this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
521 points (94.8% liked)

News

23424 readers
3444 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Last year, I wrote a great deal about the rise of “ventilation shutdown plus” (VSD+), a method being used to mass kill poultry birds on factory farms by sealing off the airflow inside barns and pumping in extreme heat using industrial-scale heaters, so that the animals die of heatstroke over the course of hours. It is one of the worst forms of cruelty being inflicted on animals in the US food system — the equivalent of roasting animals to death — and it’s been used to kill tens of millions of poultry birds during the current avian flu outbreak.

As of this summer, the most recent period for which data is available, more than 49 million birds, or over 80 percent of the depopulated total, were killed in culls that used VSD+ either alone or in combination with other methods, according to an analysis of USDA data by Gwendolen Reyes-Illg, a veterinary adviser to the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), an animal advocacy nonprofit. These mass killings, or “depopulations,” in the industry’s jargon, are paid for with public dollars through a USDA program that compensates livestock farmers for their losses.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You do understand you're not doing your cause any favours by being a fundamentalist right?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

"I hate cruelty to animals" buys animal products at the grocery store

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is such a common phenomenon that it has a name: cognitive dissonance. If you already knew what that was, then your comment suggests another example of it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They're not mutually exclusive. There's plenty of ways to buy ethically sourced meat. Local butchers often buy pigs, chickens, and cows to butcher and cut for consumers near me. The cows typically have a central barn where they have clean bedding and recycling water troughs, get fed every morning (maybe night), and are allowed to freely roam in a pasture whenever they please.

I eat about the size of my palm of meat every day, so over the corse of a year i probably eat 5-6 chickens, a sixth of a pig, and an eight of a cow. At those numbers, it's totally possible to make ethically sourced meat work as a business.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A substantial percentage of people have access to food systems that allow them to thrive on plants alone, freeing them from a dependence on animal products. For these individuals, is 'ethically sourced meat' even possible? That is to say: if we know that killing a living being is unnecessary, is it ethical to do it anyway?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's an interesting question that probably has an individualized answer depending on who you ask. In my opinion, we have afforded their species comforts that no other species has. So a humane death and respectful use of their body is ethical in my eyes. Most wild animals die from infection or starvation and we've protected our domesticated animals from that horrible drawn out death on ethical farms.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd argue the most ethical course of action is to halt the breeding of additional animals for the purpose of slaughter. We have complete control of the situation here: not all wild animals die gruesome deaths, but a livestock animal's fate is decided far before they are even born. It feels a little less than 'humane'.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And that's why the truly realistic and humane people reduce their animal product consumption and try to limit it to local products.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I agree that this is probably realistic but still incredibly difficult to call 'humane'.

Here's a definition from a quick web search:

Characterized by kindness, mercy, or compassion.

Would you say that an individual who has the choice not to kill an animal and does it anyway is doing a 'humane' thing? Does it make difference where that killing happens?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The "ethical" food typically cost more -- what if they can't afford it? Would you give them financial aid, or does your preaching stop at words?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In case you missed it, I made a point of scoping this ethical question to people who do have the means to make choices with their consumption. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to make ethical choices provided that they are able.

I wouldn't tell someone not to shoot an oncoming attacker because murder is unethical. In the same vein if someone has no choice in what they can eat, it would be ridiculous to tell them to try to 'make ethical choices'.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Shooting an oncoming attacker isn't murder. Not a great comparison.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

So not the point though

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That's fine, you can pick your example of choice then.

Person A is presented with ethical dilemma X. They are in a position where they can freely make a choice.

Person B is presented with the same ethical dilemma X. They are not in a position where they are able to freely make a choice.

Person B is not obligated to try to pick the more ethical choice in dilemma X, since they are unable to freely make a decision.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Rice veggies and beans is among the cheapest of foods.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's also great depression food if you eat it regularly!

And anyway, not everybody can eat all the same foods. Plenty of people can't eat beans without shitting their brains out, for example. Likewise with a lot of vegetables, though then it depends on the type of vegetable.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Honestly. I absolutely agree that it's a great cheap and healthy meal, and it's one I eat just about every day. But it tends to be the only suggestion I see people make in these threads. Like don't get me wrong, it's a great suggestion, but c'mon

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The only ethically sourced meat is meat that's hunted to prevent overpopulation. There is no ethical way to make two animals breed with the intent to cut their offspring's life short so that you can eat it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

I hate capitalism, I still spend money

I can exist within society and still be critical of it, quite frankly I'm not sure how else one exists.

You're aware of how we treat produce pickers right? How we treat the people who sew your clothes together? Or the people who assembled the device you're reading this on?

Cruelty to life exists at every level. If you've ever eaten chocolate, or had coffee you've participated in slavery.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A vegan that can't resist antagonizing others over their diet is being rather counterproductive. It's an easier lifestyle choice to keep your mouth shut and not be snarky than it is to completely change your diet.

It begs the question, if this person criticizing me can't make an easier lifestyle change than what they want me to do, why should I even listen?

(And I'm going to get replies that completely miss the point and continue to moralize at me)