Ann: Chairman and CEO - AGM address to shareholders, page-57

Absolutely, which is why I linked in the post to an article on this subject (provided again below).

This article, which appeared in a medical ethics journal, looked at whether animal derived products might conflict with religious patients’ beliefs.

A questionnaire was sent to religious and spiritual leaders of the six largest religions worldwide, asking the religion’s stand on the use of human, bovine and porcine content in drugs, dressings and implants for adherents of the respective religions.

The responses were that the Hindus and Sikhs did not approve of the use of bovine or porcine derived products, and Muslims did not accept the use of porcine derived drugs, dressings or implants. Christians, Jews and Buddhists accepted the use of all animal and human derived products. However, all religions accepted the use of all these products in case of an emergency and only if alternatives were not available.

In a post last month (second link below) I drew attention to the following statements in an Information for Patients guide to BTM put out by University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust

BTM is the chosen product at this trust and other local trusts…..

BTM can be used by those with different cultural beliefs or food preferences as no animal product is used.

I noted that the United Kingdom has a large Muslim and Hindu population – 3.3 million Muslims and 1m+ Hindus. In Leicester, 18.6% of the population is Muslim and 15.2% Hindu.

With significant Hindu and Muslim populations across the world, and a growing vegan population, I see BTM’s ability to address religious and cultural sensitivities to be a strong selling point globally, not just in India.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4220589/

https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/the-clinicians-speak.6460688/page-254?post_id=63569341