Quick takes

Striking paper by Anant Sudarshan and Eyal Frank (via Dylan Matthews at Vox Future Perfect) on the importance of vultures as a keystone species.  To quote the paper and newsletter — the basic story is that vultures are extraordinarily efficient scavengers, eating nearly all of a carcass less than an hour after finding it, and farmers in India historically relied on them to quickly remove livestock carcasses, so they functioned as a natural sanitation system in helping to control diseases that could otherwise be spread through the carcasses they consume. In 1994, farmers began using diclofenac to treat their livestock, due to the expiry of a patent long held by Novartis leading to the entry of cheap generic brands made by Indian companies. Diclofenac is a common painkiller, harmless to humans, but vultures develop kidney failure and die within weeks of digesting carrion with even small residues of it. Unfortunately this only came to light via research published a decade later in 2004, by which time the number of Indian vultures in the wild had tragically plummeted from tens of millions to just a few thousands today, the fastest for a bird species in recorded history and the largest in magnitude since the extinction of the passenger pigeon.  When the vultures died out, far more dead animals lay around rotting, transmitting pathogens to other scavengers like dogs and rats and entering the water supply. Dogs and rats are less efficient than vultures at fully eliminating flesh from carcasses, leading to a higher incidence of human contact with infected remains, and they're also more likely to transmit diseases like anthrax and rabies to people. Sudarshan and Frank estimate that this led to ~100,000(!) additional deaths each year from 2000-05 due to a +4.2%(!) increase in all-cause mortality among the 430 million people living in districts that once had a lot of vultures, which is staggering; this is e.g. more than the death toll in 2001 from HIV/AIDS (92,000), malaria

For a different kind of FarmKind post:  FarmKind includes an offset calculator on its website, the results of which are roughly 1-3 orders of magnitude higher than some of the offset calculations I've seen on-Forum (e.g., here and here).   I'm personally skeptical about offset arguments for various reasons. But -- although I haven't dug under the hood too much -- FarmKind's calculation (of $23/month for an average omnivore) seems to at least mitigate many of my objections as a practical matter.  Why the differences from other approaches? Some of this may be due to using a bucket of interventions to calculate offset, which may mitigate some negative effects that can flow from focusing heavily on certain types of interventions which score best on perceived cost-effectiveness. However, some of the difference also appears to come from a design choice that has the effect of pushing up the figure (i.e., the idea that if you consume a certain type of animal or its output, then your offsetting activity should reduce an equivalent amount of suffering in that species, rather than any morally equivalent amount of farmed-animal suffering). In the end, I suspect my own computation would be even higher than FarmKind's for various reasons (e.g., I suspect they still give too much "credit" to the donor in the context of offsetting).[1] But it strikes me as at least in the right direction, and mitigates some practical concerns with publicizing and internalizing very low offset numbers.[2] I've put a specification of those reasons and concerns in footnotes to keep this a quick take and keep it somewhat more focused on FarmKind's work than my personal musings about offsets.     1. ^ In more detail: * Many theories of change in farmed-animal welfare end up placing additional costs on third parties. When we are deciding where to spend our charitable dollar, that's fine! But in an offset situation, I don't think it is proper to spend $1 to influence action that

Animal Justice Appreciation Note Animal Justice et al. v A.G of Ontario 2024 was recently decided and struck down large portions of Ontario's ag-gag law. A blog post is here. The suit was partially funded by ACE, which presumably means that many of the people reading this deserve partial credit for donating to support it. Thanks to Animal Justice (Andrea Gonsalves, Fredrick Schumann, Kaitlyn Mitchell, Scott Tinney), co-applicants Jessica Scott-Reid and Louise Jorgensen, and everyone who supported this work!

FAW#3 An interesting idea (no evidence that it would work) - just putting it here for preservation more than anything else: Insects are haraam to eat. This is obviously good news in that it means at least 20% of the global population is unlikely to contribute to the demand for insects as food. However it doesn't automatically rule-out that muslims will contribute to the demand for insects through the consumption of farmed-animals who we might use insects to feed - e.g. Chickens and Fish. It might be worth finding out if muslims would care if their chicken or fish was unnecessarily fead exclusively haraam food instead of plant-based feed. My experience as a muslim makes me feel like a lot of people would much rather prefer the animals they consume to not be fead on things which they themselves wouldn't consider halaal.

First in-ovo sexing in the US Egg Innovations announced that they are "on track to adopt the technology in early 2025." Approximately 300 million male chicks are ground up alive in the US each year (since only female chicks are valuable) and in-ovo sexing would prevent this.  UEP originally promised to eliminate male chick culling by 2020; needless to say, they didn't keep that commitment. But better late than never!  Congrats to everyone working on this, including @Robert - Innovate Animal Ag, who founded an organization devoted to pushing this technology.[1] 1. ^ Egg Innovations says they can't disclose details about who they are working with for NDA reasons; if anyone has more information about who deserves credit for this, please comment!

The Belgian senate votes to add animal welfare to the constitution. It's been a journey. I work for GAIA, a Belgian animal advocacy group that for years has tried to get animal welfare added to the constitution. Today we were present as a supermajority of the senate came out in favor of our proposed constitutional amendment. The relevant section reads: It's a very good day for Belgian animals but I do want to note that: 1. This does not mean an effective shutdown of the meat industry, merely that all future pro-animal welfare laws and lawsuits will have an easier time.  And, 2. It still needs to pass the Chamber of Representatives. If there's interest I will make a full post about it if once it passes the Chamber. EDIT: Translated the linked article on our site into English.

The meat-eater problem is under-discussed. I've spent more than 500 hours consuming EA content and I had never encountered the meat-eater problem until today. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/topics/meat-eater-problem (I had sometimes thought about the problem, but I didn't even know it had a name)

For those voting in the EU election and general elections in Belgium, here's an overview of the party positions when it comes to animal welfare: (For more details, click this link) ✅ means more in favor    ❌ means more against Federal election (Flanders): policy proposal PVDA 🔴 GROEN ❇️ VOORUIT 🔺 Open-VLD 🔵 CD&V 🔶 N-VA 🔆 VB ⬛️ VAT rate reduction on veterinary care and pet food✅✅❌❌❌❌✅A ban on traditional fireworks✅✅✅❌❌✅✅ Federal election (Walloon): policy proposal PTB 🔴 ECOLO ❇️ PS 🔺 LE 🐬 Défi 🌸 MR 🔵 VAT rate reduction on veterinary care and pet food✅❌✅❌❌✅A ban on traditional fireworks✅❌✅❌❌✅ Flanders election: policy proposal PVDA 🔴 GROEN ❇️ VOORUIT 🔺 Open-VLD 🔵 CD&V 🔶 N-VA 🔆 VB ⬛️ Better living conditions for broiler chickens in Flanders✅✅✅❌❌✅✅A ban on live cooking and cutting lobsters in half✅✅❌❌❌❌❌A phasing out plan of Boudewijn Seapark✅✅✅❌❌✅✅A ban on the painful surgical castration of piglets✅✅✅❌❌✅❌A ban on chick killing✅✅✅✅❌✅✅Stricter legislation around the dog and cat trade✅✅✅❌❌✅✅A duty of care for horses, dogs, cats and rabbits✅✅❌❌❌✅✅The development of cultured meat in Flanders✅✅✅✅❌✅❌Animal testing: for an animal-free strategy in Flanders✅✅✅✅❌✅✅A Flemish ban on the sale of products that harm animal welfare✅✅✅❌❌✅❌Animal welfare as a criterion in environmental permit procedure✅✅❌❌❌✅❌A punishment of animal abuse through GAS fines ❌✅❌❌❌✅✅total score11/1212/128/123/120/1211/127/12Highest score ✅      Walloon election:   PTB 🔴 ECOLO ❇️ PS 🔺 LE 🐬 Défi 🌸 MR 🔵 Total score12/1311/138/1310/136/135/13Highest score✅      EU election (Flanders):   PVDA 🔴 GROEN ❇️ VOORUIT 🔺 Open-VLD 🔵 CD&V 🔶 N-VA 🔆 VB ⬛️ Total score9/1010/1010/108/100/1010/100/10Highest score ✅✅  ✅  EU election (Walloon):   PTB 🔴 ECOLO ❇️ PS 🔺 LE 🐬 Défi 🌸 MR 🔵 Total score9/109/107/109/106/107/10Highest score✅✅ ✅   Brussels election:   PVDA 🔴 ECOLO ❇️ GROEN ❇️ PS 🔺 VOORU