Meat Without Feet
Each year, worldwide, people eat 240 billion kilos of meat, and in the US they eat a million chickens every hour.
I eat meat: I have sometimes thought of giving it up, but never for very long, because I like it too much, and because most veggie food that I have had is very nice but would be even nicer with an accompanying pork chop, or steak, or piece of chicken.
I'm choosy about which meat I buy. I always, for example, choose British bacon from pigs that are not kept in factory-farm conditions. I had a tour round a French factory farm where pigs were reared a few years ago and it was horrific, because pigs are intelligent animals, and these pigs were kept in horrendously crowded conditions on concrete, and the only time they saw grass or trees – if indeed they ever did – was when they were loaded onto the lorry that was taking them to slaughter.
The French farmer's take on it, however, was different. Look how healthy they are! They have all the best food, and all the best vitamins, and they never go hungry! (En francais, naturellement).
Last week Peta (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) put forward a prize of a million dollars to “the first person to come up with a method of in vitro meat at competitive prices by 2012”. The idea, which is beginning not to seem too far-fetched, is that you get the stem cells from an animal and grow them, in a laboratory, into meat. Not, perhaps, a leg of lamb exactly, but more a chunk of meat which you could mince and make into spag bol or a pie. It could be healthier, too – harmful saturated fats could be removed and omega-3 introduced instead, for example.
Then you wouldn't have to use up so much of the planet's resources feeding the animals – it can take 16lb of grain to produce 1lb of meat - and the carnivores would be happy, and so would the animal rights campaigners, surely?
Well, many purist animal rights campaigners think that eating meat is a Bad Thing no matter where it comes from, apparently. Many think that even using the stem cells from animals is deeply wrong. Which is, I have to say, a load of bollocks of the kind that leads the most stupid of them to release domestic animals into the wild to die a slow, painful death, in the misguided belief that this is some form of kindness to animals. (Notice how I just sneaked that little opinion into this carefully-reasoned piece?)
Of course, the offer of the prize has caused chaos within Peta itself as many of their members think that people should just be vegetarians, and they think that the prize is totally immoral.
My first reaction to this proposed test-tube meat was, like many people's I suspect, along the lines of “Ewwwwwwwwwww nooooooooooooo!” But I think that's just the cry of the carnivore who doesn't like to think too hard about where their meat comes from.
I don't have anything against this test-tube meat on principle, I think, though the idea does take a bit of getting used to.
As usual with such issues, it isn't clear-cut. Presumably the members of Peta who thought of this prize are hoping that, if people must eat meat, then laboratory-grown meat will improve the treatment of animals. People will eat lab meat. Factory-farming will be abolished. The little lambs and calves and piglets will be free to gambol freely in the fields.
Except they won't, will they? Because there'll be hardly any of them.
I think the idea that people will, globally, be prepared to give up meat is pie in the sky (Pie In the Sky. Made with Quorn and Vegetables). It's fine to campaign for the better treatment of animals, and a good way to help this is by buying meat that comes from animals that have been well-treated.
But the idea that people will somehow all agree to become vegetarian is a nonsense. And if Peta's ideas – and those of similar groups - are put into practice, then animals simply will not be bred for meat, and there won't be many domestic animals. The initials will stand for People for the Extinction of Tame Animals – and perhaps that's what they want, but I don't agree with them.
Yes, we should eat less meat, though we in the West will find that difficult. Yes, the test-tube meat idea is one worth pursuing. And yes, we should treat our cows, pigs, sheep and other domestic animals as well as possible. And then we can kill them humanely, and eat them.
I eat meat: I have sometimes thought of giving it up, but never for very long, because I like it too much, and because most veggie food that I have had is very nice but would be even nicer with an accompanying pork chop, or steak, or piece of chicken.
I'm choosy about which meat I buy. I always, for example, choose British bacon from pigs that are not kept in factory-farm conditions. I had a tour round a French factory farm where pigs were reared a few years ago and it was horrific, because pigs are intelligent animals, and these pigs were kept in horrendously crowded conditions on concrete, and the only time they saw grass or trees – if indeed they ever did – was when they were loaded onto the lorry that was taking them to slaughter.
The French farmer's take on it, however, was different. Look how healthy they are! They have all the best food, and all the best vitamins, and they never go hungry! (En francais, naturellement).
Last week Peta (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) put forward a prize of a million dollars to “the first person to come up with a method of in vitro meat at competitive prices by 2012”. The idea, which is beginning not to seem too far-fetched, is that you get the stem cells from an animal and grow them, in a laboratory, into meat. Not, perhaps, a leg of lamb exactly, but more a chunk of meat which you could mince and make into spag bol or a pie. It could be healthier, too – harmful saturated fats could be removed and omega-3 introduced instead, for example.
Then you wouldn't have to use up so much of the planet's resources feeding the animals – it can take 16lb of grain to produce 1lb of meat - and the carnivores would be happy, and so would the animal rights campaigners, surely?
Well, many purist animal rights campaigners think that eating meat is a Bad Thing no matter where it comes from, apparently. Many think that even using the stem cells from animals is deeply wrong. Which is, I have to say, a load of bollocks of the kind that leads the most stupid of them to release domestic animals into the wild to die a slow, painful death, in the misguided belief that this is some form of kindness to animals. (Notice how I just sneaked that little opinion into this carefully-reasoned piece?)
Of course, the offer of the prize has caused chaos within Peta itself as many of their members think that people should just be vegetarians, and they think that the prize is totally immoral.
My first reaction to this proposed test-tube meat was, like many people's I suspect, along the lines of “Ewwwwwwwwwww nooooooooooooo!” But I think that's just the cry of the carnivore who doesn't like to think too hard about where their meat comes from.
I don't have anything against this test-tube meat on principle, I think, though the idea does take a bit of getting used to.
As usual with such issues, it isn't clear-cut. Presumably the members of Peta who thought of this prize are hoping that, if people must eat meat, then laboratory-grown meat will improve the treatment of animals. People will eat lab meat. Factory-farming will be abolished. The little lambs and calves and piglets will be free to gambol freely in the fields.
Except they won't, will they? Because there'll be hardly any of them.
I think the idea that people will, globally, be prepared to give up meat is pie in the sky (Pie In the Sky. Made with Quorn and Vegetables). It's fine to campaign for the better treatment of animals, and a good way to help this is by buying meat that comes from animals that have been well-treated.
But the idea that people will somehow all agree to become vegetarian is a nonsense. And if Peta's ideas – and those of similar groups - are put into practice, then animals simply will not be bred for meat, and there won't be many domestic animals. The initials will stand for People for the Extinction of Tame Animals – and perhaps that's what they want, but I don't agree with them.
Yes, we should eat less meat, though we in the West will find that difficult. Yes, the test-tube meat idea is one worth pursuing. And yes, we should treat our cows, pigs, sheep and other domestic animals as well as possible. And then we can kill them humanely, and eat them.
posted by Daphne at 4:37 pm
1 Comments:
Excellent post.
As you can probably imagine, I have very strong views on meat production and vegetarianism.
Any significant reduction in the number of domestic animals would be a massive setback for the environment. Organic farming would grind to a halt and the chemical fertiliser companies would make a fortune.
Buy meat from a reputable butcher who can tell you where the meat came from. Or, better still, buy it direct from the farmer!
Post a Comment
<< Home