Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Should animals be stunned before slaughter?
Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Livestock and Pets
Author 
 Message
Green Man



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 5272
Location: Rural Scotland.
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:10 pm    Post subject: Should animals be stunned before slaughter? Reply with quote
    

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14779271

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I'd wager that the supermarkets prefer stunned meat because the plant throughput is quicker than non-stun.

Having seen animals killed both ways (although not cattle - I'd be interested to seen non-stun cattle slaughter) I think non-stun is quicker for the animal, but it obviously takes more time for the humans.

ninat



Joined: 01 Feb 2009
Posts: 606
Location: Scotland
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Cattle have a different blood supply to the brain which means that just slitting their throat makes for a much longer death compared with other species....

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

ninat wrote:
Cattle have a different blood supply to the brain


I was unaware of that, how is it different?

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I've found it, vertebral arteries.

crofter



Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 2252

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Rob R wrote:
(although not cattle - I'd be interested to seen non-stun cattle slaughter)


There are videos on youtube, but it is horrific to watch.

Green Man



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 5272
Location: Rural Scotland.
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Supermarkets are seemingly all demanding non stunned animals as it means they can sell the meats to the religious groups. Most of us are eating non stunned meats.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

crofter wrote:
Rob R wrote:
(although not cattle - I'd be interested to seen non-stun cattle slaughter)


There are videos on youtube, but it is horrific to watch.


These videos tend to be, I'd rather see for myself, without the bias.

sean
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 42219
Location: North Devon
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

If you ever eat game or rabbit or slaughter your own poultry (sorry don't know the regs on commercial poultry) then this is a bit of a non-starter isn't it? Racism thinly disguised as concern for animal welfare IMHO.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

sean wrote:
If you ever eat game or rabbit or slaughter your own poultry (sorry don't know the regs on commercial poultry) then this is a bit of a non-starter isn't it? Racism thinly disguised as concern for animal welfare IMHO.


Yep.

Mithril



Joined: 22 Jul 2011
Posts: 1755
Location: wessex
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Apparently, all the hospital (meat) meals for a local'ish hospital to me (Dorchester) are made with halal meat.

RE. game - they aren't bled to death.

Bodger



Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 13524

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I saw this BBC report at 6.00 am this morning and deliberately stayed away from it.

Green Man



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 5272
Location: Rural Scotland.
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

There should be a scientific tests to see which is the least stressful and a law to do it that way for all.
Aghhhh, but that would be animal testing

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46207
Location: yes
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

i recon stun is better if done well

instant loss of awareness is surely kinder than the fastest exsanguination can be and it is far safer for the workers

NorthernMonkeyGirl



Joined: 10 Apr 2011
Posts: 4630
Location: Peeping over your shoulder
PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 11 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

During a recent bout of insomnia, I saw a few repeats of "Kill it, Cook it, Eat it" where the live animal was brought in, slaughtered in a glass-sided abattoir (cue studio audience reactions) then butchered and spit roasted (I'd prefer hung meat but....)

Anyhow, it got to sheep and some very young lambs came in (the equivalent of veal). The stunning clamps didn't work or were too big, so they went to the captive bolt pistol.
Now in this case, the pistol causes death, yes? Then the throat is cut. So yes if you can do that then I don't think stunning is needed.

HOWEVER - who is going to do that to anything bigger?

I've seen Longhorn yearling take 4 or 5 goes with the captive bolt to get through the rock-hard skull.

Sod religious rights. It's not racist to overrule old ways of doing things.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Livestock and Pets All times are GMT
Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright � 2004 marsjupiter.com