Last year, I wrote a great deal about the rise of “ventilation shutdown plus” (VSD+), a method being used to mass kill poultry birds on factory farms by sealing off the airflow inside barns and pumping in extreme heat using industrial-scale heaters, so that the animals die of heatstroke over the course of hours. It is one of the worst forms of cruelty being inflicted on animals in the US food system — the equivalent of roasting animals to death — and it’s been used to kill tens of millions of poultry birds during the current avian flu outbreak.

As of this summer, the most recent period for which data is available, more than 49 million birds, or over 80 percent of the depopulated total, were killed in culls that used VSD+ either alone or in combination with other methods, according to an analysis of USDA data by Gwendolen Reyes-Illg, a veterinary adviser to the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), an animal advocacy nonprofit. These mass killings, or “depopulations,” in the industry’s jargon, are paid for with public dollars through a USDA program that compensates livestock farmers for their losses.

  • billwashere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Just pump nitrogen in the sealed pens. The animal doesn’t panic due to perceived oxygen deprivation. They just get sleepy and die.

    Hell it would be the way I’d want to go if I was sick with terminal cancer. Cheap, easy, and painless.

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I imagine that would be pretty difficult to do in a chicken coop. These are barns made out of corrugated steel and generally aren’t even remotely air tight. You will, ultimately, need about 10x the nitrogen you would otherwise need, and that’s if it even works.

      So a special coop would need to be built for this purpose.

      Chicken farmers are some of the poorest farmers in the country. They generally don’t have the means to build a special kill shed to humanely euthanize their flock. They barely have the means to keep up with Tyson and Perdue’s ridiculous bullshit.

      So, while I agree, heat stroke is a fucking awful way to kill these animals, the issue isn’t just “there’s a humane method bro, just build a kill house bro”

      The issue is, we are paying FAR too little for chicken, and most meat, honestly.

      • Szymon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        11 months ago

        If you have millions of chickens to kill, you’re not so poor of a farmer that be you can’t afford to come up with a humane method to do this job.

        • Wogi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          41
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There are several documentaries on this topic, but they don’t have a lot of authority over how many chickens they buy. They’re dictated a flock size, they pay for it, and then they pay to feed and raise them, then they sell them back to the people they bought the chicks from. Inevitably every year the chicken processor, whoever it may be, makes additional demands that they also have to pay out of pocket for.

          I’m not justifying their actions, I’m saying they are stuck between two masters and they have no room to wiggle.

            • Kepabar@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              29
              ·
              11 months ago

              No.

              It’s cheaper to out source it this way because as their farmers are contractors they don’t have to adhere to the legal responsibilities they would if they ran them in their own.

              They can keep their contracted farmers in debt to them indefinitely and essentially have a class of indentured servants.

      • billwashere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        You’re not wrong and nuance is often the bane of rationality. I didn’t say it was an easy solution just a more humane one.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      11 months ago

      I imagine there are a handful of ways to do it besides “long, slow heat stroke”

    • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      Carbon monoxide would be cheaper. We used it for euthanizing animals that couldn’t be saved at the wildlife rehab center I worked at. Though, it was done with sealed induction box, not a drafty barn like someone mentioned

      • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Sounds like it would be more expensive? Nitrogen is incredibly cheap to concentrate out of the air, 70% of what we breath is nitrogen after all.

        • evranch@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Monoxide is incredibly cheap to produce with a crappy farm truck or old tractor. You doing need to distill or concentrate anything, just a hose and the exhaust pipe and a couple hours of fuel for idling.

          We used it to gas a nest of rats that had settled in under a grain bin floor. Only a couple rats popped out and they were dazed, the dogs quickly snacked them up. The rest expired rapidly.

          A chicken barn is big and drafty but you could just use multiple tractors or detune them on purpose. Any engine running rich produces a lot of CO.

    • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Nitrogen is expensive and these buildings aren’t airtight

      • billwashere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        These are engineering problems. The point is it’s way more humane than dying in a sweat lodge.

      • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Eh, the atmosphere is 70% nitrogen, making liquid nitrogen is basically just a suped up AC.

        There are also various methods of simply filtering the nitrogen out of the air. Having on site machines doesn’t seem too bad.

    • pan_troglodytes@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      wouldnt that be more expensive than just cutting off the ventilation? on top of paying for disposal afterwards & whatnot?

      • billwashere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Disposal of what? The air we breathe is 75% nitrogen. The chickens are already going to have be disposed of.

    • hglman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Those big coops are not anything close to airtight. Heat, however, doesn’t require it to be airtight.

      • Cornpop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        They are already dead. (Infected) Better to kill then now and not risk even more birds life.

        • Seraphin 🐬@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Or… and this is crazy… not cram thousands of them together in such a tiny area. Then disease wouldn’t spread so rapidly.

      • Pipoca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is specifically talking about mitigation for highly pathogenic avian influenza. HPAI kills chickens fairly quickly, so to contain the spread and minimize the risk of zoonotic spread to people, they kill every bird on every property that it’s detected on.

        This is one of those situations where no one thinks it’s a great solution, it’s just a pragmatic one that minimizes the risk towards workers while quickly depopulating the barn. The problem is that this is one of the cheapest and least humane ways to depopulate a barn, and shouldn’t be allowed. We should insist that barns allow humane depopulation, or at least less inhumane methods.

        • MTK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Or, and I know this sounds even craizer… not farm them and stop this from happening to begin with?

        • MTK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Crazy how you can’t think past this. Maybe not factory farm them? Shocker, I know.

          • rambaroo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Yeah we shouldn’t, but we did, so we are stuck having to do shit like this now. And shamefully it’s not going to change anytime soon. Corporate interests essentially control the country now to a degree that they haven’t since the late 19th century. Especially in the farming industry.

          • Veneroso@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            So you want to pay $50 for a McDonald’s chicken sandwich? I don’t think it’s right. These chickens are bred to be oversized and grow fast. They get so big that they can barely move. Full of antibiotics so they don’t get infected from sitting in their own leavings.

            I am really hoping for lab grown meat personally.

            And since you may have missed it, these chickens are all female. There are technically ways to determine sex before they hatch but if you really want to get upset Google ‘Chick Grinder’. It’s as horrible as it sounds so maybe don’t Google it.

            That being said, I don’t want to pay for $50 chickens as much as I don’t want to pay for $2,000 iPhones because that’s what having them made without slave/child labor would probably cost…

            Ugh

            • PolarisFx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              I was reading that Europeans actually found a way to sex the egg so they don’t hatch the male eggs, thus negating the need to destroy male chicks. I’m guessing the technology costs money so it’s unlikely that US factory farms would use it. Probably easier to kill the with the grinder.

            • daltotron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I think it’s kind of a false dichotomy, between spending a lower amount of money (i.e. being poor), and being ethical. I think there’s a lot more we could take issue with, on how society is structured, than accept this false dichotomy. There’s a better universe out there where instead of having to use paper straws, we all just switch to biodegradable, and it is incentivized that people use metal straws. Same shit with this. There’s a universe out there where we eat less meat, where this meat is more sustainably sourced and is locally sourced, which cuts down on logistics, and where, as a result, we don’t have to pay 50 bucks for a frankly pretty gross chicken sandwich.

            • MTK@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Jeez, either you are great at walking the line between idiotic and good sarcasm or you are not

            • MTK@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              11 months ago

              Crazy how you can’t think past this. Maybe not factory farm them? Shocker, I know.

              • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I’m addressing that they’re factory farmed birds so they probably won’t get better, which makes your statement a bad idea. Don’t just move the goalpost if you want to discuss stopping factory farming because I never indicated I was wanting to talk about that.

            • MTK@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              Crazy how you can’t think past this. Maybe not factory farm them? Shocker, I know.

    • Rose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      You can hope for that or you can become vegan today to no longer contribute to those industries.

      • Drusas@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I already eat very little meat just through personal preference. I think that is a reasonable way to go for the average person. Not everybody has to be vegan; they just need to consume a small amount of meat if they’re going to consume it at all.

      • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        “capitalism is more effective than alternatives”

        Capitalism showing why it is more effective :

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        So you’ll put your money where your mouth is and stop buying chicken then right? That’s how condemnation works.

        • 4lan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          That’s hilarious, people have no sense of personal responsibility whatsoever. Just look at COVID.

          They use the argument that one person not eating meat won’t change anything. Ignoring the fact that they are literally deriving joy from suffering. It doesn’t have to be this way. I truly believe meat can be ethical, but when 99.8% of beef is factory farmed I do not have the option to ethically eat meat.

          17 years meat free and every once in awhile I reconsider adding chicken to my diet. Then I see a post like this lol

          • triangle5106@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think ethical meat can only truly exist in theory (though with cell culture meat I suspect that that will change).

            Anyway, I just wanted to say 17 years is a long time. Thanks for walking the talk. Not many people do.

        • AlecSadler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I get my chicken (and beef) from small, local neighboring farms, directly. I don’t see the problem?

          • triangle5106@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            If your question is genuine, these small farms you speak of are still breeding animals with intent to slaughter them. At the end of the day, the only meaningful difference with a small farm is that you can probably shake the hand of the person who needlessly killed an animal. Can’t get that at those big mean factory farms, that’s for sure.

            • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              intent to slaughter them

              Assuming that’s the intent is an asshole move. What if the primary intent is to extract nutrition from land that is otherwise unproductive?

              • triangle5106@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                Is it not the intent? A farmer generally isn’t going to raise an animal for fun. That wouldn’t be profitable, and small farms are already difficult to make a living on.

                I can entertain the idea that I could walk up to a farmer and ask them what their intent is, and they reply, “why it’s to extract nutrition from land that is otherwise unproductive, of course!”. But the end result is the same in either case regardless of stated intent: animals are being killed unnecessarily.

                To be clear, none of this applies to people who rely on animal products to survive (e.g. people in the unproductive land you mentioned). I’m talking about people like myself (and likely many others here) who have access to supermarkets and other products of a globalized food system. Like Uncle Ben said, with great power privilege comes great responsibility.

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                Land has more value than economic activity, such as natural habitat and biodiversity and recreation (all things farmers destroy lol)

        • Drusas@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Some of us instead reduce consumption and buy expensive meat products which are locally and humanely raised.

        • LuckyBoy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          You do understand you’re not doing your cause any favours by being a fundamentalist right?

            • GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              They’re not mutually exclusive. There’s plenty of ways to buy ethically sourced meat. Local butchers often buy pigs, chickens, and cows to butcher and cut for consumers near me. The cows typically have a central barn where they have clean bedding and recycling water troughs, get fed every morning (maybe night), and are allowed to freely roam in a pasture whenever they please.

              I eat about the size of my palm of meat every day, so over the corse of a year i probably eat 5-6 chickens, a sixth of a pig, and an eight of a cow. At those numbers, it’s totally possible to make ethically sourced meat work as a business.

              • triangle5106@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                A substantial percentage of people have access to food systems that allow them to thrive on plants alone, freeing them from a dependence on animal products. For these individuals, is ‘ethically sourced meat’ even possible? That is to say: if we know that killing a living being is unnecessary, is it ethical to do it anyway?

                • GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It’s an interesting question that probably has an individualized answer depending on who you ask. In my opinion, we have afforded their species comforts that no other species has. So a humane death and respectful use of their body is ethical in my eyes. Most wild animals die from infection or starvation and we’ve protected our domesticated animals from that horrible drawn out death on ethical farms.

  • Fades@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    The meat industry is fucking sick and demented but people need their meats so animal ethics be damned…. Fucking bullshit, fucking human cancer

    • Seraphin 🐬@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is why the core of the issue that nobody ever talks about is human overpopulation. The demented levels of factory farming we have is only a thing because 8 billion people need to be fed.

      • ohitsbreadley@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        The demented level of factory farming had nothing to do with human overpopulation, but everything to do with human culture’s demand for animal products that are entirely unnecessary for survival. If we change our culture to eliminate animal products, we will eliminate a huge source of wasted resources and labor. Think of how much less plant agriculture would be required if we didn’t have to feed 33 billion chickens, almost two billion sheep, a billion and a half cattle, a billion pigs.

        If we just grew food we can eat, instead of wasting land, effort, and resources both directly and indirectly supporting animal agra, we wouldn’t have such huge problems.

        “But baaaaaaconnnnnn.” “I can’t liiiiiive without eeeeegggggs.” “Cheeseburgers taaaaaaaste too good give up” “it’s because there’s too many huuuuuumanssss”

          • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Natural yes, vital no, as made perfectly evident by the fact vegetarians and vegans aren’t wasting away in the streets.

            • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              There are a lot of stories about malnourished vegans and even about vegans’ kids, malnourished to death.

              • triangle5106@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                There are similarly many stories of omnivores who have died of malnourishment. Is this a valid case against meat eating?

                • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Similarly many stories of omnivores, who have died of malnourishment specifically because of their omnivorous diet, as vegans did?

          • ohitsbreadley@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            “cOnSuMiNg MeAt Is nAtUrAl”

            Setting aside the inherent ethnocentrism of this statement, which, in classic Western fashion, completely bulldozes the many cultures that have thrived on entirely plant-based diets for centuries, possibly millennia…

            This is still a shit argument, when you realize that EVERYTHING humanity does aims to separate ourselves from “nature,” and move beyond what is “natural.”

            If we actually lived according to nature, we wouldn’t have plastics, cell phones, cars, airplanes, air conditioning, and all the other myriad things that make our soft squishy lives easier.

            But you keep chowing down on your “aLl-NaTuRaL” chicken wings and Mountain Dew, you fucking neanderthal.

            • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              You are giving mixed signals. Is separating ourselves from nature good or bad?

              “cOnSuMiNg MeAt Is nAtUrAl”

              Stop clowning around, please.

              • ohitsbreadley@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Though I have opinions, I will not take the bait, as it is not relevant to my point whether humans distancing themselves from nature is “good” or “bad.”

                I think my signal is pretty clear - Your “it’s natural” argument fails entirely when one picks and chooses the aspects of human life to which they apply it.

                As an example - you wake up in your climate controlled house, put on your synthetic fiber clothing, jump into your Ford F150 Pickup Truck, Drive to a gas station, pick up a mountain dew in a plastic bottle, and buy a slice of pizza - in all that context, your big brained argument is that it is more natural for that pizza to have animal pepperoni and dairy cheese, vs plant-based alternatives.

                Tell me, who is the clown in this situation?

                • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It’s you. You’re the clown.

                  Our body still is natural by all means. And omnivorous diet is natural to our body.

      • Pipoca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        Animal agriculture is very inefficient, because of tropic levels.

        Looking on Wikipedia, dressed broiler chicken carcasses have a feed conversion ratio of about 4. That is to say, a 4lb whole chicken you buy from the butchers case would have required about 12 lbs of feed over its ~2 month life.

        An online calorie counter says 4lb of raw whole chicken is 3856 calories. By contrast, a 1lb bag of cornmeal has ~3300 calories. 12 lbs of cornmeal have just over 10x the calories of 1 chicken.

        Even comparing the differences in yield between chickpeas and corn, we get way more calories per acre from hummus than Buffalo wings.

        In the US, we get 36% of our calories from animals, but use an order of magnitude more space to raise them. We grow more acreage of feed crops than crops that get directly eaten by humans. Fully 40% of the continental US is devoted to raising livestock, which is insane.

        We don’t factory farm because there’s 8 billion humans to feed. We factory farm because we want “a chicken in every pot”.

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Because they aren’t right. People talk about overpopulation constantly. Overpopulation isn’t the problem, distribution is. We don’t need to grow animals to feed people in the first place; that turns plants into food less efficiently than just feeding the plants to people.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        ”The problem that nobody ever talks about is overpopulation"

        Outright untrue, in both ways. People always talk about it, and it remains not the problem. The problem is distribution, which is largely due to greed and overconsumption. The problem is that farmers breed what they can sell, and people buy so much meat just to have access to it in case they want it eventually.

        I found a third way it’s incorrect: we don’t need animal farms to feed people in the first place. We could simply eat plants instead of feeding them to animals.

      • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I started incorporating more meat alternatives (Beyond, Impossible, Gardein, etc) into my diet for heart health reasons, but damn, it’s starting to make me feel a little better morally as well.

        • ohitsbreadley@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Good for you for working towards eating less meat, and caring about your heart health! Meat is definitely not good for the cardiovascular system, but it’s important to keep in mind that these meat alternative products are not healthier, even though they’re plant-based. Those products should still be eaten in moderation, just as with red meats, because they’re both really high in saturated fat and sodium. They, like meat, also tend to char when cooked, and char is loaded with carcinogens and oxidants. (even though that taste can be divine…)

          Anyway - for me, meat alternatives were a helpful introduction to the plant-based/vegan diet, and emboldened me to try out other plant based recipes. “Vegan” can be such a loaded term, but there are a lot of good recipes out there with the term. Search for recipes incorporating tempeh as the protein source - it’s a bit easier to cook than tofu, which often gets a bad rap for being bland when it’s usually just been cooked incorrectly (it requires some preparation/a good marinade and sauce/specific handling and patience to cook it well, but I digress). Tempeh is more forgiving, in that it carries more flavors/textures of its own, which are complimented well by many sauces.

  • frickineh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    11 months ago

    Oh cool, that’s completely horrifying. And not at all surprising from the meat industry. They’ve never cared about animal cruelty with anything else they do, so why would they care about this?

  • Che Banana@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    11 months ago

    Fourty nine million just staggers my brain. Like, thats not even a blip in the production.

    …nuts.

  • Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    If aliens do come to earth, and simply enslave us, torture us then kill us for reasons we can’t comprehend, there should be absolutely no question whether we deserve it or not. They would be doing what we do to other sentient creatures en masse. We have the intelligence and ability to simply not kill these animals in a fashion that is sadistic and agonizing(im not even saying not to kill them, just do it humanely, bare minimum), yet we do it anyway because of greed and capitalist profit motives, cutting costs, etc.

    • interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I like veganism because it forces meat-eaters to eat their own shit and perform mental gymnastics that make them worthy of an Olympic gold medal to avoid admitting their contribution to the problem.

      Really shows the cognitive dissonance among average people. And they’re proud of it, lol.

    • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      They would be doing what we do to other sentient creatures en masse.

      Chickens are sentient?

      • 4lan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I see this sentiment a lot regarding eating meat. I think a lot of people don’t realize how much these animals suffer.

        Just look at your dog anytime you eat pork. Remember that that animal you’re eating is smarter than your dog. That pig used to play with its siblings, have love for its mother, and eventually live in complete terror before it is killed. People love to make fun of Asian societies for eating dogs when it is exactly the same as eating a pig.

        That little bit of joy you gained from eating pork came at the cost of unfathomable suffering.
        There is no excuse in 2023, I’ve been building muscle for the first time in my life and doing it on a vegetarian diet.

  • Hylactor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    If humans don’t commit suicide first through war or environmental abuse, I truly believe that future generations will look back on eating meat as a barbaric mistake. They’ll tell stories about how we caused epidemics and pandemics, wasted valuable resources and land, polluted air, land, and sea, and abided the suffering of billions of animals, all so we could feed our children dinosaur shaped meat nuggets and buy cheap hamburgers that we were too lazy to even get out of our cars to purchase.

    “And then, even as global warming spiraled out of control, they wasted arable land and dwindling water supplies on subsidized corn to feed to the subsidized beef and poultry stock. The ones that didn’t get culled or recalled or spoil before even hitting a plate contributed to a dietary culture of heart disease. Also, the animals regularly suffered immensely, which they were aware of but preferred not to consider.”

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yup. And there are gonna be arguments about how “they were a product of their time,” which will be exactly as bullshit as it is today when we talk about people of the past.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I don’t get how you can live with this attitude and not be suicidal. Shit’s gonna get bad, hundreds of millions of people are gonna die if we’re lucky, but to think the human race has no future? That’s past advanced pessimism

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Everyone dies eventually, that’s always been the case. I don’t get why you think seeing a high chance of a particular death down the line should make people instead want death immediately. Frankly, it’s kinda pathetic that you think that’s a logical line of thought. Shit’s going to get so bad humanity might not make it, so we should all just give up?

          Personally, it makes me appreciate this life even more. I might be seeing humanity’s peak, which is a pretty cool time to be alive, and maybe there won’t be many more chances to experience human life. Good or bad, that’s all this is: an experience. It might be the only one we get and will inevitably end at some point anyways, so why rush that ending?

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Obviously everyone’s gonna die, but laughing at the idea that future generations won’t exist, that there is no future, just sounds miserable.

        • Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I don’t do nonsense like “optimism’” or “pessimism.” I’ll stick to facts an solutions. If there be any left it would be by Richard Stallman and FOSS AI.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            future

            LMFAO

            There will be none. Not for anything alive from here.

            Where are the “facts and solutions” in this? That’s textbook pessimism. Like, googling “define pessimism” gives you “a lack of hope or confidence in the future.”

            • Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I’m not pessimistic. I know these things. I don’t fuck around with brainwashing like “optimism” either. I’ll deal with facts and you and your religious cult can fuck off with “hope.”. I’d say bullshit but mushrooms actually heal. Even the Death God won’t be back for your fucking ignorance.

              Let’s stop that with prohibition. rolls eyes

        • Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          You don’t understand that this is the exact objective of the patriarchy. Corporations and greedy are just scheme of distraction and disbelieve upon their collective suicide.

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    I sometimes hope for aliens to come to this planet and treat us like we treat other living beings.

    Humanity is such a poor excuse for civilisation

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Humans are fucking disgusting. If you zoom out far enough we are just a bacterial infection of the Earth. Spreading our gray cities like bacteria in a petri dish. Growth for the sake of growth is the mentality of a cancer cell.

        • 4lan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I don’t know what rants you’re talking about. This is not a new idea and I did not frame it as a new idea. Maybe stop living your life in podcasts, that is wild that you memorized a quote from 12 years ago

    • tok@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      maybe one of the big filters for intelligent life in the universe is greed

    • IMongoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      11 months ago

      There isn’t really a vaccine. One is being trialed but it is not available. The reason they are so extreme with this is that in affected birds they have about a 99% chance of dieing within 48 hours of infection. Waterfowl can carry it for longer but are still susceptible to death, they seem to be the major infection vector. HPAI highly contagious (highly pathonogenic avian influenza is the name), a bird brushing up on another is enough to spread it, due to birds cleaning their feathers with their mouths. So if a poultry farm tests positive they want to quarantine it ASAP so a sparrow doesn’t spread it to neighbors and wild populations.

      • Confound4082@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        And, setting up an entire culling operation, which would have to include transporting the birds, and contaminating another facility and several semi trailers, and staff, not to mention other wildlife is a huge risk. Shutting the windows and turning up the heat is probably the safest and quickest way to do things in this situation

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    Chickens don’t need to be treated ethically like people do. They’re birds ffs.