Easygoing Speciesism. Rights Violations: Are These Not the Oddest of Gifts?

Every year, at this time – the time of goodwill – I am assailed by radio and TV advertisements for an Irish charity called Bóthar. This organisation was started in 1989 in Limerick, Ireland, dedicated to sending dairy cows to Africa as "gifts" for poor people. Bóthar became project partners with Heifer International in the USA, and “Send A Cow” from Britain and in 1991 sent a first batch of 20 pregnant cows to Uganda.

What can animal advocates say in response to these shipments without appearing to live up to the "human hater" stereotype many are fond of trying to attach to us? Answers to that question are provided in an excellent podcast and 2006 blog entry by Colleen Patrick-Goudreau of Compassionate Cooks.

Once we begin to look critically at the idea of sending dairy cows (and goats) to Africa, much of it starts to unravel, even without subscribing to the animal rights view that this animal slave trade amounts to organised rights violations. Colleen Patrick-Goudreau highlights some of the problems thus

…environmental problems; economic problems, (raising animals for human consumption is expensive and inefficient); health problems (globalising our preventable diseases such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes hardly seems charitable); and…the fact that two-thirds of non-Caucasians on the planet are lactose intolerant and cannot digest dairy.

Indeed, Dr Julia Lee-Thorp and Dr Becky Rogers Ackermann, of the Department of Archaeology, University of Cape Town, in a piece entitled "Lactose Intolerance is Normal!," cite research that suggests that, "90-95% of black individuals and 20-25% of white individuals throughout the world" are lactose intolerant. Lee-Thorp and Rogers Ackermann suggest that the global picture is very complex

Many Asian populations, especially people from Far East, have rates of lactase deficiency approaching 100% [lactase is the enzyme that breaks down lactose]. Additionally, there are a few groups in Africa, such as the Fulani, who have relatively low rates of lactose intolerance (around 20-25 percent). Conversely, some European populations like the Swedes are almost completely lactose tolerant (apx. 4% deficiency)… The perception of lactose intolerance as a health problem is a rather narrow Western view.

They say that "general misconceptions" about the healthy associations of whole dairy milk "are widespread," and believe that such misconceptions, "probably have a lot to do with marketing and advertising campaigns." Lee-Thorp and Rogers Ackermann may agree with Colleen Patrick-Goudreau's claim that, "The last thing a hungry child in Africa needs is the milk of a cow," explaining that

Human infants, like other mammals, receive nourishment from mother’s milk. Infants have an enzyme that allows milk sugar - lactose - to be digested. In most human populations, the manufacture of the lactase enzyme is "turned off" by around four years of age. The same is true of other mammals, [who] become lactose intolerant following weaning.

The really interesting question, for Lee-Thorp and Rogers Ackermann, is why are some humans not lactose intolerant? In particular, "why are relatively few ‘white’ people - aka. of Western European origin - lactose intolerant?"

The answer, would you Adam and Eve it, is bound up with humans exploiting nonhuman animals, as Lee-Thorp and Rogers Ackermann explain

Human beings only began to cultivate domestic grains and keep domestic animals relatively recently. Sheep and then cattle were first domesticated just over 10,000 years ago, in the Near East where the wild progenitors of these animals lived. Grains like wheat and barley were also domesticated at around this time. All of this took place through selective breeding - and consequent genetic manipulation - with humans in control. It brought about a quantum change in the way that people lived - they settled down, cultivated most of their food and populations began to grow. Not all of the change was for the better, as amongst other new problems humans also began to inherit diseases from their animals and from close proximity to large numbers of people (like TB and other infectious diseases - but that is another story!). The new way of life spread, along with the cattle, sheep and grains, reaching Western Europe a few millennia later.

Therefore, in Western Europe, "some populations began an evolutionary transition to lactose tolerance." In certain individuals, as a result of genetic change, "the enzyme allowing the digestion of milk sugar" continued to be produced throughout adult life, meaning that, "these individuals no longer lost their childhood lactose tolerance but carried it into adulthood." The upshot of all this is that lactase deficiency is low in Europe, in populations, "with a long history of dairy farming," while the highest levels of deficiency are in Asian populations, "who were not dairy farmers."

Interestingly, Lee-Thorp and Rogers Ackermann say that low levels of lactose intolerance, "also occur in other populations that rely extensively on milk in their diet (like the Fulani of Western Africa, and it is believed, Khoi pastoralists of Southern Africa)."

A cynic may suggest that organisations like Bóthar are attempting to begin "an evolutionary transition to lactose tolerance" and to hell with the fact that many are lactose intolerant at the present time. Since symptoms of lactose intolerance include gas (wind), cramping, abdominal pain, nausea, bloating and diarrhoea, Colleen Patrick-Goudreau seems to be dead right: "The last thing a hungry child in Africa needs is the milk of a cow." Diarrhoea, for example, is a major problem in the "developing world." According to The World Health Organization, 3.5 million deaths a year are due to diarrhoea. 80% of such deaths occur in children under the age of five, and most occur in children between six months and three years of age.

Are these acts of "charity" nothing more than the development of another market, or just the result of homespun propaganda? After all, something as "wonderful" and generally "beneficial" as cow’s milk is something everyone should have access to – no?

And, so, do we human hating animal rights people have an alternative to this slave trade? We do, actually!, and Patrick-Goudreau writes, "I’m not suggesting we don’t help the hungry; what I’m suggesting is to do it in such a way that benefits EVERYONE and that doesn’t exploit ANYONE."

For example, she cites as "programs dedicated to providing solutions to hunger without exploiting animals," the Fruit Tree Planting Foundation, the Women’s Bean Project, Sustainable Harvest International, and notes that Animal Aid, "is supporting a tree-planting initiative in Kenya, which will provide fruit-bearing trees for local families. The aim is to help 100 families to plant 20 trees each, which will bear oranges, avocados, mangoes, and macadamia nuts, with a few additional trees for timber and firewood." We can also add Vegfam, and perhaps Trees for Life International, to that list.

If you know anyone planning to "help" humans by means of rights violations against nonhuman animals, perhaps you can tell them that there is a better way to assist the global poor.