Factory farming is a modern invention that allows people to raise and process more animals for human consumption than is possible in a conventional farming environment, with open pastures and clear skies for the animals. Putting more animals into closer proximity is a key aspect of factory farming, an industrial approach to delivering more nutrition to families’ dining tables.
When it comes to agricultural science, researchers are motivated to test and use new tools and techniques, to help farmers raise more with less effort and time.
Factory farmers want to maximize profits, so they will make an effort to safely house as many animals together as possible while still seeing to their safety and health. The use of antibiotics plays a big role here, to avoid spreading disease in a crowded environment. And since crowded conditions can lead to poorer health outcomes for animals, there is plenty at stake in keeping them healthier and happier. What’s also prized by owners and operators of factory farms would be any new method that promises to help them raise more animals faster.
This is where CRISPR gene editing is making some inroads. Genetic engineering may wind up having a profound impact on factory farming as we know it today.
Here is an overview of the potential benefits and drawbacks of CRISPR in the context of factory-farmed animal production.
Pros and Cons of How CRISPR Gene Editing Might Impact Factory Farms
One sign that factory farmers are poised to do more with genetic engineering is that the United States Food and Drug Administration announcing in March 2022 that it is safe for people to eat beef obtained from cattle that have undergone gene editing, as reported by Vox.
Not only are the cattle themselves considered fine to consume, people can also eat meals made of meat from the cattle’s offspring. The FDA indicates that beef derived from genetic editing could hit the butcher case within two years.
One pro is that with tools such as CRISPR gene editing, factory farming could let farmers raise animals more quickly. A faster turnaround time before they get to market means that farmers will see their profits turning faster. The less time you spend raising cattle, the less food you have to provide them to achieve the same production goals.
The principle also applies to seafood. A company called AquaAdvantage received FDA approval to sell its genetically engineered salmon. AquaAdvantage can grow its gene-altered salmon twice as fast as naturally occurring salmon year-round, compared to wild-spawned fish, which mainly reproduce during the summer and spring.
Per Vox, the American Humane Society favors gene editing for animals on the farm if doing so will reduce the suffering of animals. But a spokesperson for the Animal Welfare Institute warns that the industry will be able to keep its costs low while deflecting criticism of its industrial farming practices, a potential con.
Another drawback, at least from the perspective of those who are impatient for results is that it may take decades before our supermarkets start actually selling meat derived from gene-edited animals.
But some pros would have clear benefits for the genetically engineered animals. For example, farmers would prefer if they could grow calves without horns, since it is a painful process to remove them (“dehorning” often occurs on the farm). And being able to edit animals’ genes to protect them against different diseases could mean being able to rely less on antibiotics, which cause their own health issues when used in abundance.
Potential for Faster Factory Farming in the Future
For those interested in the future of factory farming, the use of tools such as CRISPR gene editing will certainly have a big effect on the incidence of animal disease, the ability to raise animals faster and to grow animals that are easier to process (such as not having horns that would need to be removed).
