The transformation of an animal into pieces fit for human consumption is a very important operation. Rather than argue about halal slaughter without stunning being inhumane or stunning being controversial from the Islamic point of view, we discuss slaughter, stunning and animal welfare considering both Islamic and animal welfare legislation requirements. With the world Muslim population close to two billion, the provision of halal meat for the Muslim community is important both ethically and economically. However, from the animal welfare standard point of view, a number of issues have been raised about halal slaughter without stunning, particularly, about stressful methods of restraint and the latency of the onset of unconsciousness. This paper sets out to, discuss the methods of stunning that are acceptable by Islamic authorities, highlight the requirements for stunning to be acceptable in Islam and suggest practical ways to improve the humanness of slaughter.

A study was conducted to compare the effect of halal slaughter without stunning and gas stun killing followed by bleeding on residual blood content and storage stability of rabbit meat. Eighty male New Zealand white rabbits were divided into two groups of 40 animals each and subjected to either halal slaughter without stunning (HS) or gas stun-kill (GK). The volume of blood lost during exsanguination was measured. Residual blood was further quantified by determination of haemoglobin content in Longissimus lumborum (LL) muscle. Storage stability of the meat was evaluated by microbiological analysis and measuring lipid oxidation in terms of thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS). HS resulted in significantly higher blood loss than GK. HS had significantly lower residual haemoglobin in LL muscle compared to GK. Slaughter method had no effect on rabbit meat lipid oxidation at 0, 1, and 3 d postmortem. However, at 5 and 8 days of storage at 4°C, significant differences (p<0.05) were found, with meat from the GK group exhibiting significantly higher levels of MDA than that from HS. At day 3, greater growth of Pseudomonas aeroginosa and E. coli were observed in the GK group (p<0.05) with B. thermosphacta and total aerobic counts remained unaffected by slaughter method. At days 5 and 7 postmortem, bacterial counts for all tested microbes were affected by slaughter method, with GK exhibiting significantly higher growth than HS. It can be concluded that slaughter method can affect keeping quality of rabbit meat, and HS may be a favourable option compared to GK due to high bleed out.

Traditional halal slaughter and other forms of religious slaughter are still an issue of debate. Opposing arguments related to pre-slaughter handling, stress and pain associated with restraint, whether the incision is painful or not, and the onset of unconsciousness have been put forward, but no consensus has been achieved. There is a need to strike a balance between halal bleeding in the light of science and animal welfare. There is a paucity of scientific data with respect to animal welfare, particularly the use of restraining devices, animal handling, and efficient halal bleeding. However, this review found that competent handling of animals, proper use of restraining devices, and the efficient bleeding process that follows halal slaughter maintains meat eating quality. In conclusion, halal bleeding, when carried out in accordance with recommended animal welfare procedures, will not only maintain the quality and wholesomeness of meat but could also potentially reduce suffering and pain. Maintained meat quality increases consumer satisfaction and food safety.