This is horrifying...

Captain_Tightpants

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

AntWrig

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

kcragg

IT is horrific - I only eat free range or organic chicken. I won't eat battery hens on principle!

Captain_Tightpants

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

I have no better solutions. Just thought this would be an interesting topic for folks.

xraychick77

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

nonsense...

this is why i'm a vegetarian.. facts are, we dont feed 6billion (the number is closer to 7billion btw) people of the world. nearly 15% of the population is considered starving. i am not sure how many are considered mal nourished..there is a difference. many people in the US are malnourished yet overweight. facts are, animal farms, feed lots etc contribute to much of our pollution, clear cutting forests, erosion problems, poor soil quality. Facts are, a vegetarian diet is more sustainable for populations as well as the Earth. humans dont NEED meat to survive. in fact, vegetarian diets (if properly done) are overall healthier than one that incorporates meat.

Macrocarpa

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

Let's ask Dr Hannibal Lecter, he seemed legit in that documentary about the lambs or whatever...

PercivalHackworth

It's disgusting, I tottaly agree with you man - but eh look at the way fishes are treated, so the monkeys for trying out a new gloss, so the dogs for a new shampoo.
It's repulsing you since an article is written on that, officially. But under the radar, even more horrible things are happening just right now :frown:

AntWrig

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

nonsense...

this is why i'm a vegetarian.. facts are, we dont feed 6billion (the number is closer to 7billion btw) people of the world. nearly 15% of the population is considered starving. i am not sure how many are considered mal nourished..there is a difference. many people in the US are malnourished yet overweight. facts are, animal farms, feed lots etc contribute to much of our pollution, clear cutting forests, erosion problems, poor soil quality. Facts are, a vegetarian diet is more sustainable for populations as well as the Earth. humans dont NEED meat to survive. in fact, vegetarian diets (if properly done) are overall healthier than one that incorporates meat.

6 billion, 7 billion, 8 billion, it doesn't matter. What does matter is the fact that huge population requires protein and yes the best protein comes from meat. It took millions of evolution that involved us being primarily meat eaters. Show me one study stating that "vegetarian diets (if properly done) are overall healthier than one that incorporates meat."

I will wait.

flimflamfloz

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

By genetically engineering modified humans without stomach, blind and without cerebral cortex.
They will be really stupid and docile, and comply with everything they are told. Plus they won't eat.

I find this topic fascinating.

My (real) personal opinion on the topic is that we can't keep "patching" or quick fixing things forever. If that's the only plan we have for the future, it's going to be a mess.
At some point, we need to decide: OK we're going to stop being such a destructive wave for the planet - or things won't last forever.

Now we can decide to create headless chickens and stomachless humans, or we can decide to limit the waste of resources and even population growth. Heck, "even" Chinese people have been doing it for years...

AntWrig

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

By genetically engineering modified humans without stomach, blind and without cerebral cortex.
They will be really stupid and docile, and comply with everything they are told. Plus they won't eat.

I find this topic fascinating.

My (real) personal opinion on the topic is that we can't keep "patching" or quick fixing things forever. If that's the only plan we have for the future, it's going to be a mess.
At some point, we need to decide: OK we're going to stop being such a destructive wave for the planet - or things won't last forever.

Now we can decide to create headless chickens and stomachless humans, or we can decide to limit the waste of resources and even population growth. Heck, "even" Chinese people have been doing it for years...

Easier said then done. I want to see you tell people they can't have children.

(I agree with you by the way.)

vzucco

"Ford argues that his solution is no more shocking than existing food-production techniques. “The realities of the existing systems of production are just as shocking,” he told Wired.co.uk, “but they are hidden behind the sentimental guise of traditional farming scenes that we as consumers hold in our minds and see on our food packaging.”"

^^ I think that is an important part of this article. The current situation I find even more horrifying. However, I think the solution is to sponsor free range chicken farmers, and organic farmers in general. Consumers dictate the market and if we decide we don't want genetically engineered plants and brainless matrix poultry, the farming practices will adapt.

I don't agree with an entirely vegetarian diet being more healthy, we are omnivores, but I do think we consume entirely too much meat in our diets. Cavemen did not eat meat with every meal and neither should we. I am a meat eater but most of my meals are vegetarian and sometimes vegan. Yesterday, for example, I had an entirely meat-free day. This practice allows me to buy free-range chicken even though it is more expensive because I am not eating as much of it.

cekeys

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

nonsense...

this is why i'm a vegetarian.. facts are, we dont feed 6billion (the number is closer to 7billion btw) people of the world. nearly 15% of the population is considered starving. i am not sure how many are considered mal nourished..there is a difference. many people in the US are malnourished yet overweight. facts are, animal farms, feed lots etc contribute to much of our pollution, clear cutting forests, erosion problems, poor soil quality. Facts are, a vegetarian diet is more sustainable for populations as well as the Earth. humans dont NEED meat to survive. in fact, vegetarian diets (if properly done) are overall healthier than one that incorporates meat.

You realize that if we take your argument that no one should eat meat to the entire Earthly population (7 billion), we're going to have to slaughter millions of animals to sustain ourselves as a society. We'll need way more farmland to support the increased vegetable consumption. Those animals whom your trying to protect will by definition become competition for our survival. I'm not against vegetarianism, nor veganism, but that's the logical flaw in the argument.

BAMFMeredith

I don't agree with an entirely vegetarian diet being more healthy, we are omnivores, but I do think we consume entirely too much meat in our diets. Cavemen did not eat meat with every meal and neither should we. I am a meat eater but most of my meals are vegetarian and sometimes vegan. Yesterday, for example, I had an entirely meat-free day. This practice allows me to buy free-range chicken even though it is more expensive because I am not eating as much of it.

Completely agree with this. Human beings have been omnivorous since the beginning of human beings. Plenty of animals in the world are carnivorous. Different animals require different food sources. There is nothing better about being an omnivore, vegetarian, vegan, whatever. It's all about personal preference.

Personally I prefer to eat free range chicken and wild game (I'm from Texas, we hunt. Almost always have some kind of wild game in my freezer--thanks step dad!). But certainly not for every meal.

Contrarian

One time, a chicken bit me. These new chickens will never do that. I like them.

blink1021

Its definitely disturbing but not surprising. It was just a matter of time. This morning on the news they were talking about how one study was growing red meat in petri dishes. I couldn't watch it because I didn't want to know how.

CountryBoy65

Oh my HOLY Damn......come on. This is on WIRED...its gotta be true, right?

delilah47

But more horrifying than the current situation?
You decide...
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/02/headless-chicken-solution

How else are you going to feed a population of 6 billion and counting?

nonsense...

this is why i'm a vegetarian.. facts are, we dont feed 6billion (the number is closer to 7billion btw) people of the world. nearly 15% of the population is considered starving. i am not sure how many are considered mal nourished..there is a difference. many people in the US are malnourished yet overweight. facts are, animal farms, feed lots etc contribute to much of our pollution, clear cutting forests, erosion problems, poor soil quality. Facts are, a vegetarian diet is more sustainable for populations as well as the Earth. humans dont NEED meat to survive. in fact, vegetarian diets (if properly done) are overall healthier than one that incorporates meat.

First, I'm not anti-vegan. But, what if the whole world's population decided to go vegan? Would there be enough space to raise veggies for 100% of the world's food? How much space *would* be required? Something to think about. Would we have to kill off all the cows and other animals we use for food, directly or indirectly?

CountryBoy65

I don't agree with an entirely vegetarian diet being more healthy, we are omnivores, but I do think we consume entirely too much meat in our diets. Cavemen did not eat meat with every meal and neither should we. I am a meat eater but most of my meals are vegetarian and sometimes vegan. Yesterday, for example, I had an entirely meat-free day. This practice allows me to buy free-range chicken even though it is more expensive because I am not eating as much of it.

Completely agree with this. Human beings have been omnivorous since the beginning of human beings. Plenty of animals in the world are carnivorous. Different animals require different food sources. There is nothing better about being an omnivore, vegetarian, vegan, whatever. It's all about personal preference.

Personally I prefer to eat free range chicken and wild game (I'm from Texas, we hunt. Almost always have some kind of wild game in my freezer--thanks step dad!). But certainly not for every meal.

Exactly. If God did not intend for us to eat animals, he would not have made them out of meat! :-P

Nopedotjpeg

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

livi_cowgirl

That's barbaric! Not to mention goes against the laws of nature. I have truly never read such an horrific notion in all my life. I hope to goodness that this "idea" never becomes common practice.

cekeys

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but can we be certain that the animals would feel no pain?

EDIT for clarification

delilah47

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

Sure, and if this works... let's put some humans on the line too. We could use them for surrogates for our babies and we could all have beautiful bodies! And then we could put some cows on there so they wouldn't have to graze the pastures. And then..... there's a moral boundary here somewhere.

Nopedotjpeg

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but has that been proven that certain animals feel no pain?

Look at the article. They're removing the cerebral cortex in order to desensitize the chicken. (Not sure how accurate that is because iirc there were more parts that deal with the senses). But for argument's sake, if the parts were removed that deal with pain, how would it be inhumane?

cekeys

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but has that been proven that certain animals feel no pain?

Look at the article. They're removing the cerebral cortex in order to desensitize the chicken. (Not sure how accurate that is because iirc there were more parts that deal with the senses). But for argument's sake, if the parts were removed that deal with pain, how would it be inhumane?

I got that. I restated myself because I wasn't clear.

lizzybethclaire

It's disgusting, I tottaly agree with you man - but eh look at the way fishes are treated, so the monkeys for trying out a new gloss, so the dogs for a new shampoo.
It's repulsing you since an article is written on that, officially. But under the radar, even more horrible things are happening just right now :frown:

He is absolutely right. We would not eat any meat if we visited those farms.

GinNouveau

This article made me sad. I'm not a vegetarian, but own a few chickens. Life should be respected. Even if it isn't human life. You can eat meat and still be respectful of the animal it came from. Basically, the designer is trying to take the life out of the birds to produce the meat. I don't know if it's more humane, but anyone can look at it and see it's not natural. Zombie chicken vines.

Nopedotjpeg

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

Sure, and if this works... let's put some humans on the line too. We could use them for surrogates for our babies and we could all have beautiful bodies! And then we could put some cows on there so they wouldn't have to graze the pastures. And then..... there's a moral boundary here somewhere.

Moral according to who? Also, a human brain is much more complex than a cow's or a chicken's. Not to mention there's already a large percentage of the population that's starving. Making a surrogate to have even more offspring seems counterproductive to what the goal of the original "headless chicken" experiment is.

DannyMussels

Norman Borlaug won a nobel peace prize for genetically modified crops to sustain harsh/poor growing environments and literally saved millions (some say billions) of lives.

People still complain about him and what he did. (ie its not natural....)

So until you save billions and billions of lives, keep eating your frankenstein food and be happy.

If I have to eat live people, I will.

Nopedotjpeg

How is it horrifying if these 'animals' have no sensory part to their brain? If they feel no pain, why would this be considered inhumane?

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but has that been proven that certain animals feel no pain?

Look at the article. They're removing the cerebral cortex in order to desensitize the chicken. (Not sure how accurate that is because iirc there were more parts that deal with the senses). But for argument's sake, if the parts were removed that deal with pain, how would it be inhumane?

I got that. I restated myself because I wasn't clear.

I'm no expert on neurology, but I do recall that the sensory parts of the brain have been identified.

Nopedotjpeg

Norman Borlaug won a nobel peace prize for genetically modified crops to sustain harsh/poor growing environments and literally saved millions (some say billions) of lives.

People still complain about him and what he did. (ie its not natural....)

So until you save billions and billions of lives, keep eating your frankenstein food and be happy.

If I have to eat live people, I will.

Thank you for bringing him up. The fact is that very little of our food is in it's original "natural" state, and if you wanted it all to be, you would basically be handing a death sentence to a large amount of the world's population.

aion26

This reminds me a bit of the Margaret Atwood Sci-Fi novel Oryx and Crake.