addition to being vitamin-rich, bee pollen also includes unsaturated fatty acids, sterols, and phenolics compounds that express antiatherosclerotic, antidiabetic, and anti-inflammatory properties. Therefore, the constituents of hive products are particular and different. All of these constituents have been investigated for their properties in numerous research studies. This review aims to provide a thorough screening of the bioactive chemicals found in honeybee products and their beneficial biological effects. The manuscript may provide impetus to the branch of unconventional medicine that goes by the name of apitherapy.

Chelant agents are the mainstay of treatment in copper-associated hepatitis in humans, where D-penicillamine is the chelant agent of first choice. In veterinary medicine, the use of D-penicillamine has increased with the recent recognition of copper-associated hepatopathies that occur in several breeds of dogs. Although the different regulatory authorities in the world (United States Food and Drugs Administration—U.S. FDA, European Medicines Agency—EMEA, etc.) do not approve D-penicillamine for use in dogs, it has been used to treat copper-associated hepatitis in dogs since the 1970s, and is prescribed legally by veterinarians as an extra-label drug to treat this disease and alleviate suffering. The present study aims to: (a) address the pharmacological features; (b) outline the clinical scenario underlying the increased interest in D-penicillamine by overviewing the evolution of its main therapeutic goals in humans and dogs; and finally, (c) provide a discussion on its use and prescription in veterinary medicine from a regulatory perspective.

Although inflammation is an important physiological response, it plays a prominent role in several diseases across the mammalian species. In horses, in particular, inflammation secondary to bacterial infection or translocation is one of the most frequent causes of morbidity and mortality. Research in new molecules with anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory proprieties and safe use profile is constantly an active field; natural compounds are an important source of molecules with peculiar properties such as antioxidants, anti-inflammatory and immune modulating. Silibinin, a natural polyphenolic flavonoid, extracted from plant milk thistle, Silybum marianum, has been reported to have actions such as antioxidant immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory. The aim of this study was to test the effect of silibinin on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced inflammatory response in equine peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Our results showed the protective effect of silibinin 10 μM and 50 μM in equine PBMCs stimulated with LPS. Silibilinin was able to prevent the LPS induced increased levels of TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6 and IL-8. The results from this study on LPS-stimulated equine PBMCs showed that silibinin could be a useful pharmacological approach in treatment or prevention of several inflammatory conditions in horse.

The strengthening of the bond between humans and animals has changed the landscape of the veterinary profession. This has, in turn, led the legal system to assess damages in veterinary malpractice and liability cases more carefully, paying attention to the possibility of using clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to prove whether the defendant veterinarian contravened or not the standard of care. In this era of evidence-based veterinary medicine, CPGs are becoming an integral part of many aspects of veterinary practice, even if CPGs do not have the force of law and are situated halfway between ethical rules and legal requirements. Although guidelines have been used for several years, there seems to be a general lack of recognition of the medical and legal ramifications of CPGs for veterinarians. This creates ambiguity and inconsistency in the care that veterinary practitioners provide, compromises the care animals receive, and prevents the courts from assessing veterinarian competence in a systematic and rational way. On the basis of these considerations, this article discusses the legal implications of CPGs in veterinary medicine for dogs and cats and explores how the law may treat CPGs in the future. Redefining the CPGs should be a priority for veterinary profession. NOTE: The authors chose to use the terms “companion animal,” “pet,” and “small animal” interchangeably throughout this article, as all three are commonly in use and refer to the same animals (dogs and cats).

In Italy, the consumption of pork meat is increasing, despite consumers’ attitudes being addressed toward a greater sensitivity about animal welfare and its link with safe food. Considering the relatively high animal welfare standards and the divergence in public interest in farm animal welfare and ethical issues, the objective of this study—in continuation of our previous paper relating to consumer behavior and preferences in welfare-friendly pork breeding—was to investigate habits of pork consumers regarding pig welfare, principally evaluating their willingness to pay (WTP) a higher price for pork obtained using raising techniques with an approach based on animal welfare. An ad hoc questionnaire-based survey was submitted to consumers (n = 404) in Messina province, Italy. Results suggest that 47% of consumers were willing to pay an additional price for pork from farms that apply specific animal welfare standards. Positive correlations were between WTP and farming techniques (p = 0.001), organic farming methods (p = 0.001), and farms in which animal welfare is taken care of and guaranteed (p < 0.001). These findings suggest that consumers intend to pay a higher price for pork, like other animal products obtained using animal-friendly raising techniques. The sensitivity to the animal welfare of a single human being may influence consumers’ attitudes toward pork consumption.

The present study aimed to compare the welfare of dairy cows kept in two traditional husbandry systems (semi‐intensive and intensive farming) in south‐eastern Sicily. A total of 18 dairy farms (nine semi‐intensive and nine intensive) were evaluated with a multicriteria system adapted for Sicilian conditions and obtained simplifying the model of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Values of welfare measures, collected by inspections of the farms (general well‐being indicators, ventilation system, resting areas [cubicles or bedding], flooring, milking parlours and waiting area, manger and watering equipment), and those of health categories (cases of abortions, hypocalcemia, displacement of abomasum, acidosis/ketosis, enteritis, hoof problems, and mastitis) obtained through the farm records, were compared using Mann–Whitney and Chi‐squared tests, respectively. Data showed significant differences ( p ≤ .05) about the variables related to welfare categories such as housing ventilation system, resting area, manger, and water equipment that were better in the semi‐intensive system than the intensive system. No significant differences were observed about the variables related to health indicators. The results demonstrated that in Sicily the semi‐intensive farm is better than the intensive to satisfy the conditions of animal welfare.