Pain causes behavioral, autonomic, and neuroendocrine changes and is a common cause of animal welfare compromise in farm animals. Current societal and ethical concerns demand better agricultural practices and improved welfare for food animals. These guidelines focus on cattle, sheep, and pigs, and present the implications of pain in terms of animal welfare and ethical perspectives, and its challenges and misconceptions. We provide an overview of pain management including assessment and treatment applied to the most common husbandry procedures, and recommendations to improve animal welfare in these species. A cost-benefit analysis of pain mitigation is discussed for food animals as well as the use of pain scoring systems for pain assessment in these species. Several recommendations are provided related to husbandry practices that could mitigate pain and improve farm animal welfare. This includes pain assessment as one of the indicators of animal welfare, the use of artificial intelligence for automated methods and research, and the need for better/appropriate legislation, regulations, and recommendations for pain relief during routine and husbandry procedures.

Millions of laboratory animals are killed each year worldwide. There is an ethical, and in many countries also a legal, imperative to ensure those deaths cause minimal suffering. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding what methods of killing are humane for many species and stages of development. In 2013, an international group of researchers and stakeholders met at Newcastle University, United Kingdom to discuss the latest research and which methods could currently be considered most humane for the most commonly used laboratory species (mice, rats and zebrafish). They also discussed factors to consider when making decisions about appropriate techniques for particular species and projects, and priorities for further research. This report summarises the research findings and discussions, with recommendations to help inform good practice for humane killing.

The objective of this study was to compare the changes in the electroencephalogram (EEG) in response to noxious stimuli with tail flick and hot plate responses of rats administered opiorphin. Female Sprague -Dawley rats (n = 8 per group) randomly received intravenous (IV) injection of morphine (1 mg/kg,) or opiorphin (2 mg/kg,) or saline (0.5 ml,) in each of the three testing methods (EEG, tail flick and hot plate). Each type of test (n = 24 per test) was conducted in different population of rats on separate occasions. The tail flick and hot plate latencies were recorded until 5 min after test drug administration to conscious rats. The EEG was recorded in anaesthetised rats subjected to noxious thermal and electrical stimuli after test drug administration. At the end of 5 min in each of the testing methods rats were administered naloxone subcutaneously (SC) (1 mg/kg) and the test procedure was repeated. There was no significant increase in the median frequency and spectral edge frequency (F50 & F95) of EEG, indicators of nociception, of morphine and opiorphin groups after noxious stimulation. Noxious stimuli caused a significant increase in both F50 and F95 of the saline group. An injection of naloxone significantly increased the F50, thus blocking the action of both opiorphin and morphine. There was a significant increase in the tail flick latency after administration of opiorphin and morphine as compared to the baseline values. Rats of morphine group spent significantly longer on the hot plate when compared to those of the opiorphin and saline groups. There was no significant difference in the hot plate latencies of opiorphin and saline groups. The results of this study suggest that the analgesic effect of opiorphin occurs at the spinal level and it is not as effective as morphine at supraspinal level. It may be due to rapid degradation of opiorphin or limited ability of opiorphin to cross the blood brain barrier or a higher dose of opiorphin is required for its action in the brain. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics studies along with in vivo penetration of opiorphin in the cerebrospinal fluid are required for further evaluation of opiorphin analgesia.