Two points:

Is there a real ethical difference between killing embryo's in the shell (living animals as well!) and dayold chicks?

Consumers have over decades stated that they are willing to pay more for good products including welfare issues. However, in the supermarket their wallet often decides otherways!

Within the ethics of animal behavior, we must respect the desires of the animal as in humans, because cohabitation is very important for the perpetuation of offspring, and this is the law of the creator of man and animals and cannot be violated

Dr. Kan, thank you for raising these important considerations. Your first point about the ethical difference between culling embryos versus day-old chicks underscores the complexity of defining "ethical" choices. While ovasexing prevents the birth of male chicks and avoids their suffering post-hatching, it doesn’t fully resolve the moral dilemma of ending life—albeit at an earlier stage. This highlights the ambivalence in ethical perspectives: what one sees as progress (ovasexing) could be seen by others as merely shifting the moral burden.

Your second point about consumer behavior is equally relevant. The gap between stated values and actual purchasing habits reflects a tension between ideals and economic realities. It suggests that achieving widespread ethical alignment in agriculture may require systemic change, such as pricing policies or subsidies, rather than relying solely on consumer goodwill.

Ultimately, ovasexing is a step forward in addressing animal welfare concerns, but it also raises deeper questions about how we prioritize ethical trade-offs and balance competing values. What do you think is the most effective way to bridge these ethical and practical gaps?

Dear Almamury, thank you for sharing your thoughtful perspective. Your emphasis on respecting the desires of animals and aligning our practices with the natural laws of coexistence is a profound reminder of the interconnectedness of all living beings. Your insight enriches this discussion and underscores the need for a balanced and respectful approach to animal welfare in agriculture. I truly appreciate your valuable contribution!

Dear Edoh

Thanks for your nice comments. Asking questions or making comments is always easier than giving answers.

Being trained as a chemist and retired for almost 18 years, I do not dare to answer these questions in the field of human thoughts and behavior. You should approach (active) experts in those fields to ask them what they think. Good luck.

Dear Dr. Kan,

Thank you for your kind response and for sharing your thoughts. Your humility and openness to dialogue, even beyond your primary field, are truly admirable. Thought-provoking questions like yours often serve as catalysts for deeper reflection and learning, and I greatly appreciate your willingness to engage in this discussion.

I will certainly seek insights from experts in these fields, as you suggested, but your perspective as a chemist and seasoned observer carries its own unique value. Thank you again, and I hope to continue learning from exchanges like these!

Warm regards,

Johannes Edoh

New methods that determine sex in advance in the laboratory would be an effective step in the poultry industry, especially in laying hens. In this way, ethical issues and the killing of male chicks would be eliminated.