Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
A dish best served not.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                                                                             

More humane animal slaughter

Food safe lethal injection for Animal Slaughter
  (+8, -1)
(+8, -1)
  [vote for,
against]

Admittedly I know very little about Slaughterhouses, or the chemical reactions which take place in the lethal injection used in Capital punishment.

I like philosophy, and we covered species-ism at my University course recently. I believe species-ism is a problem, and I think we could definitely keep eating meat if the process of slaughter were more humane. My argument boils down to: sure we eat meat and I don't want to give it up; yet there has to be a better way to slaughter animals for food than what exists currently!

Which brings me to my idea: humans should develop a lethal injection drug which becomes completely inert after death. The logic is; we have safer, less toxic house-hold chemicals for house cleaning today that we did twenty years ago. Why can't we create chemicals which could be injected in to animals for slaughter which don't poison the carcass which humans would later eat?

I'm sure there would be some objection from the public about this if it were ever made, some might think it could have adverse effects on humans; yet I think if created in the right way; it wouldn't!

Discuss.

Braineeee, Oct 23 2015

Baked. https://www.youtube...watch?v=TUvXIqWaIRA
[doctorremulac3, Oct 24 2015]

Worth looking at https://www.faceboo.../10153458263351323/
Global warming caused by meat eaters [xenzag, Oct 24 2015]

Eating meat gives you cancer! http://www.telegrap...rocessed-meats.html
Processed meat ranks alongside smoking as major cause of cancer, World Health Organisation says WHO publishes report listing processed meat as 'carcinogenic to humans' - the highest ranking, shared with alcohol, asbestos, arsenic and cigarettes [xenzag, Oct 26 2015]

Temple Grandin https://www.youtube...watch?v=RoNErsJNPzw
[JesusHChrist, Oct 26 2015]

sugar death http://www.globalhe...etest-poison-of-all
Sweet deadly gold people [travbm, Oct 30 2015]

[link]






       Welcome to the HB!   

       Animal slaughter in general is often not well done. The systems in use, if used correctly, are supposed not to cause suffering; but they are often used improperly and in a way that stresses the animal a lot. So, [+] for the idea.   

       And yes, it could certainly be done.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 23 2015
  

       Not sure if the poster is advocating cannibalism...
FlyingToaster, Oct 23 2015
  

       I became a vegetarian after watching the horrendous way the cattle were treated in the US, prior to slaughtering, when I saw it on a newsreel. I remained one for 7 years. It effected me that profoundly.   

       I once again eat meat, but not on a regular basis, and always opt for plant based protein instead, when available, and when I can.   

       I applaud your idea, and welcome your compassionate and curious soul to the hb. Here's a bun, baked without animal product.
blissmiss, Oct 23 2015
  

       [bliss], you're scaring him a little.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 23 2015
  

       [Brainee] - welcome to the 'bakery.   

       The fine print in the help file (over there on the left under "meta") includes encouragement to flesh out your idea (sorry, couldn't resist) with the specifics of actually how this will be achieved.   

       Under those admittedly loose guidelines, this would fall under WIBNI, which is the initialism for " wouldn't it be nice if ".   

       You may have to do some research regarding which chemicals might support the meat of your argument.
normzone, Oct 23 2015
  

       Until then it's all protean.   

       Welcome [+].   

       Nitrogen gas asphyxiation. Cheap, widely available.
sninctown, Oct 24 2015
  

       What [sninctown] said.. I'm withholding my mark for deletion because you're new but god have mercy upon you if there isn't substance in your next idea because I have none to spare.
Voice, Oct 24 2015
  

       Wouldn't it be nice to eat animals with a clear conscience? No. Animals are subject to horrendous abuse in vile factory farms, during which they are also pumped full of antibiotics, growth hormones etc etc. The manner of their death is only the end point of all of that, and in that specific regard the idea here promotes an aspect of magic. ie wouldn't it be nice if we had this. (Read the help file) Wouldn't it be nicer if everyone just stopped eating meat, and became more enlightened. In time this will be realised as more and more become vegetarians and vegans.
xenzag, Oct 24 2015
  

       The chemistry of this idea is apparently nontrivial. It seems that European suppliers restrict access to deathrow drugs and make it quite difficult for the Yanks to kill people efficiently. Doing so without leaving poisonous traces in the body may be asking too much (of yanks).
4and20, Oct 24 2015
  

       Bizarrely, I find myself half-agreeing with [xenzag]. Many modern animal husbandry practices are abhorrent, driven by the desire for large quantities of cheap meat. If you can buy a chicken for £1.99, it's pretty clear that it hasn't been pampered.   

       Meat _can_ be produced humanely. I think that if an animal is brought into existence, has a contented life, and is then killed more or less instantaneously and without stress or anticipation, then that's a fair deal.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 24 2015
  

       Indeed. I can't see anything wrong w
pertinax, Oct 24 2015
  

       // I think that if an animal is brought into existence, has a contented life, and is then killed more or less instantaneously and without stress or anticipation, then that's a fair deal// A fair deal for whom? If you have children and this logic was applied to them, would it still be a "fair deal". What does "fair deal" mean?
xenzag, Oct 24 2015
  

       It means that life and death is brutal in some fashion for those not on top of the food chain and has been so since the invention of canine teeth.   

       “Good evening," it lowed and sat back heavily on its haunches, "I am the main Dish of the Day. May I interest you in parts of my body? It harrumphed and gurgled a bit, wriggled its hind quarters into a more comfortable position and gazed peacefully at them.   

       Its gaze was met by looks of startled bewilderment from Arthur and Trillian, a resigned shrug from Ford Prefect and naked hunger from Zaphod Beeblebrox.   

       "Something off the shoulder perhaps?" suggested the animal. "Braised in a white wine sauce?"   

       "Er, your shoulder?" said Arthur in a horrified whisper.   

       "But naturally my shoulder, sir," mooed the animal contentedly, "nobody else's is mine to offer."   

       Zaphod leapt to his feet and started prodding and feeling the animal's shoulder appreciatively.   

       "Or the rump is very good," murmured the animal. "I've been exercising it and eating plenty of grain, so there's a lot of good meat there." It gave a mellow grunt, gurgled again and started to chew the cud. It swallowed the cud again.   

       "Or a casserole of me perhaps?" it added.   

       "You mean this animal actually wants us to eat it?" whispered Trillian to Ford.   

       "Me?" said Ford, with a glazed look in his eyes. "I don't mean anything."   

       "That's absolutely horrible," exclaimed Arthur, "the most revolting thing I've ever heard."   

       "What's the problem, Earthman?" said Zaphod, now transferring his attention to the animal's enormous rump.   

       "I just don't want to eat an animal that's standing there inviting me to," said Arthur. "It's heartless."   

       "Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten," said Zaphod.   

       "That's not the point," Arthur protested. Then he thought about it for a moment. "All right," he said, "maybe it is the point. I don't care, I'm not going to think about it now. I'll just ... er ..."   

       The Universe raged about him in its death throes.   

       "I think I'll just have a green salad," he muttered.   

       "May I urge you to consider my liver?" asked the animal, "it must be very rich and tender by now, I've been force- feeding myself for months."   

       "A green salad," said Arthur emphatically.   

       "A green salad?" said the animal, rolling his eyes disapprovingly at Arthur.   

       "Are you going to tell me," said Arthur, "that I shouldn't have green salad?"   

       "Well," said the animal, "I know many vegetables that are very clear on that point. Which is why it was eventually decided to cut through the whole tangled problem and breed an animal that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly. And here I am."   

       It managed a very slight bow.   

       "Glass of water please," said Arthur.   

       "Look," said Zaphod, "we want to eat, we don't want to make a meal of the issues. Four rare steaks please, and hurry. We haven't eaten in five hundred and seventy-six thousand million years."   

       The animal staggered to its feet. It gave a mellow gurgle.   

       "A very wise choice, sir, if I may say so. Very good," it said. "I'll just nip off and shoot myself."   

       He turned and gave a friendly wink to Arthur.   

       "Don't worry, sir," he said, "I'll be very humane."
RayfordSteele, Oct 24 2015
  

       //What does "fair deal" mean?//   

       That's a good question, and it is impossible to argue objectively. The question of whether it's OK to eat animals (or, indeed, OK to do anything) ultimately comes down to a moral stance that depends on the individual, and can't be derived by logic. Society then acts according to the moral stance of the majority.   

       All I can say is that my _personal_ morality is that suffering is wrong, and causing suffering is therefore wrong. So, some intensive farming methods are wrong because (as far as I can tell) they cause suffering. Equally, it is in general wrong to kill a human being, because they are likely to anticipate it (and thereby experience mental suffering), and because they will be missed by others.   

       I believe that it is possible to raise and kill animals in such a way that they do not experience suffering, or at least experience less suffering than most wild animals experience. On that basis, I'm OK with eating animals, if they are raised and killed in such a way.   

       If someone says "it's just not OK to raise and kill animals, regardless of how it's done" - that's fine; I can't argue with that, any more than they can (or need to) provide logical arguments to support that.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 24 2015
  

       // Wouldn't it be nicer if everyone just stopped eating meat, and became more enlightened//   

       I'm not so sure that the two are synonymous. Has there ever been a species that went from omnivore to herbivore?   

       I had to take care of someone's 200 free-range chickens for week while they were out of town once.
By day three I'd figured out how to completely automate their hobby farm so that the chickens would be fed and watered, the floor would be self cleaning, the eggs would be collected cleaned and carton-ed.
For humanely killing and collecting chickens to eat I'd thought to have them each eat in individual cubicles with closing entrances.
The chicken eats its fill and exits the cubicle, but one or more of the cubicles contain a clamp and a quillotine. The chicken is killed and bled out humanely without release of stress hormones and the other chicken returning to the yard just wonder where Clucky went.
  

       I'm sure something similar could be applied to most farmed meat.   

       // it is in general wrong to kill a human being, //   

       We are so glad you qualified that statement.   

       // because they are likely to anticipate it (and thereby experience mental suffering), //   

       In some cases, that's the point. The more suffering, the better.   

       // and because they will be missed by others //   

       *may* be missed by others.   

       Altho they can be missed in a good way, as in "Ahhh, at last we're rid of that bastard".   

       In order to participate on the carnivore side of the debate, protagoinsts shound answer the question "Have you ever been present at or participated in the death of a homiothermic life form (fish, frogs and attourneys don't count) after which you prepared, optionally cooked, and consumed same ?"   

       Most modern humans in the developed world probably haven't. The nearest they get to death is probably roadkill.   

       To advocate the consumption of meat, as long as the grim, bloody reality of its production is neatly hidden from sight of the consumer, is gross hipocracy.   

       // Nitrogen gas //   

       Hydrogen cyanide inerts extremely fast after death and in fact can be undetectable after a few hours, leading to the diagnois of heart attack or other natural disease.   

       // Not sure if the poster is advocating cannibalism.. //   

       If you're looking at a poster in the street and the text says "Eat more raw human flesh !" then it probably is either (a) advocating cannibalism, or (b) advertising the latest zombie movie.
8th of 7, Oct 24 2015
  

       Nobody was advocating raw. Eww.
FlyingToaster, Oct 24 2015
  

       From the help file //WIBNI - "Wouldn't It Be Nice If". The invention describes something widely known as desirable, but unobtainable, without giving any new clues as to how it could be done.....// [Braineeee] - You're new here, but rules are rules, and these are the rules. [marked-for-deletion] Next time explain how your idea can actually work, and not just be an "I wish it was like this", or else add an explanation to this one.
xenzag, Oct 24 2015
  

       [xen], I can't help feeling that you are using [mfd] simply on the grounds that this idea relates to something you don't endorse.   

       The guy (or woman) is advocating slaughtering animals by lethal injection. That's more detail than in some HB ideas. Whaddya want - the chemistry? Give over.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 24 2015
  

       It's marked, so decision lies with moderators. There is the opportunity for the poster to add the necessary detail, as I have pointed out. Why would I do that, if what you say is true with regard to my reasoning? Silly. (//advocating// advocacy is another reason for m-f-d by the way)
xenzag, Oct 24 2015
  

       Someone's a little tetchy.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 24 2015
  

       //Wouldn't it be nicer if everyone just stopped eating meat, and became more enlightened.//   

       If we didn't raise animals to eat they would have no lives at all. They would never be born. Isn't a short life better than no life?
Voice, Oct 24 2015
  

       //Someone's a little tetchy// That can't be pleasant for you, by contrast I'm in fine form, happy to be alive after my near death infarction! A Bottle of Guinness will help out.... drop in and have one from my fridge!
xenzag, Oct 24 2015
  

       That is a kind offer, which I will alas decline as I am currently in G&T mode, one of which I am happy to offer you, though I don't think it'll sit well on the Guinness.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 24 2015
  

       Ah Guinness and Gin - The Dog's Nose (from The Pickwick Papers) - Better than its arse I suppose, but still don't like sound of....
xenzag, Oct 24 2015
  

       Would that Guinness and Gin have any memory of the last time they were drank together? That episode didn't go well...
RayfordSteele, Oct 24 2015
  

       See last link.
xenzag, Oct 26 2015
  

       Seems like "Less humane animal slaughter of humans" would be a good title for the idea of reducing the population levels by encouraging people to eat more meat. According to the WHO it's a toxic as asbestos!!
xenzag, Oct 26 2015
  

       Yes, [xen], but that's clearly bollocks, and possibly misquoted bollocks. If not, someone really ought to mention it to lions.   

       I appreciate that you are on a single-woman crusade to get us all to be vegetarians; out of interest, do you get lots of people telling you to eat meat?
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 26 2015
  

       perhaps misconstruing the phrase "get stuffed".
FlyingToaster, Oct 26 2015
  

       // ... the idea of reducing the population levels by encouraging people to eat more meat. According to the WHO it's a toxic as asbestos!! //   

       They did not say that. They said that PROCESSED meat is in the highest of 5 categories. I didn't notice a ranking inside that category.   

       They listed fresh red meat as a possible carcinogen which means it is almost assuredly less carcinogenic than asbestos.   

       I didn't read enough to find out if chicken made the list at all, but it didn't make headlines.   

       So putting // Eating meat gives you cancer! // as a title for that link may be a little bit of an exaggeration.
scad mientist, Oct 26 2015
  

       ...but on the plus side, I've just ordered 58 square metres of veal ("a[s] toxic as asbestos!!") to line the fireplace in the East-wing Carvery.   

       I'm beginning to wonder if there's a practical use for foie gras.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 26 2015
  

       Two carcinoma burgers coming up!
xenzag, Oct 26 2015
  

       //burgers coming up!//   

       I'll have the vealburger with the foie and bacon, and a side order of frogs' legs.   

       Actually, thinking about it, I believe that burger with a topping of paté de foie would be awesome. After all, the pate in Beef Wellington really makes it, and a burger is just a more down-to-earth B.W. Thanks for the idea, [xen].
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 26 2015
  

       pass on the veal - tasteless. never had foie gras (that I can recall), but chicken liverwurst tastes like manure so no, and that's before reading the WP article on the stuff.   

       Alberta beef, slab thereof, burnt on the outside, still mooing on the inside, salt, pepper.
FlyingToaster, Oct 26 2015
  

       //never had foie gras (that I can recall)//   

       The paté is pretty good - you should try it, though if you don't like liver in general you might not like it. But pan-fried foie, caramelized on the outside, and maybe with a little apple or pear fried in the same pan is just indescribably amazing. There's nothing else like which it is. But for the burger, the paté would work well.   

       If I get around to trying this, I shall christen it the xenburger in honour.   

       I'm also wondering what iterative foie-gras (taken from geese fed exclusively on foie-gras) would taste like.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 26 2015
  

       Probably a bit like anatidae spongiform encephalopathy.   

       ...or bald eagle.   

       I hope not. Bald eagle is chewy and a bit like panda.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 26 2015
  

       Yes. You wouldn't care for the beaver then.   

       Hey, if livestock were put down using nitrous oxide then calling it an [Animals Laughter House] would be politically correct.   

       Incidentally, given the huge range of secondary metabolites which plants synthesize in order to defend themselves (terpenes, polyphenols, alkaloids...), I'd be interested to see how far the incidence of cancer can be reduced by avoiding green plants.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 26 2015
  

       I thought I commented on this earlier but I don't see it here.   

       You can't kill the animal with a toxin or inert gas, for the soimple reason that exanguination only really works while the animal's heart is beating. Hence the concept of stunning the animal for immediate exanguination. I mean you might be able to use tetrodotoxin or similar - but that would absolutely not pass your bar for less cruel than current methods.
Custardguts, Oct 27 2015
  

       Current methods are inhumane?! C'mon. You can't spell “slaughter” without “laughter”!
ytk, Oct 27 2015
  

       Everyone's a critic. Like you can do better.   

       // staying quite some significant distance away from electromagnetic radiation //   

       Excellent advice. We will be glad to provide a capsule with walls made of alternating layers of lead, steel and concrete, and tow it out into intergalactic space. Some neutrinos may leak through but not much else. There, you can live out the remainder of your life* in a safe environment free from almost all electromagnetic radiation.   

       The service is free of charge, but you will be required to share your accomodation with a bottle of poison, a radioactive source, a trigger mechanism, and a cat in a state of quantum uncertanty**.   

       *Duration of remainder of life not guaranteed and may be considerably shorter than you expect.   

       ** Cat will definitely be alive when installed.
8th of 7, Oct 27 2015
  

       Nah - the garage up the road from me has one.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 27 2015
  

       All the old craft skills are dying out ...
8th of 7, Oct 27 2015
  

       Can I urge you, [8th], to visit the Rentisham's museum? There you will find many venerable traditional skills preserved and used on a daily basis.   

       If you have never seen a man craft a combination burler/puller from a fresh willow branch, using nothing more than the crook of his elbow and the point of a brining awl, it is an awe-inspiring sight. Even the skill of hand-whissoping is as alive today as it was two centuries ago, within the Rentisham estate.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 27 2015
  

       I think you should try lethal injection of honey. Honey ham anyone?
travbm, Oct 29 2015
  

       You would think so but have you ever heard about sugar killing animals. It was first fed to live stock to try and fatten them up. Instead they began dying off. Too much of anything can be bad for you I guess. But strait sucrose is more deadly as in crystal sugar.
travbm, Oct 30 2015
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle