Should we ban the Kosher/Halal method of killing unstunned animals?

[superstring01]

I think you ought to stop beating around the bush worrying about whether slaughtering animals is done humanely and start addressing the more immediate question of whether any slaughter at all can be humane.

Good point. And the answer is. . .

I don't care.

Stun gun. Long knife. Shot gun. Baseball bat. Dirty Language.

Whatever works.

I'll still eat my burgers.

It's not that I want them to suffer, it's just that I'm unwilling to obsess about it to the point of going vegetarian.

~String

 

[visceral_instinct]

Yes, for sure. An animal should not be conscious when being killed. End of. I don't care if their religion tells them it's wrong. If my religion tells me it's okay to kill babies is that just fine?

 

[S.A.M.]

Out of curiosity, is foie gras harvested from force fed geese banned in the countries where slaughter without stunning is banned?

As far as I know traditional foie gras requires the geese to be force fed corn through gavage

http://divisionstreet.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/foie-gras-5_1.jpg

Has that been changed by law?

 

[visceral_instinct]

It seems absurd on its face to suggest that cutting an animal's throat is more humane than stunning it with a blow that renders it immediately unconscious. Care to explain yourself? First, since there's an astonishing amount of non-scientific bullshit that gets thrown around in these discussions, I'm going to need you to provide a scientific reference to back up this assertion. Second, I don't know about cows, but a human brain remains conscious for up to ten seconds even if blood flow to the brain is completely cut off. Ten seconds of agony is NOT as humane as instant unconsciousness from a blow to the head.

Are you sure about that? I've almost blacked out in a lot less than ten seconds just from standing too fast. Now translate that to actual decapitation.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think most of the evidence represents evidence of brain activity as consciousness. I'm not certain if that is entirely correct. Even coma patients and unconscious patients present with activity

 

[Lori_7]

imo, how we kill them isn't nearly as impactive as the quality of life we afford them prior to killing them. iow, the amount of respect we have for them.

 

[Lori_7]

Good point. And the answer is. . .

I don't care.

Stun gun. Long knife. Shot gun. Baseball bat. Dirty Language.

Whatever works.

I'll still eat my burgers.

It's not that I want them to suffer, it's just that I'm unwilling to obsess about it to the point of going vegetarian.

~String

i'm not sure why you would consider that "obsessing". it seems much more like a logical decision to me. :shrug:

 

[Lori_7]

i think it's entirely logical and responsible to want to know exactly what happens to your food prior to consuming it. or with any thing we consume for that matter, we should be responsible for the effects of our supply and demand. turning a blind eye to anything has never done anyone any good.

particularly pertaining to your food, or something you ingest. nothing could possibly have a greater impact on you personally.

i was a staunch vegan for about 5 years. now i eat seafood, eggs, and dairy, but i don't feel all that great about it...though i've considered it a compromise of being married and sharing meals with someone.

when i was a vegan, people were fascinated by that, and always asking me how i could possibly be a vegan, and saying how they could never do that themselves because they love their meat, or it would be just too much of a pain in the ass...to much self-sacrifice iow. so i would tell them that if they were to see what happens to their food prior to them consuming it, they would emphatically change their eating habits. i would suggest they watch a movie called "earthlings", watch some peta vids, go visit a slaughter house or a stockyard, or a dairy or a chicken farm. and unanimously and emphatically people would respond with, "OH HELL NO! I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT!" they don't want to know. how is that responsible? most of those people will not argue that it is responsible, they just don't care nor do they want to.

the bible says that purposely turning away from knowledge is evil, and i can see why that is.

 

[Nasor]

Are you sure about that? I've almost blacked out in a lot less than ten seconds just from standing too fast. Now translate that to actual decapitation.

This was probably caused by blood draining from your head due to the rapidly standing up, resulting in a sudden drop in blood pressure. I don't think that's comparable to slitting an animal's throat. Yeah, there will be a gradual drop in blood pressure as the animal bleeds out, but it would be far from instantaneous.

Also, if you're interested, there have been some pretty gruesome investigations indicating that even when completely decapitated, people can remain conscious for a surprisingly long time...

 

[S.A.M.]

This was probably caused by blood draining from your head due to the rapidly standing up, resulting in a sudden drop in blood pressure. I don't think that's comparable to slitting an animal's throat. Yeah, there will be a gradual drop in blood pressure as the animal bleeds out, but it would be far from instantaneous.

Also, if you're interested, there have been some pretty gruesome investigations indicating that even when completely decapitated, people can remain conscious for a surprisingly long time...

Do they talk while they are "conscious"? Do they run around as decapitated chickens do?

The loss of blood following decapitation is obviously much more rapid than that due to low blood pressure. Just look at forensic evidence of jugular bleeding. I've lost animals while inserting jugular catheters because of bleeding out.

What I am interested in here, since the basis is humane slaughter, is the evidence of lower suffering when a bolt is placed at the base of the animals skull so that tissue destruction is caused by the penetration of the electric current rendering the animal insensate. Does that cause less suffering than bleeding out? How do we know this?

 

[Nasor]

Do they talk while they are "conscious"? Do they run around as decapitated chickens do?

You can't talk when you're decapitated because the vocal cords are severed. But the eyes continue to look around, and will focus on people who call out their name. This seems to strongly indicate that it's not just random muscle spams etc. Pretty gristly stuff...

 

[S.A.M.]

Can I see this evidence of response to stimulus post decapitation? I've decapitated a lot of animals and I've never seen any sign of stimulus-response.

Pretty gristly stuff...

Umm why? A person who knows he is going to be decapitated is likely to be anxious waaaay before the event. The speed of death is only relevant insofar as suffering is involved. All methods of killing involve some form of suffering, except perhaps certain forms of chemical intoxication - I'm not convinced that decapitation is worse than electric shocks or chemical injections in terms of extended suffering.

 

[Lori_7]

I've decapitated a lot of animals...

wow sam; that's hardcore.

 

[S.A.M.]

wow sam; that's hardcore.

Lets just say that the decapitation was the most humane of the procedures I conducted. I wonder if people realise how many animals suffer for research - or how much.

 

[Nasor]

Can I see this evidence of response to stimulus post decapitation? I've decapitated a lot of animals and I've never seen any sign of stimulus-response.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine

The following report was written by a Dr. Beaurieux, who experimented with the head of a condemned prisoner by the name of Henri Languille, on 28 June 1905:

Here, then, is what I was able to note immediately after the decapitation: the eyelids and lips of the guillotined man worked in irregularly rhythmic contractions for about five or six seconds. This phenomenon has been remarked by all those finding themselves in the same conditions as myself for observing what happens after the severing of the neck …

I waited for several seconds. The spasmodic movements ceased. […] It was then that I called in a strong, sharp voice: "Languille!" I saw the eyelids slowly lift up, without any spasmodic contractions – I insist advisedly on this peculiarity – but with an even movement, quite distinct and normal, such as happens in everyday life, with people awakened or torn from their thoughts.

Next Languille's eyes very definitely fixed themselves on mine and the pupils focused themselves. I was not, then, dealing with the sort of vague dull look without any expression, that can be observed any day in dying people to whom one speaks: I was dealing with undeniably living eyes which were looking at me. After several seconds, the eyelids closed again […].

It was at that point that I called out again and, once more, without any spasm, slowly, the eyelids lifted and undeniably living eyes fixed themselves on mine with perhaps even more penetration than the first time. Then there was a further closing of the eyelids, but now less complete. I attempted the effect of a third call; there was no further movement – and the eyes took on the glazed look which they have in the dead.

http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/thefrenchrevolution/a/dyk10.htm

The current medical consensus is that life does survive, for a period of roughly thirteen seconds, varying slightly depending on the victim's build, health and the immediate circumstances of the decapitation. The simple act of removing a head from a body is not what kills the brain, rather, it is the lack of oxygen and other important chemicals provided in the bloodstream. To quote Dr. Ron Wright "The 13 seconds is the amount of high energy phosphates that the cytochromes in the brain have to keep going without new oxygen and glucose" (Cited from urbanlegends.com, no longer extant). The precise post-execution lifespan will depend on how much oxygen, and other chemicals, were in the brain at the point of decapitation; however, eyes could certainly move and blink.

Umm why?

You don't consider discussions of how long severed heads remain conscious to be gristly?

 

[Lori_7]

Lets just say that the decapitation was the most humane of the procedures I conducted. I wonder if people realise how many animals suffer for research - or how much.

is it difficult for you to do these procedures?

 

[S.A.M.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine

http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/thefrenchrevolution/a/dyk10.htm


You don't consider discussions of how long severed heads remain conscious to be gristly?

I'm not certain "conscious" is the right word to use here. We know a lot more about muscle physiology now than we did in 1905. eg the effects of ATP depletion on muscular movements - I'd assume a high anxiety level in a person who has been decapitated and definitely post-traumatic stress reflexes which manifest as movements. I have experienced muscular movements in leg muscles upto half an hour after the animal has been killed, while harvesting the soleus muscle, but thats not evidence that the animal is conscious inspite of being separated from its head - not even when the involuntary jerk is precipitated by a cut. The drop in blood pressure is too rapid for sensation to persist -ask any person who suffers from low BP how they feel immediately when their blood pressure drops.

is it difficult for you to do these procedures?

Like all difficult things, its something that becomes routine with time and practice. Dissection is part and parcel of biology and nutrition has the added benefit of desensitising you to the body as a living being and viewing it as a machine.

 

[Lori_7]

Like all difficult things, its something that becomes routine with time and practice. Dissection is part and parcel of biology and nutrition has the added benefit of desensitising you to the body as a living being and viewing it as a machine.

being religious, do you ever think, "there's got to be a better way?"

 

[Nasor]

In any case, I don't think Kosher/Halal slaughter of mammals involves decapitation. They simply slit the throat. Usually the animal makes pained noises and thrashes around for some time before dying.

 

[S.A.M.]

being religious, do you ever think, "there's got to be a better way?"

Usually the options we explore are the best ones available to us. Sometimes we have a choice and sometimes we don't. Most of my regrets are not related to what I could have done differently since I always take care to prepare adequately and ignorance can only be cured by accessing greater knowledge.

I do think, however, that I was able to view it more dispassionately because I have cared for sick animals and witnessed animals being killed for consumption. Being aware of what is involved makes you better prepared to face what is to be done.

Being religious as well as a fatalist makes it easier, I think.

In any case, I don't think Kosher/Halal slaughter of mammals involves decapitation. They simply slit the throat. Usually the animal makes pained noises and thrashes around for some time before dying.

If the animal thrashes around a lot, the slaughter was not done properly - the more the animal thrashes around, the greater the ATP depletion, the tougher the meat.

Ideally, from what I have seen, the animal is held immobile and the cut made deep and fast. The animal should not be "conscious" for more than a few seconds and certainly should not thrash around. Slaughtering is also a science and not everyone is equally good at it.