URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Who CAN you trust? 
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 2717--------------------------------------------------
       Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: February 22, 2015, 9:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       GO,
       Here is a sign that some things ARE improving. Every now and
       then you jokingly bring up the subject of eating veal (with some
       fancy gourmet descriptive the rich folks like) name. I hope you
       realize that is highly offensive to some people. For the last
       century (at least ), male calves who don't win the breeding
       lottery have had their movements and diets restricted :emthdown:
       to produce the gourmet delicacies you are so fond of.
       That is changing. I consider that a good sign.  :emthup: You
       might not because the calves are still getting slaughtered so
       what's the big deal? The big deal is that they do not suffer
       while they are alive. I consider that a big deal, don't you?
       [quote]Many veal farmers have started improving conditions in
       their veal farms.[13][14] The American Veal Association has
       announced their plan to phase out the use of crates by 2017
       :emthup:, which is often the main focus of controversy in veal
       farming.[15]
       Criticism of veal crates revolves around the fact that the veal
       calves are highly restricted in movement; have unsuitable
       flooring; spend their entire lives indoors; experience prolonged
       sensory, social, and exploratory deprivation; and are more
       susceptible to high amounts of stress and disease.[12]
       [img width=640
       height=480]
  HTML http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/92/55/925553b49554b745b010a12b5e3f3ace.jpg[/img]
       [size=14pt]The life of a young male calf slated to be Veal is no
       picnic.  [img width=70
       height=050]
  HTML http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000370273/polls_Smiley_Angry_256x256_3451_356175_answer_4_xlarge.png[/img]
       According to the Veal Quality Assurance Program, the Veal Issues
       Management Program industry fact sheet, and the Ontario Veal
       Association, individual housing systems are important for
       disease control and in reducing the possibility of physical
       injury. Furthermore, they state it also allows for veal farmers
       to provide more personal attention to veal calves.[9][10]
       Alternative agricultural practices for using male dairy calves
       include raising bob veal (slaughter at two or three days
       old),[16] raising calves as "red veal" without the severity of
       dietary restrictions needed to create pale meat (resulting in
       fewer antibiotic treatments and lower calf mortality),[17] and
       as dairy beef.[18]
       In 2008-2009 the demand for free-raised veal rose
       rapidly.[14][19]
       [/size][/quote]
  HTML http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veal
       QUOTE
       Differentiation between veal, calf, and beef carcasses is made
       primarily on the basis of the
       color of the lean, although such factors as texture of the lean;
       character of the fat; color, shape,
       size, and ossification of the bones and cartilages; and the
       general contour of the carcass are also
       given consideration.
       Typical veal carcasses have a grayish pink color of lean that is
       very smooth and velvety in texture and they also have a slightly
       soft, pliable character of fat and marrow, and very red rib
       bones.
       By contrast, typical calf carcasses have a grayish red color of
       lean, a flakier type of fat, and somewhat wider rib bones with
       less pronounced evidences of red color.
       UNQUOTE
  HTML http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELDEV3060455
       The EXPENSIVE veal was a calf with restricted diet and severely
       restricted movements. I.E. a MISERABLE CALF.  Please remember
       that when you fork up  $26.99 per pound for THIN CUT (Cut from
       the leg in a thin cut) Veal. I don't eat veal but I drink milk
       so I may be just as guilty as you. The dairy and the veal
       industry are partners in doing what they do.   [img width=30
       height=30]
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif[/img]
       [img width=640
       height=520]
  HTML http://davidsztybel.inf
       o/y-vealcalf.jpg[/img]
       We have to eat. But we have no excuse for torturing the animals
       we eat before they are slaughtered. No crates for calves means a
       bit less evil, does it not?
       [img]
  HTML http://cmsimg.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=BT&Date=20120511&Category=LIVING06&ArtNo=120510017&Ref=V1&MaxW=300&Border=0&Vermont-farmers-make-case-humane-veal[/img]
       #Post#: 2842--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: March 16, 2015, 5:59 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center] [img width=275
       height=150]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-060914180936.jpeg[/img][/center]
       Agelbert:By the way. how is the latest goat family doing? I have
       often wondered if goats, like cows, have to be kept pregnant in
       order to give milk except when their kids are nursing.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191404.bmp
       Knarf: [quote]The goats are fine. Our two oldest does, ages 7
       and 6, each had triplets two months ago. Their kids are pretty
       well weaned now and we're preparing to begin milking.
       Yes, like cows, goats cannot give milk until they have kidded.
       Then, depending on their age, how many sets of kids they have
       had, and their genes, they can sometimes be milked for a year or
       more before their milk production drops off to where it isn't
       worth the effort to milk them anymore.[/quote]
       And when they are giving milk to the kids, is there enough for
       you to make cheese without hurting the kid milk supply?
       [quote]
       It partly depends on how many kids they have. Kinder goats, the
       breed we raise, have been know to bear up to six kids in one
       kidding (!), but even with quads or quints, the breeder may have
       to bottle feed kids that aren't getting their fair share of
       milk.
       As for hurting the kids' milk supply, breeders handle the
       situation in various ways, but what we do is wean the kids to
       the point where they can subsist on hay, forage, and a little
       grain, and then we begin milking.
  HTML http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif
       
       Can't wait too long to start though or the does begin to dry
       up.[/quote]
       I recently read that when human fertile females are exposed by
       wolf pups (or dog pups) to the Oxytocin pheromone, they start
       producing milk. I wonder if that has been tried.
       [quote]I don't know about using oxytocin for contraception and
       artificial inducement of lactation, but an obstetrician once
       told me that, back in the old days, to encourage contractions, a
       woman in labor was sometimes given someone else's infant to
       nurse.
       This is because the act of breastfeeding would cause the
       expectant mother to produce oxytocin, which in turn causes
       contractions. Post-partum, nursing also encourages contractions
       that enable delivery of the placenta.[/quote]
       [img width=60
       height=50]
  HTML http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg[/img]<br
       />
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/thankyou.gif
       #Post#: 2846--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: March 16, 2015, 9:07 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       JD said:
       [quote]
       The questions you ask basically are ones of technical
       feasibility. [/quote]
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif
       [quote]That is not the most important issue.[/quote] I never
       said it was. You just jumped up and made that incorrect
       assumption.
       [quote]If you are doing sustainable animal husbandry, every
       calorie that goes into milk production is a calorie that can not
       be expended on other requirements.[/quote]  This is mechanistic
       reductionist thinking on your part.   Knarf addressed that issue
       effectively by weaning the kids with a suitable, nutritional
       substitute that does NOT hurt the kid OR the female goat. The
       lactating period is a little longer but not enough for you to
       make such and "unsustainable" big deal out of it.
       [quote]
       So it is really more of a budgetary question, how much can you
       extract from the system before it falls apart? [/quote] More
       mechanistic reductionist thinking. Goat milking is DESIGNED to
       perpetuate the viability of the goat milking human and the goats
       as well, not to "EXPLOIT THE SYSTEM" to the point of collapse!
       That is predatory capitalist thinking. I thought you had been
       weaned of that garbage by this forum. MKing sees EVERYTHING that
       way. I was convinced it was different for you.  :(
       [quote] If you are using artificial stimulants, the answer is
       not much unless you use artificial supports, like
       antibiotics.[/quote] Oxytocin is a hormone. The fact that we can
       make it does not change that. We make insulin. Is that
       "artificial" too?
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif
       [quote]
       Dairy animals go dry for a reason.  They need a period to rest
       and recover.  Breeds that have been selected for hyper levels of
       production tend to have very short lifespans because they
       literally wear themselves out.[/quote] With all due respect, JD,
       this is the kind of comment, that you make from time to time,
       that really pisses me off. You know me. You know I have a
       general idea of what mammary glands are, when they are used, why
       they are used and how they can me misused. If you are talking to
       a fucking ignoramus, this is the kind of comment that is in
       order. I thought you had a higher opinion of my data base. :(
       You and I have had communication difficulties since I met you.
       FWIW, I will try to explain my position to you on this animal
       husbandry thing in general and milking them in particular.
       I hear ya. I am as concerned about sustainability and proper,
       humane, husbandry as you. I think what Knarf is doing qualifies
       as sustainable, don't you?
       The cows, on the other hand, have their male calves taken from
       them for VEAL for the rich at about $28.00 a pound!  :emthdown:
       :( The agony those cows go through and the grieving has been
       documented.   :(
       That is one hell of a difference!
       As to your energy outlook on sustainability, I think it is a bit
       cold blooded.  :emthdown: Animal husbandry is, admittedly, an
       EVIL practice in this country. However, unlike many
       permaculturists out there, I DO NOT agree with all their calorie
       calculations about this and that not being sustainable. That is
       Baloney.
       The problem is the WAY the animals are treated, how they are
       fed, and WHAT IS DONE with their urine and feces. If all this
       was done CORRECTLY, we would have MORE and healthier ORGANIC
       crops with MORE domestic food animals, PERIOD. And NO
       antibiotics would be needed either!
       I've read the numbers, JD. I DO NOT buy them. HUGE herds of
       ruminants roamed this land before Homo SAPS were killing them
       off. THEY are NECESSARY for a viable biosphere. All the Baloney
       about how farm animals are "unsustainable" is just that!
       What is UNSUSTAINABLE is the "PROFIT" from jamming animals into
       factory style environments that breed disease so some big meat
       corporation can buy off the government inspectors.
       The MOMENT those animals are treated properly, the LAND where
       they graze, urine and defecate begins to recover. But the
       profits of the ranchers goes down in proportion to the humane
       and sustainable treatment of the animals.
       As to Oxytocin being an "artificial" substance that violated
       permaculture principles, you are wrong. Yes, we can make
       oxytocin in the lab, but both animals and humans MAKE IT
       NATURALLY.
       I know all about mastitis and other deleterious effects of
       forcing mammary glands to pump milk too often. Perhaps it would
       be better to eliminate milk altogether.
       But THAT is no guarantee that the animals will have better
       and/or LONGER lives, as you surmise. In fact, more cows will
       head for the slaughter EARLIER. I don't consider that progress,
       do you?
       As long as we DO get milk from animals, If we can get them to
       lactate, like HUMAN FEMALES DO, from exposure to oxytocin, that
       beats the HELL out of inseminating them, getting them pregnant,
       and then ripping their calves away from them for veal cutlets!
       Here's an article on 11 effects of Oxytocin does in humans. I
       think several Diners could use a heavy dose of it now and then.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp<br
       />
       [quote]
       Oxytocin crystallizes emotional memories
       A November study in the journal Proceedings of the National
       Academy of Sciences supported researchers' theory that oxytocin
       would amplify men's early memories of their mothers. In a group
       of 31 men, those who inhaled a synthetic version of the hormone
       found the hormone intensified fond memories of their mothers if
       their relationships had been positive. Those whose ties with
       their mom's had frayed downgraded their opinions after inhaling
       oxytocin, the study showed.[/quote]
       [quote]
       Oxytocin solidifies relationships
       Comparing urine levels of oxytocin and a related hormone called
       vasopressin in biological and adoptive children who lived in
       Russian and Romanian orphanages, researchers found that oxytocin
       rose in biological children after having contact with their
       mothers. The study, published in 2005 in the journal Proceedings
       of the National Academy of Sciences, showed that oxytocin levels
       remained static in the adoptive children in the same situation,
       suggesting a physiological basis for why some adoptive children
       have difficulty forming secure relationships.[/quote]
       [quote]
       Oxytocin facilitates childbirth and breastfeeding
       In its best understood role, oxytocin is released in large
       amounts during labor, intensifying the uterine contractions that
       open the cervix and allow the baby to pass through the birth
       canal. Physicians have been using synthetic oxytocin, also known
       by its brand name Pitocin, to induce or augment labor since the
       early 1900s. After birth, the hormone continues to stimulate
       uterine contractions that discourage hemorrhaging, and more is
       released when the nipples are stimulated during suckling,
       promoting the letdown of milk into the nipples.[/quote]
  HTML http://www.livescience.com/35219-11-effects-of-oxytocin.html
  HTML http://www.livescience.com/35219-11-effects-of-oxytocin.html
       [/quote]
       #Post#: 2850--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: March 18, 2015, 7:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=jdwheeler42 link=topic=559.msg70423#msg70423
       date=1426563306]
       Thanks, AG, for explaining your position.  Yes, we have had our
       difficulties in communications, which is kind of ironic, because
       I think of all the regular Diners, you are the one who I agree
       with the most.  That seems to really accentuate the differences,
       though.  I think it's partially because I leave a lot of stuff
       out, and we have different ways of connecting the dots.
       One thing I definitely do disagree with you on is what is
       "artificial".  It's not just a matter of origin.  Oxytocin and
       insulin may be chemically identical to what is produced by the
       body, but introducing them into the body is still what I
       consider "artificial stimulation".  Not that I am necessarily
       opposed to it, mind you; my wife was on insulin during her last
       trimester, and I had no problem with that.  But I am wary of
       designing systems that use them on a routine basis.
       What I didn't understand until you explained it in your last
       post was how you were thinking of this as a substitute for
       getting dairy animals pregnant to produce milk.  Now, I'm pretty
       sure that oxytocin by itself will be insufficient to induce
       lactation, but with a careful mix of other hormones like
       progesterone, it might be possible, and it is an intriguing
       idea.
       One thing I was unclear in explaining is that I was not talking
       about ecosystem calories, which can vary widely, I was talking
       about metabolic calories for the individual animal, which, when
       food is not limited, depend on its ability to process its food,
       which is fairly strictly limited if it is to remain in a healthy
       range.  However, this actually works for the idea of getting an
       animal to produce milk without getting pregnant, because all the
       calories that are not put into growing the new baby can go into
       producing milk.
       I'm sorry about the comments where I seem to be talking down to
       you, AG, but in an open forum, unless I name someone
       specifically, I try not to address my comments just to one
       person, I do try to explain things to the lowest level that
       would likely be reading a post.
       [/quote]
       JD,
       Thank you for your kind reply. I understand your concerns and
       agree with all of them.
       I go off on a rant from time to time because of this whole
       mindset that we have been saddled with by "science" (see milk
       production and cow slaughter system rant below) because it is
       such a logical strait jacket.  [img width=30
       height=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png[/img]
       As you will agree, there is far more (not just a little bit
       more) to nutrition and health in all life forms than energy
       capturing cause and effect. The joy of a free range animal that
       can raise its young without separation, less chemicals of all
       sorts and a healthier soil underfoot as a result, is something
       SPIRITUAL, not something that can be measured in calories.
       Science refuses to go there. All they can do is come up with
       "observations" like "music makes cows produce more milk". This
       is so pitifully limited in thought and logic as to be laughable
       if it wasn't so overtly cold blooded and cruel.  :(   [img
       width=30
       height=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png[/img]
       This rant is NOT addressed to you, JD.; It is addressed to ALL
       humanity, including myself. I post it as a warning that our
       proper path REQUIRES an ethical posture on absolutely every
       industry we engage in BECAUSE, not doing so DESTROYS empathy in
       Homo SAPS. We will destroy ourselves, along with a large part of
       the biosphere, if we do not make ethical behavior MANDATORY in
       everything we do. We MUST always look at the WHOLE PICTURE.
       That picture has a portion that science CANNOT EVER MEASURE.
       Ethical behavior is far more important than the mechanistic
       reductionist bean counting so favored by scientists.
       They have it exactly backwards. I have fought (mostly myself) on
       this most of my life. I LIKE to reduce "systems" to a nice
       manageable bit of addition and subtraction. That is WRONG. And
       it is wrong because it always excludes the main issue of the
       overall cause and effect of what we do and don't do in regard to
       vital intangibles that science has never been able to measure.
       The Native Americans have it right with the 7th Generation cause
       and effect decision making calculus. We do not.
       [center]
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gifMilk<br
       />Production and Cow Slaughter System Rant
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif[/center]
       [quote] Domestic cows can live to 20 years, however those raised
       for dairy rarely live that long, as the average cow is removed
       from the dairy herd around age four and marketed for
       beef.[9][11] In 2009, approximately 19% of the US beef supply
       came from cull dairy cows: cows that can no longer be seen as an
       economic asset to the dairy farm.[12] These animals may be sold
       due to reproductive problems or common diseases of milk cows
       such as mastitis and lameness.[11] [/quote]
       PLEASE, note the word "May" in the above quote. The reason for
       using the word "may" in a sentence is to ensure one does not
       assume too much about the stated reasons for this or that. IOW,
       these animals are sold for slaughter based on mechanistic
       reductionist BEAN COUNTING, period. And the next quote is the
       prize of cold blooded scientific doubletalk:
       [quote]Cow longevity is strongly correlated with production
       levels.[17] Lower production cows live longer than high
       production cows, but may be less profitable. Cows no longer
       wanted for milk production are sent to slaughter. [/quote]
       So WTF does "increased longevity" mean when a Homo SAP dairy
       farmer will send you to SLAUGHTER SOONER if you put out
       "UNECONOMICAL" amounts of milk, HUH!!!?
       But never fear, our mechanistic reductionist bean counting
       mother fucking scientists have come up with a "natural" way to
       partially overcome "inefficiencies" in the "system".
       [quote]Another factor affecting milk production is the stress to
       which the cow is faced to. Psychologists at the University of
       Leicester, UK, analyzed the musical preference of milk cows and
       found out that music actually influences the dairy cow's
       lactation. Calming music can improve milk yield, probably
       because it reduces stress and relaxes the cows in much the same
       way as it relaxes humans. [18] [/quote]
       You see, our wonderful dairy farmers must make those
       ECONOMICALLY SOUND decisions to slaughter a cow. There LOGIC is
       as follows: [quote]Over 90% of all cows are slaughtered for 4
       main reasons: Infertility, Mastitis, Lameness and "low"
       production (below around  below 12 to 15 litres of milk per
       day). [/quote]
       How long does dairy CASH cow [s]live[/s] LAST? Let us ask our
       wonderful scientists who analyze the "system":
       [quote]Dairy cows may continue to be economically productive for
       many lactations. In most cases, 10 lactations are possible. The
       chances of problems arising which may lead to a cow being culled
       are high, however; the average herd life of US Holstein is today
       [color=red]fewer than 3 lactations.[/I] [img width=50
       height=50]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-070814193155.png[/img]
       [/quote]
  HTML http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_cattle
  HTML http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_cattle
       Well then, BRING ON the Lutalyse, Cystorelin, Estrumate,
       Estroplan,Factrel, Prostamate, Fertagyl, Insynch, and Ovacyst
       and recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST)! Don't forget the
       pesticdes! Every manufacturer of these chemicals is MAKING A
       PROFIT TOO! That's all part of the study of the "system" of milk
       production.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif
       Do these human BRAIN FARTING BEAN COUNTERS EVER stop to add and
       fucking subtract?
       HELLO? Human females CAN lactate for SEVERAL YEARS with no loss
       in longevity. In fact, that's what they used to DO before we got
       "civilized". In fact, that KEPT human teeth from erupting, for
       YEARS. I have read of present day tribes where a child will
       lactate for almost a DECADE! Do you think that decreases momma's
       life span? I don't. I can give you chapter and verse about how
       human females have more diseases than ever from our "civilized"
       society.
       [i]But let's talk cash cow CFS.
       1. Cows live on the LAND. Therefore, the LAND is part of the
       total financtial picture. It is a HUGE FUCKING MISTAKE to
       exclude land and crop production from the "milk production"
       system.
       2. Our so-called "profitable system" of cow milk production and
       routine slaughter of "inefficient" cows EXCLUDES the COST to
       society, the cows and the dairy farmer of manufacturing all the
       fucking chemicals from hormones to pesticides NEEDED to keep
       this artificial clusterfuck going.
       3. OUTbreeding all the cows to more genetically diverse and less
       specialized (for milk volume) will produce MUCH more long lived
       cows.
       4. Longer lived cows with LESS milk production will be more
       profitable for society, the cows and the dairy/crop farmer
       because the entire biosphere math, which is NOT presently done,
       will be done.
       5. This bean counting CRAP that refuses to address the pain,
       sorrow and empathy deadening, soul killing, mechanistic
       reductionist thinking that turns the farmer (and the rest of us)
       into accesories to biosphere destruction in the quest for
       "profit" is just one more path to our extinction.
       6. The LAND NEEDS animals of all types. Ruminants are NOT
       destructive of land, as the mechanistic reductionist MORON
       SCIENTISTS believe. The biosphere is a system that REQUIRES
       animals to PRESERVE the soil that plants of all sizes live in.
       But the wisdom of that MATH can only be appreciated if the
       observer is bound by biosphere preserving ETHICS as the only
       real profit.
       The issue here is NOT milk production, it is biosphere harmony
       for the perpetuation of LIFE. That includes measuring costs
       PROPERLY. Science is NOT doing that! Unethical treatment of
       animals for PROFIT, at the end of the day, is a justification
       for unethical treatment of Homo SAPS.
       The ASSHOLES who want to cubbyhole this "system" and that
       "system" so they can IGNORE ethical issues and reduce everything
       to a bean counting exercise are part of the problem, not part of
       the solution.
       Mechanistic reductionism isn't just unspiritual, evil and soul
       destroying, it's unprofitable to the only "system" that counts.
       That SYSTEM is the BIOSPHERE. It's high fucking time we stopped
       playing fast and loose with logic so we can justify our greed.
       I'm not holding my breath waiting for Homo SAPdom to get its
       head out of its mechanistic reductionist ass.
       #Post#: 2851--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: March 18, 2015, 8:01 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=jdwheeler42 link=topic=559.msg70516#msg70516
       date=1426645428]
       Excellent rant, AG.  I agree with all of it, as it applies to
       the mainstream dairy industry.
       I did want to give a bit of perspective from the sustainable ag
       viewpoint.  One of the big points they make at Project Grass is
       that in raising livestock sustainably, you are primarily
       harvesting sunlight :icon_sunny:.  The grass is of course your
       primary tool, and your livestock then become your main laborers.
       That puts a whole different perspective on when you need to
       replace them, as opposed to the mainstream view of dairy animals
       as "milk factories" that you shovel feed into and get milk out
       of.  Because animals grazing are replacing tractors and such
       raising fodder, that's a lot of costs that you are saving, in
       money, energy, and environmental damage.
       As an interesting aside, in Cuba after the collapse of the
       Soviet Union, they did a study and figured out that the most
       energy-efficient dairy had just 9 cows.
       As far as the ethics go, I like them simple:
       1. Take care of the biosphere
       2. Take care of people
       3. Give more than you take
       4. Be open to change
       [/quote]
       [img width=60
       height=60]
  HTML http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg[/img]<br
       />
       JD,
       Cuba has been doing the biosphere math pretty well so their
       numbers are probably pretty good.
       The only thing I would add to the ethics is that they are
       absolutely mandatory. Not following them should be punishable by
       fines, imprisonment or both. Fire up the drones! We've got some
       supervising to do!
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif
       #Post#: 3361--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: June 25, 2015, 7:15 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       What’s Happening to Hens in Barns Across America?
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif
       
       Topic: Health and Wellness
       Earlier this week HSUS released undercover footage from
       Hillandale Farms, an egg producer who supplies eggs to Costco.
       The footage shows images of hens jammed so tightly into cages
       that they have no room to move, often have to stand on one
       another, and sometimes even stand on top of dead or injured
       birds. Their bodies have feather loss and painful-looking skin
       infections.  You can see dead hens on the floor and piled into
       bins.
       Hillandale responded by bringing in outside inspectors to assess
       the situation and releasing a statement indicating this was an
       isolated incident.  Late yesterday, Costco announced that it
       would keep Hillandale eggs on their shelves, believing that the
       incident truly was a one-time issue.
       Undercover footage too often leads to finger pointing in
       multiple directions. Who’s to blame?  The worker?  The farmer?
       The corporate buyer?  Is it a widespread problem? An isolated
       incident? Did the animal advocates get it all wrong?  It’s an
       all-too-familiar scene that reignites a larger question of how
       the animals that produce our food are being treated.  Even if
       the severity of the problem at Hillandale was truly isolated, we
       must ask the question: what’s going on in all the other barns
       across America?
       Roughly 95 percent of all eggs produced in the United States
       come from conventional egg farms. This system was developed
       decades ago, with a focus on producing large quantities of food
       at a cost consumers can afford.  To do so, hens are kept in
       battery cages, which means a lot of hens fit into a little
       space. In short, operation costs are low and output is high.
       Essentially, a standard business model.  These are systems
       designed for efficiency, not animal welfare.  Farmers, as well
       as their corporate buyers, don’t intend to harm laying hens.
       But efficiency unintentionally results in severely compromising
       the welfare of hens.
       The times have changed.  Today we have a better understanding of
       animals as sentient beings, and while there are minimal laws
       that regulate care for animals used in food production in the
       US, the science and, let’s face it, ethics should guide the way.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif
       
       Conventional egg farming, which uses 280 million (280
       MILLION!!!) hens annually, keeps six to eight hens in one cage
       for their entire life.  If you’re thinking that those must be
       pretty big cages, I have some bad news: they’re not.  These
       battery cages are so small that each hen has the space
       equivalent of an iPad.  :( On top of that, most barns hold
       250,000 to 500,000 hens per barn. Rows of cages are stacked one
       on top of the other, keeping hens confined so tightly that they
       cannot even spread their wings, let alone fly.  Dust bathing,
       perching, and nesting, all natural behaviors of hens, are
       considered a luxury.  It’s not hard to understand the kind of
       stress this environment causes for animals.
       We have to change this reality.  Cheap and efficient food
       production can no longer be the answer when we have the proof
       that alternatives work just as well. Cage-free, free-range, and
       organic egg facilities can be used to produce enough eggs
       efficiently while also valuing the welfare of birds. While the
       cost of these eggs is currently higher than conventional eggs,
       as more and more producers switch to cage-free production
       methods, the cost will come down.
       While the recent video shows some of the worst conditions
       experienced by hens, the fact remains that in the majority of
       barns across America, hens are confined to similar or only
       slightly better conditions. This should no longer be a
       conversation about efficiency alone, but about supporting and
       building systems that prioritize animal welfare, too.  As
       consumers, we have the responsibility to speak up for hens; and
       as a business, Costco has an opportunity to show leadership by
       making hen welfare a priority for their business.
       This blog post originally appeared in The DoDo.
       By  Kara A. Mergl, U.S. Manager of Corporate Engagement
       Kara is currently the US Manager for Corporate Engagement at
       World Animal Protection where she consults with businesses on
       their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies. She holds
       a MS in Social Policy and a Master of Social Work from the
       University of Pennsylvania, as well as a BA from Moravian
       College in Psychology and Art History.
  HTML http://choosecagefree.org/blog/what%E2%80%99s-happening-hens-barns-across-america
       #Post#: 3549--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: August 3, 2015, 8:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Goat Cheese Farmers Give it All Up to Make Vegan Cheese Instead
       by Abigail Geer
       August 2, 2015
       5:30 pm
       After 20 years as award winning goat cheese farmers, Carol and
       Julian Pearce have decided to give it all up and make vegan
       cheese instead.
       Still in the transition phase from farm to sanctuary, these two
       compassionate farmers decided that there was simply no way they
       could continue to justify bringing more life into the world
       while there were so many being mistreated and murdered, and in
       desperate need of a new home.
       The No Kill Goat Cheese Farm
       Having always identified themselves as being animal lovers and
       compassionate carers, their goat cheese business was a ‘no kill’
       farm, where the animals were not slaughtered after their
       production days were over, but instead would live out the rest
       of their natural life on the farm.
       As well as the no kill farm, the couple had already been taking
       in abused and abandoned goats, pigs, cows, horses, chickens,
       ducks and dogs for many years, and this is what ultimately led
       to the decision to halt their profitable farm business, in order
       to pursue an altogether more ethical cheese making venture.
       Although many people are under the impression that small scale
       farming is not cruel or inhumane, this story highlights the fact
       that even a ‘no kill’ farm is not without its ethical problems.
       Apart from the fact that the animals are still being exploited
       for their milk (which was only ever intended to be drunk by
       their own kids), the farm is bringing more and more animals into
       the world in order to create that milk.
       As hard as any farmer may try to care for their animals, the
       industry is inherently flawed from a moral standpoint as the
       animals are always being treated as commodities, with their
       bodies being exploited for our own gain. The Pearce’s statement
       about their decision to turn their farm vegan echoed this point
       by saying, “We did the best we could for our animals while still
       producing cheese, but then we realized ~ a vegan farm will allow
       us to do even better.”
       The Animal Friendly Cheese
       These two resourceful farmers are converting their 20 years of
       goat cheese making experience into vegan cheese making, in an
       effort to adapt and utilize their skills and find additional
       funding for their new 501(c)(3) non-profit rescue organization,
       The Sanctuary at Soledad Goats.
       With the tagline “our cheese rescues animals,” the couple is
       hoping that their newfound love for vegan cheese making will
       help to spread the message about cruelty free cheese and help
       them to rescue more animals from the exploitation of the farm
       industry at the same time.
       A Model for All Farms to Follow
       Skeptics of change always come up with reasons why things have
       to remain the way they are, even when the current system of
       farming is leading to the exploitation, confinement, suffering
       and death of billions of animals every year.
       As Grace Hopper said, “The most dangerous phrase in the language
       is ‘we’ve always done it this way.”
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif
       Stories like this one offer hope and provide proof that it is
       indeed possible for us to change our ways and to find more
       compassionate alternatives. There are many options for animal
       farmers wishing to give up their current exploitative practices
       in favor of kinder ones, whether it’s switching from goat cheese
       to vegan cheese, or from pig farming to vegetable farming, we
       can create a better future for animals.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp
  HTML http://www.care2.com/causes/goat-cheese-farmers-give-it-all-up-to-make-vegan-cheese-instead.html
       #Post#: 5467--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: July 15, 2016, 8:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]What Happens to Your Body When You Eat a McDonald’s
       Hamburger? ???[/center]
       216,747 views
       SNIPPET 1:
       By Dr. Mercola
       When talking about fast food giants, nothing can be bigger – and
       more infamous – than McDonald's. Those two "golden arches" sign
       are so abundant and so well-known all over the world, that some
       toddlers can even recognize it even before they are able to
       speak full sentences.
       In 2014, over 36,258 McDonald's restaurants operate worldwide,1
       serving over 69 million people every day. From its humble
       beginnings in the 1940s, the brand has now grown to be a
       multi-billion dollar company with an estimated value of over $85
       billion.
       And the fast food's most popular menu item? The burgers.
       According to The Fiscal Times, McDonald's sells 75 burgers every
       second.2 That amounts to over 2.36 billion burgers per year –
       roughly the equivalent of eating a million cows.3
       For many people, nothing seems wrong with eating a McDonald's
       hamburger. After all, it looks and tastes the same as other
       burger patties, and the added convenience makes it a much
       sought-after meal for busy people, those who are on-the-go, or
       those who simply do not have time to cook food at home.
       But considering just how much burger patties are sold per day,
       haven't you ever wondered just how McDonald's hamburgers are
       made and, more importantly, what they're made of?
       Even more disturbing are the reports of McDonald's burgers that
       do not decompose or rot for weeks, months, or even years after
       they've been cooked.  :P
       SNIPPET 2:
       McDonald's Beef Comes from Factory Farms
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp
       Even if it is true that McDonald's burgers do not contain
       preservatives or additives (which I seriously doubt), this does
       not excuse the fact that McDonald's meat actually comes from
       confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs).
       Not only are cows and other livestock in these factory farms
       made to live in unsanitary and inhumane conditions, but they are
       also given antibiotics and growth hormones to make them grow
       faster and more resistant to disease. In fact, nearly 25 million
       pounds of antibiotics are administered to livestock in the US
       every year.
       These antibiotics, along with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, are
       transferred to you every time you eat CAFO meat – and sometimes
       even through the animal manure used as crop fertilizer. Two
       million Americans become infected with antibiotic-resistant
       bacteria every year, causing at least 23,000 deaths.11
       What's worse, antibiotic-resistant disease is not the only
       danger brought on by CAFOs. Excessive exposure to antibiotics
       and regularly eating antibiotic-laced CAFO meats also harms your
       gastrointestinal health, predisposing you to virtually any
       disease.
       But it's not just the hamburger
       meat
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__burp.gif<br
       />  that's [i]really problematic...[/i]
  HTML http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif
       Here's Why McDonald's Bun Stays Mold-Free for Years  :P
       McDonald's patty's long life may be because of its sodium
       content, but what about the bun? Bread typically stays fresh for
       several days, but have you ever heard of one that stays
       mold-free for years? Yet that's exactly what happened with the
       McDonald's bun.
       I believe that this is because McDonald's bun is lightyears away
       from freshly baked bread you make at home – in fact, it is a
       "bread-like" concoction that bears no actual resemblance to
       natural bread (except for its appearance, obviously). Just take
       a look at the ingredients used in McDonald's buns:
       [quote]"Enriched Bleached Flour (Wheat Flour, Malted Barley
       Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin,
       Folic Acid), Water, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Yeast, Soybean
       Oil, Contains 2% or Less: Salt, Wheat Gluten, Leavening (Calcium
       Sulfate, Ammonium Sulfate), May Contain One or More Dough
       Conditioners (Sodium Stearoyl Lactylate, DATEM, Ascorbic Acid,
       Azodicarbonamide, Mono and Diglycerides, Monocalcium Phosphate,
       Enzymes, Calcium Peroxide), Calcium Propionate (Preservative)."
       [/quote]
       These ingredients should clearly offer clues as to why the
       burgers stay blemish-free and "fresh" for years. But what's more
       alarming is that they can also open your eyes to the potential
       health ramifications you may experience if you eat a McDonald's
       hamburger. For example, calcium sulfate, also known as plaster
       of Paris, can possibly cause digestive problems. Meanwhile,
       ammonium sulfate is known to cause nausea, vomiting, and
       diarrhea due to gastrointestinal irritation.
       Full article: [img width=75
       height=50]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif[/img]
       
  HTML http://articles.mercola.com/mcdonalds-hamburger.aspx
       #Post#: 6162--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: December 29, 2016, 3:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://logonoid.com/images/panera-bread-logo.png[/img][/center]
       [center]Panera Bread
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif<br
       />makes industry-leading commitment to improve welfare of chicke
       ns
       [img width=25
       height=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png[/img][/center]
       December 20 2016
       Panera is one of the first major restaurant brands in the United
       States to announce an animal welfare commitment of this
       magnitude for broiler chickens.
       World Animal Protection welcomes the commitment made by national
       bakery/café chain Panera Bread to improve the welfare of the
       chickens farmed for meat, known as broiler chickens, in its
       supply chain. Panera’s commitment includes critical and
       much-needed animal welfare measures, including using
       slower-growing chicken breeds, providing birds with more space,
       and offering improved living environments with natural lighting
       and enrichments for chickens.
       “We applaud Panera Bread for this industry-leading commitment to
       give chickens better lives,” says Priscilla Ma, U.S. Executive
       Director of World Animal Protection. “We’re honored to have had
       the opportunity to work with the company in identifying
       opportunities to improve animal welfare practices, and the steps
       Panera is taking will have a significant positive impact for
       chickens. We echo Panera’s call to the wider food industry to
       work together to bring about sustainable change that chickens
       need and consumers want.”
       Panera is one of the first major restaurant brands in the United
       States to announce an animal welfare commitment of this
       magnitude for broiler chickens. Pret A Manger, Compass Group
       USA, Aramark, and Perdue Foods, the country’s fourth-largest
       national poultry producer, have also announced commitments this
       year to improve the welfare of broiler chickens.
       On average, sixty billion meat chickens are raised for global
       consumption each year. An estimated two-thirds of these animals
       (40 billion) live in overcrowded sheds or cages with little or
       no natural light or fresh air, unable to perform many natural
       behaviors, such as foraging, perching, and dustbathing. Many
       chickens will experience painful conditions including lameness
       (difficulty walking) and suffer overworked hearts and lungs as a
       result of an unnatural growth rate, and wounds like skin sores
       and burns from spending too long in wet, poorly managed litter.
       By committing to practical improvements that directly address
       these severe animal welfare problems, food companies can
       transform the welfare of the chickens in their supply chain.
       Through our Change for chickens campaign, we are calling on food
       retailers, including KFC, to improve the welfare of the billions
       of chickens farmed for meat around the world. We are calling
       for:
       •The use of chicken breeds that grow at a slower, more natural
       rate
       •More living space for chickens
       •More enrichments for chickens to engage with and explore, such
       as perches and hay bales
       •The introduction of natural light in sheds
       “Panera is implementing the far-reaching change for chickens
       that we’re hoping for from the food industry at large,” adds Ma.
       “Through the cage-free egg movement, consumers have shown that
       animal welfare is important to them in their purchasing
       decisions, and today’s businesses must take this into account.
       Importantly, Panera has also committed to reporting publicly on
       its progress in implementing its animal welfare commitments, and
       we look forward to following the company’s progress.”
  HTML https://www.worldanimalprotection.us.org/news/panera-bread-makes-industry-leading-commitment-improve-welfare-chickens
       #Post#: 9403--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Treatment of Domestic Animals Raised for Food
       By: AGelbert Date: March 29, 2018, 7:22 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=800]
  HTML https://d31j74p4lpxrfp.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/styles/hero/public/us_files/pig_eu_1700x1133_1020750.jpg?itok=1iYf4nlA[/img][/center]
       [center]Why we're turning our attention &#129488; to helping
       pigs  &#128055; &#128022;[/center]
       March 12 2018
       [move][font=courier]There are approximately 1.4 billion pigs in
       the world, and the majority of those pigs don't have lives worth
       living.[/font] &#128543;[/move]
       Full article: [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif[/img]
       
  HTML https://www.worldanimalprotection.us.org/news/why-were-turning-our-attention-helping-pigs
  HTML https://www.worldanimalprotection.us.org/news/why-were-turning-our-attention-helping-pigs?
       *****************************************************
   DIR Next Page