EPT3 years ago, when I read about that article explaining that in Korea due to some contagious disease they had to bury alive millions of pigs I couldn't stop thinking about it for days.
Death of a Chicken - Page 2
| Blogs > micronesia |
|
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
3 years ago, when I read about that article explaining that in Korea due to some contagious disease they had to bury alive millions of pigs I couldn't stop thinking about it for days. | ||
|
obesechicken13
United States10467 Posts
| ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
I was building houses in Ensenada one time and the community there killed some of the roosters as and barbecued them over an open flame, along with the frijoles and Chiles Verde (green bell peppers), such a simple meal was surprisingly better than most of the chicken I have eaten here (I am Californian). Why? I do think there is a correlation between how we treat things and the ROI. Treat your animals well? (Toss 'em your leftover corn cobs and let them roam till you catch 'em for a meal)? They produce amazing meat. Treat them like units? "We don't know what it is, but it is not chicken" Regularly change the fluids and rubber in your car? My great grandmother purchased the first car I drove, a 1961 Ford Falcon. It ran just fine, since I am in the desert it got vapor lock but that always wore off and I could start it right back up and take off. Drive your car like an ignoramus? A guy used to work with my company, a total dishonest nut job drove all over AZ and southern CA like a trucker on his route, rarely changed oils & stuff- nearly totaled his truck just driving it by 83k miles. It was a 2012. Again, my Dad replaces him, changes all the fluids and the tires and it actually ran better, unfortunately the damage has been done and the NorCal rep uses it when he is in AZ filling the job of the guy who got fired. But I do get emotional, seeing even disaster of inanimate objects. I have been desensitized to small witless animal death by seeing them work wanton destruction (rabbits in crops) however, and subsequently slaughtering them. To date I have killed over 1,000 rabbits, as quickly and painlessly as possible because they squeal. This has made me a very good shot. Then come some coyote hunters and I hear them blowing whistles that sound like that squeal! Gave me the chills! So I asked them why they did this, were they crazy? After laughing a bit, they told me coyotes torture their prey to call other coyotes to share the meal. Who mistreats animals the worst? Animals. | ||
|
EngrishTeacher
Canada1109 Posts
On May 18 2014 02:02 endy wrote: I feel the same, micronesia. 3 years ago, when I read about that article explaining that in Korea due to some contagious disease they had to bury alive millions of pigs I couldn't stop thinking about it for days. My post got buried so I'll attach it again at the end, but in pure utilitarian terms, the intense but very short suffering (being buried alive) of let's say 5 million pigs is NOTHING compared to the constant and prolonged suffering (in conditions that I've described) of billions of pigs/chickens/whatever, all day and everyday. So I feel the reason to become a vegetarian should be for the revolting conditions that animals were raised in, which causes much more suffering overall than their sometimes gruesome but nevertheless relatively quick deaths. On May 18 2014 01:28 EngrishTeacher wrote: People always associate such negativity with death, and in the case of humans the emotional suffering of loved ones is quite grave, but for animals, especially farm-raised chickens? Not so much. Maybe I just don't "fear" death in a purely academic sense (I would not be at all afraid to die if I didn't have family), but honestly death for animals is such a natural thing especially when you think about what is really important in the lives of animals. A chicken isn't going to be intellectually deprived or seek higher forms of joy, for them maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain (in constraint to their natural instincts and behavior) is all that matters. I would say chickens were relatively "happy" before the mass adoption of modern chicken farms, raised naturally outdoors with ample space to exercise and with natural chicken feed. Nowadays, chicken farms are fucking disgusting hellholes that would definitely qualify as a place of animal cruelty, and conditions for chickens are still rapidly deteriorating. Just a few years ago, chicken farms were at least still open-air with iron mesh on the sides of the barn. Currently, most chicken farms are completely sealed, and these chickens live in enormously overcrowded barns with either separate levels or tiny little separate cages, and they literally sit on top of their feces all day, eat a ton of GMO feed laced with all kinds of antibiotics and growth hormones, live among death birds that don't get removed for days or even weeks, and never ever get to see sunlight in their entire lives. So yah... I really don't think you're becoming a vegetarian for the right reasons. | ||
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9153 Posts
| ||
|
Paljas
Germany6926 Posts
On May 18 2014 02:21 Alakaslam wrote: For what it is worth though, seeing the expanse of land, we can definitely afford free range chickens. The quality is better too. I was building houses in Ensenada one time and the community there killed some of the roosters as and barbecued them over an open flame, along with the frijoles and Chiles Verde (green bell peppers), such a simple meal was surprisingly better than most of the chicken I have eaten here (I am Californian). Why? I do think there is a correlation between how we treat things and the ROI. Treat your animals well? (Toss 'em your leftover corn cobs and let them roam till you catch 'em for a meal)? They produce amazing meat. Treat them like units? "We don't know what it is, but it is not chicken" Regularly change the fluids and rubber in your car? My great grandmother purchased the first car I drove, a 1961 Ford Falcon. It ran just fine, since I am in the desert it got vapor lock but that always wore off and I could start it right back up and take off. Drive your car like an ignoramus? A guy used to work with my company, a total dishonest nut job drove all over AZ and southern CA like a trucker on his route, rarely changed oils & stuff- nearly totaled his truck just driving it by 83k miles. It was a 2012. Again, my Dad replaces him, changes all the fluids and the tires and it actually ran better, unfortunately the damage has been done and the NorCal rep uses it when he is in AZ filling the job of the guy who got fired. But I do get emotional, seeing even disaster of inanimate objects. I have been desensitized to small witless animal death by seeing them work wanton destruction (rabbits in crops) however, and subsequently slaughtering them. To date I have killed over 1,000 rabbits, as quickly and painlessly as possible because they squeal. This has made me a very good shot. Then come some coyote hunters and I hear them blowing whistles that sound like that squeal! Gave me the chills! So I asked them why they did this, were they crazy? After laughing a bit, they told me coyotes torture their prey to call other coyotes to share the meal. Who mistreats animals the worst? Animals. i am pretty sure that human-animals treat non-human animals the worst. | ||
|
Ideal26
United States185 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24674 Posts
I definitely do not like when animals are treated really poorly before being harvested for meat, but that conflict of whether or not I should continue to eat meat is a separate one (I think) from the confusion I felt, as described in the OP. | ||
|
Paljas
Germany6926 Posts
On May 18 2014 05:21 micronesia wrote: Some very good points have been made, however, I think I should clarify the comparison I was making: I was comparing these chickens being slaughtered for food to these chickens being killed by a tornado. The living conditions are the same in either case, I assume. Why do I react so differently to the chickens being killed by a tornado than I do them being killed by the company that raised them? I definitely do not like when animals are treated really poorly before being harvested for meat, but that conflict of whether or not I should continue to eat meat is a separate one (I think) from the confusion I felt, as described in the OP. i disagree, both issues are connected. you react emotionally to the chickens being killed by the tornado because you see how terrible it is. however, you pretty much have to ignore these feelings/this fact, when thinking about chickens being slaughtered for food, because you couldnt cosum their meat otherwise. the reason why the conditions are so fucking terrible for so many animals is because people chose to ignore them. | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On May 18 2014 05:21 micronesia wrote: Some very good points have been made, however, I think I should clarify the comparison I was making: I was comparing these chickens being slaughtered for food to these chickens being killed by a tornado. The living conditions are the same in either case, I assume. Why do I react so differently to the chickens being killed by a tornado than I do them being killed by the company that raised them? I definitely do not like when animals are treated really poorly before being harvested for meat, but that conflict of whether or not I should continue to eat meat is a separate one (I think) from the confusion I felt, as described in the OP. Your emotional conflict arises from a lifetime of surplus of food. Faced with real hunger and a threat to your life, you wouldn't have any problem to kill such animals with your bear hands. On the other thing someone mentioned, you can survive without meat, but the replacements will never be as good as the real thing for your body and you will always be weaker, have lower energy and require supplements you would otherwise not (and probably live less but I can't say that with certainty) | ||
|
[BSP]Kain
119 Posts
On May 18 2014 05:21 micronesia wrote: Some very good points have been made, however, I think I should clarify the comparison I was making: I was comparing these chickens being slaughtered for food to these chickens being killed by a tornado. The living conditions are the same in either case, I assume. Why do I react so differently to the chickens being killed by a tornado than I do them being killed by the company that raised them? I definitely do not like when animals are treated really poorly before being harvested for meat, but that conflict of whether or not I should continue to eat meat is a separate one (I think) from the confusion I felt, as described in the OP. Short answer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance If you eat meat it's natural to try to rationalize things you would normally (in "sterile" and logical environment) consider wrong.  On May 18 2014 11:00 GoTuNk! wrote: Your emotional conflict arises from a lifetime of surplus of food. Faced with real hunger and a threat to your life, you wouldn't have any problem to kill such animals with your bear hands. To be totally honest that is irrelevant to his dilemma. It's obvious that environment in which we were raised and the one we are currently located is crucial for who we are, but saying "you think that because you can" is quite pointless. Seeing that most part of human history revolved around fighting, manslaughter, slavery, abuse, etc. it's same as saying to someone who wishes other person better that he is empathetic just because "he can afford it" or someone who is against racism that if he were born 100 years ago it would be normal to be racist, so he shouldn't be sad for someone being a target to such actions... It's how it works and at least in my humble opinion it's pointless to bring such arguments to the discussion because they serve nothing. Also you have no evidence that his emotional conflict arises from a lifetime of surplus of food, being empathetic is an evolutionary mechanism and it's natural to experience various feelings when confronted with other beings emotions, that how our brain works and you can find examples in not only human history but also other animals. On May 18 2014 11:00 GoTuNk! wrote:On the other thing someone mentioned, you can survive without meat, but the replacements will never be as good as the real thing for your body and you will always be weaker, have lower energy and require supplements you would otherwise not (and probably live less but I can't say that with certainty) Sorry, but with all due respect to you this is plain wrong. Are conspiracy theories allowed on TL? :o It's even opposite, without meat you will be stronger, have more energy and live longer. At least according to all researches I have read so far and to my friend who has his own clinic and she is also a CEO of one of my country nutrition associations, so I usually trust her expertise, but of course one person can be wrong no matter how good she is. So always use good ol' science in doubt!  Some science for people not afraid: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/78/3/526S.long And this is good: | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On May 18 2014 12:40 [BSP]Kain wrote: Short answer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance If you eat meat it's natural to try to rationalize things you would normally (in "sterile" and logical environment) consider wrong. To be totally honest that is irrelevant to his dilemma. It's obvious that environment in which we were raised and the one we are currently located is crucial for who we are, but saying "you think that because you can" is quite pointless. Seeing that most part of human history revolved around fighting, manslaughter, slavery, abuse, etc. it's same as saying to someone who wishes other person better that he is empathetic just because "he can afford it" or someone who is against racism that if he were born 100 years ago it would be normal to be racist, so he shouldn't be sad for someone being a target to such actions... It's how it works and at least in my humble opinion it's pointless to bring such arguments to the discussion because they serve nothing. Also you have no evidence that his emotional conflict arises from a lifetime of surplus of food, being empathetic is an evolutionary mechanism and it's natural to experience various feelings when confronted with other beings emotions, that how our brain works and you can find examples in not only human history but also other animals. Sorry, but with all due respect to you this is plain wrong. Are conspiracy theories allowed on TL? :o It's even opposite, without meat you will be stronger, have more energy and live longer. At least according to all researches I have read so far and to my friend who has his own clinic and she is also a CEO of one of my country nutrition associations, so I usually trust her expertise, but of course one person can be wrong no matter how good she is. So always use good ol' science in doubt! Some science for people not afraid: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/78/3/526S.long And this is good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30gEiweaAVQ Yeah our enviroment shapes us. My point was that you should not let your emotions dictate your moral guide lines. Just like slavery wouldn't be any more right because it is tradition. Science =/= propaganda There are no professional athletes who are worth anything, aside from Mat Danzig, that are vegans or vegetarians. I'm gonna lift in excess of 90% of the drug tested record in my next competition on powerlifting (unless something unexpected happens), and I can assure you this would be impossible to me without eating meat and whey shakes. There is no way I can consume the amount of protein, fat and cholesterol, creatine, zinc and B12 vitamin required in my sport without eating meat; and I'm a middle weight. Even if you make up all the studies in the world, the empiric evidence that there are no vegan athletes is just there and irrefutable. As someone educated, you should understand that anyone can make up studies to support the most ridiculous beliefs, specially on complex stuff like nutrition, and should not disregard the value of tradition and experience (not even considering cherry picking data) For example, the China Study convinced people to start eating dieting high on carbs and avoid fat like the plague, resulting on the obese epidemy the US faces today (HFS and trans fats are what make you fat) | ||
|
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
On May 18 2014 05:21 micronesia wrote: Some very good points have been made, however, I think I should clarify the comparison I was making: I was comparing these chickens being slaughtered for food to these chickens being killed by a tornado. The living conditions are the same in either case, I assume. Why do I react so differently to the chickens being killed by a tornado than I do them being killed by the company that raised them? I think that was just due to the display of violence from the photo and headline. If you decide to watch a documentary about intensive chicken farming you'll probably react the same way. I know it was mentioned several times in the thread that living conditions are much worse than the slaughtering itself, but actually seeing it is different. | ||
|
sharky246
1197 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5576 Posts
On May 18 2014 05:21 micronesia wrote: Some very good points have been made, however, I think I should clarify the comparison I was making: I was comparing these chickens being slaughtered for food to these chickens being killed by a tornado. The living conditions are the same in either case, I assume. Why do I react so differently to the chickens being killed by a tornado than I do them being killed by the company that raised them? Is it not just that they're wasted? The sole reason all those birds exist is they were bred and raised to be food and then a tornado comes... you understand rationally that there's a lot of people and we need to feed them, but in this case the chickens ended up living in vain and dying for nothing. Also the fact that it happened to all of them. I think your heart wouldn't sink the same way if you heard like one chicken got run over by a tractor or got its head caught in some mesh and croaked. | ||
|
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
On May 18 2014 13:35 GoTuNk! wrote: Yeah our enviroment shapes us. My point was that you should not let your emotions dictate your moral guide lines. Just like slavery wouldn't be any more right because it is tradition. Science =/= propaganda There are no professional athletes who are worth anything, aside from Mat Danzig, that are vegans or vegetarians. I'm gonna lift in excess of 90% of the drug tested record in my next competition on powerlifting (unless something unexpected happens), and I can assure you this would be impossible to me without eating meat and whey shakes. There is no way I can consume the amount of protein, fat and cholesterol, creatine, zinc and B12 vitamin required in my sport without eating meat; and I'm a middle weight. Even if you make up all the studies in the world, the empiric evidence that there are no vegan athletes is just there and irrefutable. As someone educated, you should understand that anyone can make up studies to support the most ridiculous beliefs, specially on complex stuff like nutrition, and should not disregard the value of tradition and experience (not even considering cherry picking data) For example, the China Study convinced people to start eating dieting high on carbs and avoid fat like the plague, resulting on the obese epidemy the US faces today (HFS and trans fats are what make you fat) What? There are tons of vegetarian or vegan athletes... And since you mention lifting weights, you should probably know about Patrik Baboumian, one of the strongest man on earth. | ||
|
[BSP]Kain
119 Posts
On May 18 2014 13:35 GoTuNk! wrote:There are no professional athletes who are worth anything, aside from Mat Danzig, that are vegans or vegetarians. Two major things. First, it's total untrue. Like endy posted there are a lot of athletes including Patrik who is vegan and successful and titled strongman. Also people like Dave Scott who was multiple champion of Ironman (speak for itself!), he won it 6 times, each time on vegan diet, not from ethical reason, but from performance-wise approach also fellow Ironman guy, etc. Also Olympic athletes like Carl Lewis. Second, saying there there are no vegan/vegetarian athletes is not only wrong, but has a bias flaw. In Western culture, which I'm part of, not eating meat/animal products is something just getting rise in popularity. So it's obvious that the group will be underrepresented in sports, politics, business, because that's the social trend. It's same like people who said (and say...) that minorities are inferior as bosses, etc. because they are underrepresented at the highest points in hierarchy or that women are inferior in many areas in which they were actively and passively being blocked to get to... On May 18 2014 13:35 GoTuNk! wrote:There are no professional athletes who are worth anything, aside from Mat Danzig, that are vegans or vegetarians. I'm gonna lift in excess of 90% of the drug tested record in my next competition on powerlifting (unless something unexpected happens), and I can assure you this would be impossible to me without eating meat and whey shakes. There is no way I can consume the amount of protein, fat and cholesterol, creatine, zinc and B12 vitamin required in my sport without eating meat; and I'm a middle weight. Even if you make up all the studies in the world, the empiric evidence that there are no vegan athletes is just there and irrefutable. I won't pretend I know a lot about powerlifting. But I know that Patrik that endy mention has world records as vegan. I know about nutrition enough to know that you can get everything you mentioned from other than animal products with the exception of B12 if you live in sterile environment. Also whey shakes you mention are by default vegetarian... Also regarding creatine if anyone here is interested here in boosting their cognitive performance - it has really good results on you when you are vege. :D Good for SC2 I guess. ;] Link wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatine#Improved_cognitive_ability On May 18 2014 13:35 GoTuNk! wrote: Science =/= propaganda On May 18 2014 13:35 GoTuNk! wrote: As someone educated, you should understand that anyone can make up studies to support the most ridiculous beliefs, specially on complex stuff like nutrition, and should not disregard the value of tradition and experience (not even considering cherry picking data) For example, the China Study convinced people to start eating dieting high on carbs and avoid fat like the plague, resulting on the obese epidemy the US faces today (HFS and trans fats are what make you fat) Eh, this again. So let's consider everything a propaganda if that doesn't suit our believes? :/ Cmon. You are using propaganda because you are talking without backing your statements in facts. I sent link to the study and lecture who are not associated with "vegan propaganda ecoterrorists", because I too try to avoid bias on both sides. But saying that everything that they publish in science journal is false because it's not tradition and experience is wrong on so many levels... I will be more than happy if you will show me this bad methodology they have used and "cherry-picking", because if you want to publish in such renowned journal like the one I posted the proper methodology is main important factor. :X Also you mention tradition, which for sake of this discussion I understand as evolutionary developed habits and preferences. From that point of view you are correct that people prefer meat, especially in colder/more harsh geographical areas, but you need to include facts that: - most of evolutionary "tradition" of humanity revolved around meat as a luxury that is eaten occasionally and with lot of fruits and plants as main courses - in modern developed world our preferences haven't changed but the surrounding drastically - you can eat things like sugar, salt, meat as much as you want which in past were not just by the corner. Hence the many diseased considered to be caused by development. And that our organism crave for the taste of it doesn't mean it's healthy, it's just evolution is slow process while technological development is exponential. Also don't get me wrong, I have nothing against you for eating meat, etc. I don't want to limit other people choices how live their life, it's just that I find some of you statements not true and against everything that my education was about. So it's just stronger than me to not reply sometimes when I see something like that. Sorry, but I bet you understand. ^^ | ||
|
LightTemplar
Ireland481 Posts
| ||
|
Magggrig
56 Posts
I saw a video of a speech from philosopher Slavoj Žižek (I know there is chicken in the title of the video but it has nothing to do with the animal). He explains that we know how bad some situations are but manage to completely ignore it. I can't explain properly because it isn't 100% clear for me yet, but I recommend you listen to him. Oh and he is absolutely not a vegetarian. video if you are interested : | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On May 18 2014 20:16 [BSP]Kain wrote: Hm I don't want to derail this blog, so if this discussion is against micronesia intention then please tell me. Two major things. First, it's total untrue. Like endy posted there are a lot of athletes including Patrik who is vegan and successful and titled strongman. Also people like Dave Scott who was multiple champion of Ironman (speak for itself!), he won it 6 times, each time on vegan diet, not from ethical reason, but from performance-wise approach also fellow Ironman guy, etc. Also Olympic athletes like Carl Lewis. Second, saying there there are no vegan/vegetarian athletes is not only wrong, but has a bias flaw. In Western culture, which I'm part of, not eating meat/animal products is something just getting rise in popularity. So it's obvious that the group will be underrepresented in sports, politics, business, because that's the social trend. It's same like people who said (and say...) that minorities are inferior as bosses, etc. because they are underrepresented at the highest points in hierarchy or that women are inferior in many areas in which they were actively and passively being blocked to get to... I won't pretend I know a lot about powerlifting. But I know that Patrik that endy mention has world records as vegan. I know about nutrition enough to know that you can get everything you mentioned from other than animal products with the exception of B12 if you live in sterile environment. Also whey shakes you mention are by default vegetarian... Also regarding creatine if anyone here is interested here in boosting their cognitive performance - it has really good results on you when you are vege. :D Good for SC2 I guess. ;] Link wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatine#Improved_cognitive_ability Eh, this again. So let's consider everything a propaganda if that doesn't suit our believes? :/ Cmon. You are using propaganda because you are talking without backing your statements in facts. I sent link to the study and lecture who are not associated with "vegan propaganda ecoterrorists", because I too try to avoid bias on both sides. But saying that everything that they publish in science journal is false because it's not is wrong on so many levels... I will be more than happy if you will show me this bad methodology they have used and "cherry-picking", because if you want to publish in such renowned journal like the one I posted the proper methodology is main important factor. :X Also you mention tradition, which for sake of this discussion I understand as evolutionary developed habits and preferences. From that point of view you are correct that people prefer meat, especially in colder/more harsh geographical areas, but you need to include facts that: - most of evolutionary "tradition" of humanity revolved around meat as a luxury that is eaten occasionally and with lot of fruits and plants as main courses - in modern developed world our preferences haven't changed but the surrounding drastically - you can eat things like sugar, salt, meat as much as you want which in past were not just by the corner. Hence the many diseased considered to be caused by development. And that our organism crave for the taste of it doesn't mean it's healthy, it's just evolution is slow process while technological development is exponential. Also don't get me wrong, I have nothing against you for eating meat, etc. I don't want to limit other people choices how live their life, it's just that I find some of you statements not true and against everything that my education was about. So it's just stronger than me to not reply sometimes when I see something like that. Sorry, but I bet you understand. ^^I stand corrected as apparently Carl Lewis and the iron man guy, together with Mat Danzig, the 3 vegetarians that are good athletes in the history of mankind. That said, the problem I have with those three is that they weren't vegans in the begining of their carreers; while being rich they can supplement with pretty much anything, and taking steroids for their lack of natural testosterone (not that other atletes don't take them, but meat eating is fundamental for "natty" lifters more than lifters on "gear") Sorry but Patrik Baboumian is fraud. He made up an event, then made up a weight class, and then claimed he owned a "World Record" in Strongman (which is not powerlifting). Also, he built most of his lean mass before switching to vegan (according to his own biography). He is an decent athlete for German level but never won any international event. I could walk to my gym now, weight myself and max on something like the rack pull from above the knee. Then I could claim I'm the "Latin American Champion in the rack pull above the knee" because no one ever bothered before. No hard feelings it is not personal. | ||
| ||
