Halal, is it meat you're looking for?

The Geezer said:
So your point of view is 6 years of suffering for milk cattle is OK as long it's stunned, for example :confused:
Click to expand...

Sorry, but dairy cattle do not suffer. The boys are raised for the meat market, the girls go in to the heard and are bred from to constantly produce milk and grow the heard. The only even remotely interesting ethical issue arises because the calf is separated from the mother almost immediately and both may display signs for stress including calling and separation anxiety. Beyond that, the actual heard life of a cow is pretty cushy :)

Another interesting point, is that fluffy/eco so called 'Organic' farming requires no antibiotics are used to treat the cattle...... So the apparently 'eco friendly' model requires allowing the animal to suffer and die.
 
FoxEye said:
I care much more about the treatment of the animal when it was alive, than whether it's stunning before being killed.

Actually the stunning part I couldn't really care less about. You slit an animals throat and it dies very quickly.

For me, total non-issue.
Click to expand...

Care about both? Usually its just a few extra quid on the shopping bill.
 
BunnyKillBot said:
Pig farms are an interesting one, and in general, UK reared meat is always better treated than their foreign counterparts because we have tougher laws. Foreign meat is thus often cheaper because of these relaxed conditions, the supermarkets know this, and consequently the market is skewed towards people buying unethically reared, imported meat, instead of legally 'ethical' meat from UK producers.
Click to expand...

Yep it's a stupid situation. Everyone should buy British. But more than that, if it's illegal I'm the UK, it should be illegal to import stuff that is below that standard.
 
Efour said:
wow .. no .. really? how do you even come to that conclusion.

I'm saying if animals are treated badly during their lives whats a better way to kill it?

How on earth do you think i advocate animal suffering and factory farming methods because i don't want it to bleed to death, arguably in pain and terror?

Id love every farm animal on earth to live a decent free range type lifestyle and to die as quick and painlessly as possible.

seriously ?? wow....
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to understand motivations, when people only this week seem to be worried about animal welfare when the muslim slaughter issue is raised.

Why are 'we' not up in arms about the whole cheap meat issue rather than focusing on it upon death of the animal
 
The Geezer said:
I'm just trying to understand motivations, when people only this week seem to be worried about animal welfare when the muslim slaughter issue is raised.

Why are 'we' not up in arms about the whole cheap meat issue rather than focusing on it upon death of the animal
Click to expand...

Bahhhaaaa. Only this week, why not go search media headlines. animal welfare is a recurring issue over the last few decades and probably before.
It's only in the last year or two we've banned battery chicken, although battery plus isn't massively better.

Halal labelling also isn't new it's been around since at least mid 2000's it even passed first EU vote (massively in the region off, 500 for labelling and 40 for not), but failed in the second vote.
 
Last edited:
Interestingly simply because of the Halal requirements Animal Welfare during rearing is in most cases better than normal intensive farming techniques. So from a purely animal welfare perspective we should perhaps all eat Halal...
 
Castiel said:
Interestingly simply because of the Halal requirements Animal Welfare during rearing is in most cases better than normal intensive farming techniques. So from a purely animal welfare perspective we should perhaps all eat Halal...
Click to expand...

I bet in the majority it is no different. Just like in the majority 90% of halal I'm the uk are stunned.
 
How would people prove that an animal is (or isn't) suffering pain ? I'm not interested in videos where animals appear to be in pain (if you chop a chicken's head off the body shakes and moves for a while but can it be said to be suffering pain ?), I'd like something scientific, measureable, and repeatable. I'm not sure any suitable experiment would pass an ethics board, but nevertheless...

I have read a paper that used implanted EEG electrodes but, for some people, associating EEG activity to animal pain is tenuous at best. Presumably the bolt stun technique was proved scientifically before it was introduced, or is it just a sop to our sensibilities ?
 
Tuppy_Glossop said:
How would people prove that an animal is (or isn't) suffering pain ? I'm not interested in videos where animals appear to be in pain (if you chop a chicken's head off the body shakes and moves for a while but can it be said to be suffering pain ?), I'd like something scientific, measureable, and repeatable. I'm not sure any suitable experiment would pass an ethics board, but nevertheless...

I have read a paper that used implanted EEG electrodes but, for some people, associating EEG activity to animal pain is tenuous at best. Presumably the bolt stun technique was proved scientifically before it was introduced, or is it just a sop to our sensibilities ?
Click to expand...

Why is EEG tenuous(you would have to be an idiot to ignore eeg findings), it is amazing what we can decifer from the brain these days. Real time MRI would be even better, but much harder to do on animals, as they have to remain still. Before that it was assessing reactions in eye and other methods, to detain if the animal could still function.
Unless your going to try saying that slicing a neck is not painful.


http://www.ufaw.org.uk/VOL21ISSUE1SUPP2.php
Recent developments related to quantitative analysis of the electroencephalogram (EEG) have allowed the experience of pain to be assessed more directly than has hitherto been possible. Variables derived from the EEG of animals anaesthetised using our minimal anaesthesia model respond to noxious stimulation in a manner similar to those from conscious animals. This methodology has been used in a variety of applications including the evaluation of analgesic options for painful husbandry procedures and investigation of developmental aspects of the perception of pain. We have now applied the minimal anaesthesia model to the question of the slaughter of calves by ventral-neck incision. A series of studies evaluated the magnitude of EEG response to the noxious stimulus of ventral-neck incision and the physiological mechanisms that underlie this response. We also investigated the EEG effects of stunning by non-penetrating captive bolt and the ability of such stunning to ameliorate the response to ventral-neck incision. The results demonstrate clearly, for the first time, that the act of slaughter by ventral-neck incision is associated with noxious stimulation that would be expected to be painful in the period between the incision and subsequent loss of consciousness. These data provide further support for the value of stunning in preventing pain and distress in animals subjected to this procedure. We discuss the development of the minimal anaesthesia model and its adaptation for use in the investigation of slaughter by ventral-neck incision as well as considering the contributions of these studies to the ongoing development of international policy concerning the slaughter of animals.
Click to expand...

I hate the fact you have to pay to access the majority of full scientific articles. Grrrrrrrrrrrr
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
Why is EEG tenuous(you would have to be an idiot to ignore eeg findings), it is amazing what we can decifer from the brain these days. Real time MRI would be even better, but much harder to do on animals, as they have to remain still.
Click to expand...

I didn't say I found it tenuous, I said some people do. There are sceptics of many aspects of neuroscience. Please try to remember I'm asking questions, not making a point.

EEG measures electrical activity and MRI shows blood flow activity. There is necessarily a level of inference above these physical measurements. If you measure EEG or MRI in a human who says they are in pain, how could you say definitively it is a pain response and not, for example, some repair function activation ?

Just asking :)
 
Last edited:
I can understand why people are up in arms about this.
Sure doesn't effect me,tastes the same and doesn't make a difference to me personally however certain religions aren't allowed to eat meat that has been via ritualistic manner.Why bend over backwards for one religion so not to offend them and ignore rest of us.
Also hippies will be making a big deal out of it too as the way the animals are killed is pretty barbaric. (even more so then the way they are slaughtered already)
Label the stuff and have a section in supermarket halal meat, don't force everybody else to eat it because of a small MINORITY.
 
Tuppy_Glossop said:
I didn't say I found it tenuous, I said some people do. There are sceptics of many aspects of neuroscience. Please try to remember I'm asking questions, not making a point.

EEG measures electrical activity and MRI shows blood flow activity. There is necessarily a level of inference above these physical measurements. If you measure EEG or MRI in a human who says they are in pain, how could you say definitively it is a pain response and not, for example, some repair function activation ?

Just asking :)
Click to expand...

you can cause pain and now what it looks like. For both eeg and MRI.

Younarenlt really asking question, you're asking a question behind a silly opinion.

And MRai is far more complicated as that, as there are many types of MRI which follow different things. Oxygen, sugars etc, so you can see what parts of the brain are active as they require blood flow which beings them the oxygen and energy needed to fire.

Again you really would have to be an idiot to go against either method. We know a huge amount these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom