Forum menu
Funnily enough when I WITNESSED animals being killed
But you just looked. You didn't take any EEG measurements to judge whether or not they were conscious and felt any pain. Is my point.
As in my previous lengthy paste. Which you obviously didn't read. Or maybe did, and then forgot.
I find it hypocritical meat eaters worry about the pain an animal feels just before they are about to feel nothing ever again, compared to the suffering experienced on a daily basis from the conditions some animals have to live in.
I find it hypocritical meat eaters worry about the pain an animal feels just before they are about to feel nothing ever again, compared to the suffering experienced on a daily basis from the conditions some animals have to live in.
BINGO. In one.
I'll alert the media.
Meanwhile, why is one of two at least comparable methods of slaughter being subject to discrimination in law?
Animal drops straight down I assumed was in less pain than one that was struggling.
Your lengthy post doesn't say if was done in a slaughter house and I'll guarantee it wasn't but most likely a lab or other controlled environment. If you read my post you will have noticed I highlighted the differences between the ritual and industrial slaughter of the animals. I don't think the supermarkets sell halal meat killed by PETA but I'll look on the label just to make sure.
Woppit, rather than just read one version see it with your own eyes and make your mind up.
In the most recent observational study by British vets, around 13% of cattle who were subjected to religious slaughter tried to get to their feet *after* their throats had been cut.
Large mammals, cattle particularly, have veins on the back of the neck as well as around the throat - cutting the throat doesn't kill them instantly and for many means they effectively inhale their blood and still have brain function at the point they are hung up - the brain can take several minutes to lose conciousness.
There's no need for this to happen and it's abhorrent - if a surgeon operated on patients without anaesthesia in almost all cases they would lose their right to operate and likewise if pet owners willingnly caused suffering to their companion animals they would be subject to prosecution.
When techniques to avoid this trauma are readily available we should not be making the sort of exceptions to our laws that now mean up to 2/3 of all meat is slaughtered according to religious doctrines that less than 10% of the population follow.
As a bare minimum, consumers need to understand the differences between stunning / religious slaughter and should be able to make choices based on clear labels on food packaging.
I find it hypocritical meat eaters worry about the pain an animal feels just before they are about to feel nothing ever again, compared to the suffering experienced on a daily basis from the conditions some animals have to live in.
that's why you should only ever buy british high welfare meat, free range, freedom food.
vegetarians are probably reponsible for more animal deaths than meat eaters though, through pesticides and pest control, but insects don't count do they. I'd say that's equally or more hypocritical?
😛
Large mammals, cattle particularly, have veins on the back of the neck as well as around the throat - cutting the throat doesn't kill them instantly and for many means they effectively inhale their blood and still have brain function at the point they are hung up - the brain can take several minutes to lose conciousness.
A-ha.
None of the animals we eat die in their sleep from old age
Surely it can't be too hard to genetically engineer cattle so they drop down dead just when they are at their tastiest providing guilt free meat?
Strangely, at this point, I feel a string of quotes from Douglas Adams coming over the horizon.
Omeglian Mega-cow anybody?
Tissue engineering will solve this debate 😈
EEG actually registers a bowl of jelly as being alive - how exactly does it tell us whether an animal with massive brain trauma is in pain?
Page 1. Item 21.
*yawn*
If you went to the vet to get an animal put down and he did it by slitting it's throat would you be happy about it?
Depends if its a cat meh.
If its a dog and edible?
There seems to be a dichotomy here. Either fairy-story "ritual" killing (do they flounce in high heels clacking the maracas around before slitting the throat?) or bolt.
Perhaps stepping back and saying "Of *all* the ways of slaughter, not just these two, is the most humane method of slaughter?". Then both sides can suck it up, as it may be neither.
For all I know it could be low-flying pianos that are the most humane.
As in my previous lengthy paste. Which you obviously didn't read.
I got as far as "PETA" and stopped reading. As far as credible sources go, I'd sooner hear what the Daily Mail had to say.
I'll alert the media.Meanwhile, why is one of two at least comparable methods of slaughter being subject to discrimination in law?
Which method and how is it subject to discrimination under what law?
AdamW - Member
For all I know it could be low-flying pianos that are the most humane.
A nice boost for the once thriving UK Piano manufacturing industry too. 🙂
I got as far as "PETA" and stopped reading. As far as credible sources go, I'd sooner hear what the Daily Mail had to say.
One of the charities my employer deals with is PETA: there was a certain amount of upset in the response office when one of the girls brought an article in about how PETA routinely destroys abandoned animals it can't re-home, in the US.
However, this may also be routine with other animal charities, I don't know.
I do find PETA to be somewhat lecturing in its promotions, which puts me off them.