Protecting Equine Welfare and International Consumers of Horse Meat: A Proposal for the Renewal of Horse Slaughter in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Comment will address how the de facto ban on horse slaughter and the shift in destination of American horses bound for harvesting has had unintended negative consequences for equine welfare and for the safety of international consumers of horse meat. Part II analyzes the role of the horse in American history, and how this has shaped horse slaughter legislation and the international trade of American horse meat. Part III examines regulations and guidelines for the humane transportation, handling, and slaughter of horses in the United States, Canada and Mexico, and demonstrates how poorly-framed legislation, a lack of formal agreements for procedure, and lack of unified standards have compromised equine welfare and traceability of exported horses. Part IV addresses the potential health risks to international consumers of horse meat as a result of insufficient procedures for tracking medications and treatments administered to horses in the United States, and the failure of Canadian and Mexican agencies to properly test horse meat for contamination. Part V then explores the domestic implications of horse slaughter bans on the horse industry in the United States and presents evidence of increases in abuse, abandonment, and neglect of horses since the cessation. Part VI proposes a statute that would renew horse slaughter operations in the United States with heightened regulatory standards for the transportation, handling, and slaughter of equines. In addition, this section illustrates why previously proposed legislation to ban the export of American horses for slaughter, such as the Safeguard American Food Exports Act (SAFE), would fail to improve equine welfare and be economically and procedurally unfeasible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.073 | 0.033 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".