Slashdot Mirror

PETA has this crazed idea that animals are better off dead than owned...

Where on Earth would they get such a crazy idea? http://www.farmsanctuary.org/w...

Seriously, though, its not correct to suggest that chickens can't survive in the wild. Feral chickens (descended from farm animals) do well in many parts of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I'm trying to get the clearest objective picture I can about what's going on the food industry, and it doesn't look pretty. Sorry. I'm sure you have access to information that I don't, and follow these things more closely. I rely on reports by journalists, researchers, government agencies, and activists who also have access to information that I don't, and who also follow these things more closely than I do. Just because I'm not in the field doesn't mean I can't try to find what's going on and form an opinion. I will see if I can find the Journal of Dairy Science report you're talking about.

Anyway, you can accuse me of FUD, but there are real, serious, and ongoing health consequences to food industry practices:
* Mad Cow Disease: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3355625.stm
* E Coli in Spinach: http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/4198816.html
* Salmonella in Eggs: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/business/23eggs.html?_r=1&ref=business

People die when industry cuts corners and regulatory agencies don't do their job.

More of my resources:
* Agricultural Antibiotic Use Contributes To 'Super-Bugs' In Humans - http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/07/050705010900.htm
* Denmark's Case for Antibiotic-Free Animals - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/10/eveningnews/main6195054.shtml
* The above article cites Professor Ellen Silbergeld - http://faculty.jhsph.edu/Default.cfm?faculty_id=648
* The true cost of cheap chicken - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-true-cost-of-cheap-chicken-768062.html
* Agriculture Pollution report from Defra (UK government) - http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/landmanage/water/csf/index.htm
* Wikipedia page on Factory Farming - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_farming

Activists (I am listing them separately, to be fair):
* http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/ffarms.asp
* http://www.ciwf.org.uk/
* http://www.farmsanctuary.org/issues/factoryfarming/
* http://www.iowasource.com/health/CAFO_airqu_0805.html
* Food, Inc. (movie)
* Ominvore's Dillemma, Michael Pollan
* Eating Animals, Michael Safran Foer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_farming

http://farmsanctuary.org/issues/factoryfarming/

According to a recent editorial in The Lancet, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world, "All human diseases to emerge in the past 20 years have had an animal source..."[12] For example, hepatitis B, a disease which now kills a million people every year, probably appeared upon the world stage thanks to people eating chimpanzee meat. Ebola, the virus that causes one's organs to dissolve and kills up to 90% of people infected within a week, is thought to have come from eating gorilla meat. Of course the disease doesn't limit itself to killing just those that ate the flesh of their fellow primates. Once it's jumps species it can spread throughout the human population.

More healthy? It depends on what you mean by that term.

With every diet there's a trade-off. You may be getting slightly bigger boost of available nutrients by eating meat, but coming up with a vegetarian diet that clogs your arteries, stresses your kidneys, and acidifies your blood as much as a meat-centric diet does would be very hard indeed. The fact is that (a) you don't need all that much iron, Vitamin B12, etc., and supplements abound; (b) protein should be only around 5% of your dietary intake; and (c) as a meat-eater you're probably not getting nearly enough fiber. Check out The China Study for more.

I've personally chosen to stop eating all animal products despite the extra effort required. On the one hand both my father and grandfather were avid meat-eaters, and both died in their mid-50's from heart attacks brought on by arterial congestion. So I'm partially driven by my natural wish to be around longer than another 15 years. But also, as an aware person desiring harmony I find that meat-eating is simply incompatible with my knowledge and understanding, and hinders the development of deeper compassion.

Regardless of whether or not meat can be digested by humans, I feel that since I am in an elite position to make a choice then I should choose wisely and compassionately. The more deeply I seek to understand myself and the world, and the more I understand about human physiology, the more impossible it becomes to justify eating meat or dairy. Meat production is cruel, wasteful, and polluting. Knowing this, I see meat-eating as a habit a lot like smoking: It's an unhealthy practice that supports a vile industry, and therefore fosters personal denial.

I understand that very few people are apt to cease their pleasurable habits, but I like the challenge, and I feel clearer in every way - intestinally, spiritually, mentally.

From my personal experience I believe that will-power is a central issue, but in your case your beliefs are the blocker - not willpower. For the moment your will is short-circuited by the belief that meat-eating is necessary and good. If you knew or felt differently about meat-eating, or were more invested in animal welfare and environmental issues, your willpower would presumably be directed differently. Your belief that meat-eating is "more healthy" - likely augmented by cultural conditioning, sentimental attachment to the familiar, and the sensual pleasure associated with meat-eating - trumps will altogether.

If people understood what their bodies needed, were more capable of denying themselves the pleasurable sensations associated with meat and dairy consumption, and were more aware of the devastation and suffering caused by meat-production... well, it would be a much kinder and more viable world. Sustainability is a big issue facing the world, and one of the most straightforward solutions -- reducing meat consumption -- isn't all that easy! Humans are easily hooked, and the industry is hooking more of them all the time.

I wasn't born with a vegan spoon in my hand. I've been on a totally vegan diet now for only 14 months, but I've considered myself a "vegetarian" (if dairy, eggs, and fish are vegetables) for 20 years. As recently as 20 months ago, I would sometimes backslide and eat meat every so often. But at this point I'm developmentally beyond all chance of recidivism. What happened? I've been spending time at Farm Sanctuary working with animals, giving technical assistance to environmental organizations, and practicing meditation. All these experiences have helped me to understand the issue more directly, more deeply, and more broadly. The extra effort required to cook thoroughly nutritious vegan meals is more than made-up-for by the benefits of clarity, energy, and well-being that I feel every day.

I should disclaim that I am a co-host of Vegan Radio, and webmaster of both Vegani

Alcohol is one such example. Ever heard of alcohol POISONING?

Similarly, you can take "magic" mushrooms which are poisonous but get you high at the right dosage without dying.

The GP is obviouly very naive. There are TONS of toxins in foods/drinks people eat today. Alot of food is grown in chemical fertilizers unless it's organically grown. If you eat fish, you probably are eating a very tiny amount of mercury and various other toxins in the water. Also in the states, some farmers inject their cows with bovine growth hormones to improve milk yields. Okay, so maybe hormones aren't a toxin persay, but to me, they are evil/unwanted and at the same level as toxins as they can harm your body. Maybe you've heard about Mosanto and the Fox News cover-up where they prevented reporters from releasing a story about Mosanto's rBGH and how it causes cancer not to mention the needless pain and suffering of cows (due to swollen/infected udders, it's a condition called Mastitis).

Here in Canada, rBGH is banned, but it is still not banned in the United States. IMO, the U.S government rather maintain a dominant economy over risk loosing billions if word of U.S infected beef got out, so they will do whatever they can to prevent that from happening. But, they won't test EVERY cow for mad cow (because they claim that would be prohibitively expensive). Infact, I saw a story on CBC a few years ago about a small time beef farmer in the states that wanted to market his beef as having been 100% tested for mad cow disease. The government stepped in and prevented him from testing every cow and selling it because this would set a "precedent" where all the big time beef farmers would have to follow suit, costing them alot of money in the process. So this small time farmer was prevented from marketing his beef as 100% mad-cow tested, pretty sad really (I wish I could find the original story, it was quite amazing that the government would interfere with a small-time business like that to protect the beef industry as a whole, meanwhile putting beef consumers at a greater risk for the sake of profit).

US Continues to Violate WHO Mad Cow Guidelines
Old CBC News Story about a cover-up
More info about rBGH

According to this website, The U.S. is presently testing only 1 out of every 18,000 cows slaughtered (for Mad Cow Disease). Guess what the test rates are elsewhere?
Quoted from this website: ...In Europe, where they test 1 out of every 4 cows, and Japan, where they test 100% of all cattle bound for human consumption...

So U.S tests 0.0056% of their cows, where as Europe tests 25% and Japan tests 100%. Guess I'll stick to non-american beef from now on.

Be careful when using the words "free range" and "humane" together.

Some "free range" farms may really care about the animals they're raising but problems can still occur at "free range" farms. These problems are due to a lack of requirements from the U.S. Department of Agriculture for "free range" farms. Here are a few examples:

• Animals may have space to roam but nothing to eat in that space.
• "Free range" hens may still be debeaked.
• There may be overcrowding.
• Flocks may be separated by sex and age.
• "Worthless" male chicks may still be killed.
• "Free range" cows still have a long, not-so-great future after they leave the farm and before they are "finished."

Bibliography
The Google Search
Farm Sanctuary (recommended site)
"Free Range" Poultry and Eggs: Not All They're Cracked Up to Be
Vegetarian Times: Not-so free bird. (free-range hens and eggs)
Cattle: Not so free on the range