This is horrifying...

Options
245678

Replies

  • delilah47
    delilah47 Posts: 1,658
    Options
    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
    Nopedotjpeg Posts: 1,806 Member
    Options
    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
    cekeys Posts: 397 Member
    Options
    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
    lizzybethclaire Posts: 849 Member
    Options
    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
    GinNouveau Posts: 143 Member
    Options
    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
    Nopedotjpeg Posts: 1,806 Member
    Options
    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
    DannyMussels Posts: 1,842 Member
    Options
    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
    Nopedotjpeg Posts: 1,806 Member
    Options
    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
    Nopedotjpeg Posts: 1,806 Member
    Options
    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
    aion26 Posts: 14
    Options
    This reminds me a bit of the Margaret Atwood Sci-Fi novel Oryx and Crake.
  • calell83
    calell83 Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    I have read several articles lately about protein productions, now including this one. One says that labs will be able to grow enough meat to make a hamurger from stem cells of cows. This article talks about having chickens essentially without a brain. I assume if they were to successfully do this there is no reason to believe they couldn't do this to other protein sources, such as cows, pigs, etc. I don't know if that would be a good idea as who knows that the tickering with the genetics of the animal will do to the people that consumer it.
    Another artticle stated that they will be able to come up with something that mimics meat and is completely plant based, but has a similar nutritional values and taste. The artciel went so far as to say that people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between meat and the faux meat product, even "foodies."
    Sadly, as the world population grows there will have to be a solution, and it will probably be a combination fo everything above. I just wonder if we start growing meat in labs, and have brainless animals what will happen to all the real animals. Would the governments create vaults for their DNA similar to the seed vaults? Who knows.
  • jmehere
    jmehere Posts: 108 Member
    Options
    Honestly, I almost cried when I saw the picture of the brainless chickens. I think I prefer to occasionally eat an expensive, well treated chicken then to eat something like that. Just seems more natural and my gut reaction. I have been vegetarian off and on again, but now only eat poultry occasionally. The last cold I had while a vegetarian was a month long... I haven't been that sick since I lived in my parents house, who were 3 pack a day smokers.
    Anyway, here's another interesting link. I wonder how many people will think more deeply about where their meat comes from when this stuff hits the market: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    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...

    Soilent Green is people!
  • iplayoutside19
    iplayoutside19 Posts: 2,304 Member
    Options
    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...

    The logistics and draconian laws required to facilitate this are more horrifying to me than headless chickens.

    I'm not too worried about the Earth. Ever visited an abandon ghost town? Remember, we will not destroy the Earth, the Earth will destroy us if we get to be too much trouble.

    And if being mean to animals is your major concern, who do you stop other animals from from being mean to each other?
  • NatalieWinning
    NatalieWinning Posts: 999 Member
    Options
    [/quote]
    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.
    [/quote]

    Growng vegetation also impacts the earth. Driving to work, living in a home, wanitng to wear clothes, the computer we use, all of it. Being a vegetarian and not being mean to animals does not solve a thing.
  • delilah47
    delilah47 Posts: 1,658
    Options
    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.

    Everything is greed and appearances. I'm not saying MORE humans. I'm saying women wouldn't have to take time off to have a baby or, in some cases, wreck the appearance of their body. And if someone actually came up with that technology, they would get rich. And.. what difference is it how complicated a brain is.. if it is removed? Just throwing in my 2 cents. Most people who are not psychopaths have a moral boundary.. somewhere.
  • tappae
    tappae Posts: 568 Member
    Options

    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?

    It takes maybe an acre to raise a cow, right? That will give you several hundred pounds of meat (protein and fat) and nothing else (vitamins, minerals, carbs). You could feed a family of four by farming that same area and provide a balanced diet. Raising animals for food is less efficient, not more efficient (I'm not a vegetarian, btw). The most efficient way would be to raise the animals for the other things they can give us (milk, eggs, wool, etc.) and then eat them when their useful life is over. That, and goats can be raised on areas that aren't good for farming.
  • jarrettd
    jarrettd Posts: 872 Member
    Options
    Soylent Green. That is all.
  • LaurenAOK
    LaurenAOK Posts: 2,475 Member
    Options
    Literally made me feel sick. This is why I don't eat meat :/
  • paulamarsden
    paulamarsden Posts: 483 Member
    Options
    and how about this?

    http://www.periscopepost.com/2012/02/dutch-scientist-prepares-to-unveil-worlds-first-artificial-meat-burger-cooked-by-heston-blumenthal/


    im a meat eater, i choose to eat free range and organic where possible.

    i refuse to eat at Halal restaurants.

    i think we all need to stop trying to make more food, and start to stop people breeding for the sake of it.

    We dont NEED families of 7-15 kids, why is it still allowed? i say there should be a limit on offspring, and also stop trying to solve aids in africa and start trying to educate the people to not have multiple babies one after another.

    sorry if this is very right wing, but thats just who i am.

Categories