|
|
| Line 9: |
Line 9: |
| | This article provides information about pigs that should prove useful to those advocating for animal rights, as well as to those exploring the rationale for [[veganism]]. | | This article provides information about pigs that should prove useful to those advocating for animal rights, as well as to those exploring the rationale for [[veganism]]. |
| | | | |
| − | It covers various aspects of farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pork, and impacts to communities and workers | + | It covers various aspects of farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to communities and workers |
| | | | |
| − | Read it through or use the table of contents to go directly to your section of interest.
| |
| | | | |
| | <-- Generally, use [[Chickens]] as a model for this article. Deviations are allowed. The books ''Slaughterhouse,'' and ''Eating Animals'' can help in running down primary sources, if you have them or can get them. --> | | <-- Generally, use [[Chickens]] as a model for this article. Deviations are allowed. The books ''Slaughterhouse,'' and ''Eating Animals'' can help in running down primary sources, if you have them or can get them. --> |
| Line 50: |
Line 49: |
| | | | |
| | == Humane Labels and Certifications == | | == Humane Labels and Certifications == |
| − |
| |
| − | Investigations by Consumer Reports and the Open Philanthropy Project reveal that these certifications and labels are largely meaningless, as shown below. These investigations show that the standards are weak and unenforced, audits and inspections are rarely done, and if they are done and violations are found, which is infrequent, no one gets fined.<ref>Consumer Reports “Labels.” Greener Choices (blog). Accessed July 6, 2019. http://greenerchoices.org/labels/</ref><ref>Global Animal Partnership.” Open Philanthropy Project, March 26, 2016. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/global-animal-partnership-general-support</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | {{jfa-expand | Extra: Suggested script for discussing humane labels and certifications}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | When discussing humane labels and certifications, in addition to providing some of the details presented in this section, conveying the ideas presented in the following script might be useful:
| |
| | | | |
| | Many believe that we are not harming animals when we use them for food as long as we treat them well while they are living. The justification given for this view is that animals don't have a sense of the future, and thus don’t have an interest in continuing to live. However, current research in cognitive ethology and neurobiology [as shown below], says otherwise. | | Many believe that we are not harming animals when we use them for food as long as we treat them well while they are living. The justification given for this view is that animals don't have a sense of the future, and thus don’t have an interest in continuing to live. However, current research in cognitive ethology and neurobiology [as shown below], says otherwise. |
| | | | |
| − | But if one holds this belief in spite of the science, and wants to live by their own values, they might, with good intentions, decide to buy only animal products that have some sort of humane label or certification. However, investigations by Consumer Research, The Open Philanthropy Project, and numerous others reveal that these certifications and labels are largely meaningless. | + | But if one holds this belief in spite of the science, and wants to live by their own values, they might, with good intentions, decide to buy only animal products that have some sort of humane label or certification. |
| | | | |
| − | These investigations show that the standards are weak and unenforced, audits and inspections are rarely done, and if they are done and violations are found, which is infrequent, no one gets fined.
| + | In the sections that follow, we show that standards are weak and unenforced, audits and inspections are rarely done, and if they are done and violations are found, which is infrequent, no one gets fined. |
| | | | |
| | So even if you buy into the idea that it’s OK to eat animal products as long as the animals are treated well, there is virtually no chance that the animals have, in fact, been treated well, regardless of what label is on the package. While certain labels may represent less suffering for some of the abuses, other abuses remain. The mitigation of some of the cruelties does not justify the remaining ones. | | So even if you buy into the idea that it’s OK to eat animal products as long as the animals are treated well, there is virtually no chance that the animals have, in fact, been treated well, regardless of what label is on the package. While certain labels may represent less suffering for some of the abuses, other abuses remain. The mitigation of some of the cruelties does not justify the remaining ones. |
| Line 69: |
Line 62: |
| | The life of any farmed animal can only be described as one of commodified, abusive servitude ending in brutal slaughter. When viewed objectively, free from the fog of our cultural norms, their treatment and slaughter, by any standard of fairness and justice—cannot be considered humane. | | The life of any farmed animal can only be described as one of commodified, abusive servitude ending in brutal slaughter. When viewed objectively, free from the fog of our cultural norms, their treatment and slaughter, by any standard of fairness and justice—cannot be considered humane. |
| | | | |
| − | {{jfa-expand-end}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Cage-Free ===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Consumer Reports advises you to “ignore cage-free claims” for chickens.<ref>“A ‘Cage-Free’ Claim: Does It Add Value?” Greener Choices |Consumer Reports, March 5, 2018 http://greenerchoices.org/2018/03/05/cage-free-add-value/ </ref> ''Cage-free'' does not mean the chickens had access to the outdoors. It only means the chickens were not confined to a cage.<ref name="cage-free">What Does ‘Cage Free’ Mean?” Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, February 6, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/02/06/cage-free-mean/ </ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Cage-free chickens, like free-range chickens, may be confined not by a cage but by crowding so extreme that turning around and engaging in the natural behaviors of preening, nesting, foraging, dust bathing, and perching is difficult or impossible. Such extreme crowding in large metal warehouses is the norm.<ref>Ibid.</ref><ref>Dan Flynn, “Cage-Free Hens Don’t Improve Egg Food Safety, Nutrition Levels,” Food Safety News, March 1, 2017, http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2017/03/cage-free-hens-dont-improve-egg-food-safety-nutrition-levels/ </ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Free Range ===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The USDA standard for ''free-range'' requires only that chickens are given some access to the outdoors. There are no stipulations for the size or quality of the outdoor space, and there is no requirement that the chickens actually spend time outdoors.<ref>“FSIS.” Food Safety Inspection Service, USDA, http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/food-safety-education/get-answers/food-safety-fact-sheets/food-labeling/meat-and-poultry-labeling-terms</ref> Also, the claim does not have to be verified through inspections.<ref name="free-range">“What Does ‘Free Range’ Mean?” Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, April 25, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/04/25/free-range/ </ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | So it's not surprising that investigations by Consumer Reports (and others) reveal that most chickens labeled ''free-range'' spend their lives confined inside a crowded chicken house. The free-range space itself may be nothing more than an enclosed concrete slab that the chickens never use. These individuals lack the room even to turn around, much less engage in their natural behaviors of preening, nesting, foraging, dust bathing, and perching.<ref name="free-range" /> This has led Consumer Reports to say that ''free-range'' is one of the most potentially misleading labels because of the discrepancy between what it implies and what is required to make the claim."<ref name="free-range" />
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Only one percent of eggs are from free-range hens that have the option to go outdoors, but like the other 99 percent, even those hens have likely never actually been outdoors.<ref>“A Hen’s Space to Roost.” New York Times, August 15, 2010. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/weekinreview/20100815-chicken-cages.pdf</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Jonathan Foer, in his well-researched and fact-checked book<ref>Yonan, Joe. “Book Review: Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer,” November 22, 2009. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/20/AR2009112001684.html</ref> ''Eating Animals,'' sums it up well in saying that "the free-range label is bullshit" and "should provide no more peace of mind than 'all-natural,' 'fresh,' or 'magical.'"<ref>Foer, Jonathan Safran. Eating Animals. Little, Brown, 2009, 102 “A ‘Cage-Free’ Claim: Does It Add Value?” Greener Choices |Consumer Reports, March 5, 2018</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Whole Foods Market (GAP) ===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Whole Foods Market spearheaded the development of the Global Animal Partnership (GAP) certification program and sells various products, including eggs and chicken meat, with GAP labels.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The Open Philanthropy Project criticized GAP for having weak enforcement and for providing only slight improvements over standard factory farming conditions.<ref>“Global Animal Partnership.” Open Philanthropy Project, March 26, 2016. href="https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/global-animal-partnership-general-support">https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/global-animal-partnership-general-support </ref> For example, according to Consumer Reports, "standards for slaughter do not exist at any level for chickens and there is no limit on their rate of growth."<ref>“Global Animal Partnership Step 5+.” Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, May 23, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/05/23/global-animal-partnership-step-5/</ref>
| |
| − | ===Organic ===
| |
| − | Some have the perception that chickens with the ''organic'' label mean they are humanely raised, but that is not the case. Organic farmers are free to treat their animals no better than non-organic farmers. This is because the USDA, which controls the ''organic'' label in the United States, ruled that the label does not allow "broadly prescriptive, stand-alone animal welfare regulations."<ref>Whoriskey, Peter. “Should ‘USDA Organic’ Animals Be Treated More Humanely? The Trump Administration Just Said No.” Washington Post, December 15, 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/15/should-usda-organic-animals-be-treated-more-humanely-the-trump-administration-just-said-no/</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Consumer Reports informs us that while there are organic standards relating to animals, they lack clarity and precision, letting producers with poor standards sell poultry and eggs.<ref>“Do You Care about Animal Welfare on Organic Farms?” Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, February 6, 2018. http://greenerchoices.org/2018/02/06/care-animal-welfare-organic-farms/</ref>
| |
| − | ===United Egg Producers Certified===
| |
| − | Consumer Reports says that while the label is verified, "it is not meaningful as an animal welfare label because certain basic conditions, such as the freedom to move, are not required."<ref>“United Egg Producers Certified.” Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, March 23, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/03/23/united-egg-producers-certified/</ref>{{jfa-expand | Details: Freedom to Move }}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | According to Consumer Reports, "the UEP Certified guidelines allow continuous confinement in crowded cages in dimly lit buildings without natural light and fresh air. Hens only have to be given enough space to stand upright, with a minimum space requirement of 8 by 8 inches for white laying hens kept in a cage. Producers keeping their hens in cages do not have to allow the hens to move freely, perch, dust bathe, or forage, and nest boxes are not required. While the label is verified, it is not meaningful as an animal welfare label because certain basic conditions, such as the freedom to move, are not required."<ref>“United Egg Producers Certified.” Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, March 23, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/03/23/united-egg-producers-certified/ </ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | {{jfa-expand-end}}
| + | === Label or Certification 1 === |
| − | ===American Humane Certified === | |
| − | According to Consumer Reports, "the requirements fall short in meeting consumer expectations for a 'humane' label in many ways."<ref>“American Humane Certified.” Consumer Reports—Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, January 11, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/01/11/american-humane-certified/</ref>
| |
| − | ===Animal Welfare Approved ===
| |
| − | This is the only certification that Consumer Reports says has strong standards, yet the standards still allow for mutilations<ref>“Animal Welfare Approved.” Greener Choices |Consumer Reports, November 16, 2016. http://greenerchoices.org/2016/11/16/awa-label-review/</ref> and other injustices. Also, products with this label are challenging to find. A search using their own product finder reveals that it's unlikely you will find any products with this label at a grocery store near you.<ref>“Find Products.” A Greener World. Accessed October 4, 2018. https://agreenerworld.org/shop-agw/product-search/</ref>
| |
| − | ===Certified Humane Raised and Handled===
| |
| − | Consumer Reports says that "we do not rate Certified Humane as a highly meaningful label for animal welfare, because the standards do not have certain requirements that a majority of consumers expect from a 'humanely raised' label, such as access to the outdoors."<ref>“Certified Humane Raised and Handled.” Consumer Reports—Greener Choices | Consumer Reports, January 30, 2017. http://greenerchoices.org/2017/01/30/certified-humane/</ref>
| |
| − | ===Backyard Chickens === | |
| − | Although backyard chickens are not associated with a certification or label like the others that we are covering here, they deserve a closer look. A considerable number of people regard the practice of keeping chickens in the backyard for food as innocuous.
| |
| | | | |
| − | Baby chicks often die in transport. A quick search will find numerous reports of chicks being shipped alive to backyard hobbyists and dying in transport—and reports of those that make it being greatly stressed.
| + | === Label or Certification 2, etc === |
| − | | |
| − | Backyard chickens are the same or similar varieties as commercial chickens and are subject to all of the abuses that result from culling and selective breeding, as discussed above.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Backyard hens are likely to be slaughtered when egg production wanes, preventing them from living out their natural lives. As one hobbyist euphemistically put it, "when the expenses outweigh the value, then changes have to be made."<ref>“At What Age Do You Kill a Laying Hen?” BackYard Chickens. Accessed November 2, 2018. https://www.backyardchickens.com/threads/at-what-age-do-you-kill-a-laying-hen.837302/</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The slaughter of backyard chickens, whether laying hens or broiler chickens, is usually done by slitting the throat and waiting for the convulsing chicken to die its slow death. The slaughter is violent, cruel, and painful, just as with commercial operations.
| |
| | | | |
| | == Sentience and Cognition == | | == Sentience and Cognition == |
| − | While we are not suggesting that the degree of moral consideration given to an animal be based on their cognitive capacity, it seems that most people are unaware of the rich cognitive, emotional, and psychological lives that chickens experience, including their ability to experience happiness, boredom, and frustration.<ref>Marino, Lori. “Thinking Chickens: A Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior in the Domestic Chicken.” ''Animal Cognition''20, no. 2 (2017): 127–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-1064-4</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | In her book on chicken behavior and intelligence, prominent animal neurobiologist Leslie J. Rogers says that "the cognitive abilities of some avian species may actually rival those of primates," and that "recent findings challenge assumptions that have been made about brain size and the superiority of the mammalian line of evolution."<ref>Rogers, Lesley J. ''The Development of Brain and Behaviour in the Chicken''. CAB International, 1995. 214.</ref> This is not as far-fetched as it might seem—the chicken's forebrain is similar to the forebrain of mammals.<ref>Jarvis, Erich D., Onur Güntürkün, Laura Bruce, András Csillag, Harvey Karten, Wayne Kuenzel, Loreta Medina, et al. “Avian Brains and a New Understanding of Vertebrate Brain Evolution.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6, no. 2 (February 2005): 151. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1606.</ref>
| + | While we are not suggesting that the degree of moral consideration given to an animal be based on their cognitive capacity, it seems that most people are not fully aware of the rich cognitive, emotional, and psychological lives that pigs experience. |
| | | | |
| − | Experiments show that chickens have a sense of the future and thus have an interest in continuing to live.<ref>Friday, 15 July 2005 Jennifer ViegasDiscovery News. “Chickens Worry about the Future.” Item, July 15, 2005. https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2005/07/15/1415178.htm.
| + | <-- discuss --> |
| − | </ref><ref>Marino, Lori. “Thinking Chickens: A Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior in the Domestic Chicken.” Animal Cognition 20, no. 2 (2017): 127–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-1064-4.
| |
| − | </ref> It is clear they can anticipate future events, exhibit self-control, and delay gratification.<ref>Abeyesinghe, S. M., C. J. Nicol, S. J. Hartnell, and C. M. Wathes. “Can Domestic Fowl, Gallus Gallus Domesticus, Show Self-Control?” Animal Behaviour 70, no. 1 (July 1, 2005): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.10.011.
| |
| − | </ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | In the paper "Thinking chickens: a review of cognition, emotion, and behavior in the domestic chicken," Lori Marino examined 266 research articles in 16 peer-reviewed journals and found that chickens, among other capabilities…<ref>Marino, Lori. “Thinking Chickens: A Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior in the Domestic Chicken.” ''Animal Cognition''20, no. 2 (2017): 127–47. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-1064-4</nowiki>.</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * possess the capacity for episodic memory, which provides "evidence for an autobiographical sense of self in the past, present, and future"
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * exhibit self-control, a capacity not found in humans until age four and is associated with self-awareness and autonomy—the ability to think about and choose future outcomes
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * are capable of reasoning and logical inference
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * are as "emotionally and socially complex as most other birds and mammals in many areas"
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * can perform simple math and understand the ordinality of numbers
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * have self-awareness—"a subjective awareness of one’s identity, one’s body, and one’s thoughts through time, distinguished from others"
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * are capable of a wide range of emotions, including happiness, fear, anxiety, boredom, and frustration
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * "are behaviorally sophisticated, discriminating among individuals, exhibiting Machiavellian-like social interactions, and learning socially in complex ways that are similar to humans."
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * "have distinct personalities, just like all animals who are cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally complex individuals"
| |
| | | | |
| | == Environmental Consequences == | | == Environmental Consequences == |
| | | | |
| − | Chicken production, like other areas of animal agriculture, has a profoundly negative impact on the environment.
| + | The breeding, confinement, and slaughter of pigs have a profoundly negative impact on the environment. |
| − | | |
| − | A 2008 report from the United Nations concludes that "the environmental impacts of the [poultry production] sector are substantial. Poultry production is associated with a variety of pollutants, including oxygen-demanding substances, ammonia, solids, nutrients (specifically nitrogen and phosphorus), pathogens, trace elements, antibiotics, pesticides, hormones, and odor and other airborne emissions." This substantial impact is on surface water, groundwater, air, and soil.<ref>Gerber, Paul R., Carolyn Opio, and Henning Steinfeld. “Poultry Production and the Environment – a Review.” Animal Production and Health Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2008.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The impact of chicken production on global greenhouse gas emissions is not as great as for cows, but at eight percent of the total for animal agriculture, it is still substantial.<ref>“FAO - News Article: Key Facts and Findings.” FAO News—GHG Emissions by Livestock. Accessed July 3, 2019. http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/197623/icode/ </ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The poultry industry points to chicken production being less environmentally damaging than other species of farmed animal production because "chickens are the most efficient converters of feed into meat of all land-based livestock species."<ref>Kite, Vivien. “How Sustainable Is Chicken Farming?” ACMF (blog), June 2, 2014. https://www.chicken.org.au/how-sustainable-is-chicken-farming/</ref> But their calculations ignore the total impact on the environment that accrues because far more chickens are produced than any other animal.<ref name=":0" />
| |
| − | | |
| − | It's ironic that chickens that actually are free-range to some extent (which are a small minority of the birds labeled free-range, as discussed above) place a greater environmental burden in the areas of energy use, land use, and the potential for global warming, eutrophication, and acidification.<ref>Rodic, Vesna, Lidija Peric, Mirjana Đukić Stojčić, and Natasa Vukelić. “The Environmental Impact of Poultry Production.” Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry 27 (January 1, 2011): 1673–79. https://doi.org/10.2298/BAH1104673R.
| |
| − | </ref>
| |
| | | | |
| | == Human Health, Nutrition == | | == Human Health, Nutrition == |
| | | | |
| − | === Eggs ===
| + | <!-- discuss pig meat. It's ok to use the euphemistic word "pork" sparingly after using ''pig meat'' --> |
| | | | |
| − | Eggs contain no nutrients that cannot be easily obtained from plant-based sources. About 70 percent of egg calories are from fat (much of which is saturated), and eggs are loaded with cholesterol.<ref>“Egg Nutrition Facts Labels | Large Egg Calories and Protein.” Egg Nutrition Center (blog). Accessed July 6, 2019. https://www.eggnutritioncenter.org/egg-nutrition-facts-panels/.
| |
| − | </ref> Also, eggs have zero fiber. So it would be disingenuous to say that eggs are healthy because they contain other nutrients when these other nutrients can easily be found in other foods.
| |
| | | | |
| − | It's telling that even the USDA, arguably the best friend animal agriculture could ask for, has told the egg industry that it is not allowed to say eggs are healthy or nutritious.<ref>Transcript tab: "Flashback Friday: Who Says Eggs Aren’t Healthy or Safe? | NutritionFacts.Org.” Accessed July 5, 2019. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/flashback-friday-who-says-eggs-arent-healthy-or-safe/.</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The links between eggs and heart disease, cancer, and diabetes have been known for years.<ref>“What’s Wrong with Eggs?” Forks Over Knives, September 3, 2013. https://www.forksoverknives.com/whats-wrong-with-eggs/ </ref> But this has become controversial because most of the more recent egg studies have been funded by the egg industry,<ref>“Egg Industry Continues to Influence Dietary Guidelines, FOIA Document Reveals.” Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Accessed July 6, 2019. https://www.pcrm.org/news/news-releases/egg-industry-continues-influence-dietary-guidelines-foia-document-reveals.
| |
| − | </ref> resulting in misleading conclusions and sowing confusion about the topic.<ref>Nestle, Marion. “Food Industry Funding of Nutrition Research: The Relevance of History for Current Debates.” JAMA Internal Medicine 176, no. 11 (November 1, 2016): 1685–86. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5400.</ref><ref>“Egg Industry Funded Studies - Google Search.” Google Search. Accessed July 5, 2019. https://www.google.com/search?q=egg+industry+funded+studies.</ref> If you are interested in exactly how the egg industry has rigged the results, see [https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-the-egg-board-designs-misleading-studies/ this] explanation.<ref>Transcript Tab: How the Egg Board Designs Misleading Studies | NutritionFacts.Org. Accessed July 6, 2019. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-the-egg-board-designs-misleading-studies/.
| |
| − | </ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Hopefully, a 2019 study that was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association will correct the public's perception of the issue. It finds that eating even small amounts of eggs daily significantly raises the risk for both cardiovascular disease and premature death. And the more eggs consumed, the higher the risk for stroke, coronary heart disease, and heart failure.<ref>Zhong, Victor W., Linda Van Horn, Marilyn C. Cornelis, John T. Wilkins, Hongyan Ning, Mercedes R. Carnethon, Philip Greenland, et al. “Associations of Dietary Cholesterol or Egg Consumption With Incident Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality.” JAMA 321, no. 11 (March 19, 2019): 1081–95. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.1572.</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Chicken Meat ===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | It is commonly believed that white meat is healthier than red meat, and this belief is at least partially responsible for the 1,400 percent increase in the number of chickens bred and slaughtered for meat over the last 50 years.<ref>“Big Chicken: Pollution and Industrial Poultry Production in America.” Accessed July 6, 2019. http://pew.org/2yIxE4p</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| | But a 2019 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition says that there is no reason to choose white meat over red meat for the reduction of cardiovascular disease, and it recommends plant-based food for lowering the risk of cardiovascular disease.<ref>Bergeron, Nathalie, Sally Chiu, Paul T. Williams, Sarah M King, and Ronald M. Krauss. “Effects of Red Meat, White Meat, and Nonmeat Protein Sources on Atherogenic Lipoprotein Measures in the Context of Low Compared with High Saturated Fat Intake: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 110, no. 1 (July 1, 2019): 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqz035.</ref> | | But a 2019 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition says that there is no reason to choose white meat over red meat for the reduction of cardiovascular disease, and it recommends plant-based food for lowering the risk of cardiovascular disease.<ref>Bergeron, Nathalie, Sally Chiu, Paul T. Williams, Sarah M King, and Ronald M. Krauss. “Effects of Red Meat, White Meat, and Nonmeat Protein Sources on Atherogenic Lipoprotein Measures in the Context of Low Compared with High Saturated Fat Intake: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 110, no. 1 (July 1, 2019): 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqz035.</ref> |
| Line 197: |
Line 100: |
| | * contributes to atherosclerosis—plaques of cholesterol that accumulate in the lining of our vessels; this condition is far less common on a vegan diet because absorbable cholesterol is not found in plants | | * contributes to atherosclerosis—plaques of cholesterol that accumulate in the lining of our vessels; this condition is far less common on a vegan diet because absorbable cholesterol is not found in plants |
| | | | |
| − | == Social Consequences of Chicken Production == | + | == Social Consequences of Pig Production == |
| − | Poultry workers suffer serious injuries at twice the rate of other industries and are more than six times as likely to have sickness related to work, according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).<ref>“OSHA Poultry Slaughtering and Poultry Processing | Occupational Safety and Health Administration.” Accessed June 12, 2019. <nowiki>https://www.osha.gov/dep/enforcement/poultry_processing_10282015.html</nowiki>.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | OSHA data from 2013 reveals poultry workers suffer carpal tunnel syndrome seven times more than the average worker and that they are 4.5 times more likely to identify repetitive motion for serious injury.<ref>Cartwright, Michael S., Francis O. Walker, Jill N. Blocker, Mark R. Schulz, Thomas A. Arcury, Joseph G. Grzywacz, Dana Mora, Haiying Chen, Antonio J. Marín, and Sara A. Quandt. “The Prevalence of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome in Latino Poultry-Processing Workers and Other Latino Manual Workers.” ''Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine''54, no. 2 (February 2012): 198–201. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e31823fdf53</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Cartwright, Michael S., Francis O. Walker, Jill C. Newman, Mark R. Schulz, Thomas A. Arcury, Joseph G. Grzywacz, Dana C. Mora, Haiying Chen, Bethany Eaton, and Sara A. Quandt. “One-Year Incidence of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome in Latino Poultry Processing Workers and Other Latino Manual Workers.” ''American Journal of Industrial Medicine''57, no. 3 (March 2014): 362–69. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22250</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Musolin, Kristin, Jessica G. Ramsey, James T. Wassell, and David L. Hard. “Prevalence of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome among Employees at a Poultry Processing Plant.” ''Applied Ergonomics''45, no. 6 (November 2014): 1377–83. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2014.03.005</nowiki>.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The GAO also finds that workers are hesitant to speak up about the injuries for fear of retaliation, which suggests the problems may be underreported.<ref>Office, U. S. Government Accountability. “Workplace Safety and Health: Better Outreach, Collaboration, and Information Needed to Help Protect Workers at Meat and Poultry Plants,” no. GAO-18-12 (December 7, 2017). https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-12.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The Union of Concerned Scientists concludes that with the increase in chicken-processing line speeds allowed by the USDA in late 2018, the situation will only get worse.<ref>“USDA Increases Line Speeds Endangering Poultry Processing Plant Workers.” Union of Concerned Scientists. Accessed June 12, 2019. <nowiki>https://www.ucsusa.org/center-science-and-democracy/attacks-on-science/usda-increases-line-speeds-endangering-poultry</nowiki>.</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| | == Footnotes == | | == Footnotes == |
| Line 211: |
Line 107: |
| | == Meta == | | == Meta == |
| | | | |
| − | This article was originally authored by [[User:Greg.Fuller | Greg Fuller ]] and copy-edited by [[User:Isaac.Nickerson | Isaac Nickerson]]. The contents may have been edited since that time by others. | + | This article was originally authored by xxx with contributions by [[User:Greg.Fuller | Greg Fuller ]]. The contents may have been edited since that time by others. |
| | | | |
| | {{jfa-meta | | {{jfa-meta |
| − | | meta-title = Chickens | + | | meta-title = Pigs |
| | | meta-keywords = veganism, animal rights | | | meta-keywords = veganism, animal rights |
| − | | meta-description = This article covers various aspects of farmed chickens in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, chicken sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming chickens, the health risks of chicken meat and eggs, and impacts to workers and neighborhoods. | + | | meta-description = This article covers various aspects of farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to workers and neighborhoods. |
| | }} | | }} |
| | | | |
This assignment is a work in process and not ready to be assigned. Assignments are moved to the draft namespace after an author has accepted the assignment.
<-- Visible editorial notes appear between <-- and --> tags. You can delete them after you start on a section or you can hide them by using the standard notation for comments, adding an exclamation mark: "." They should be deleted, hidden or not, before the pre-publication review. The author should delete this particular one after reading it. -->
This article provides information about pigs that should prove useful to those advocating for animal rights, as well as to those exploring the rationale for veganism.
It covers various aspects of farmed pigs in the context of animal rights, including injustices and suffering, humane labels and certifications, pig sentience and cognition, the environmental consequences of farming pigs, the health risks of pig meat, and impacts to communities and workers
<-- Generally, use Chickens as a model for this article. Deviations are allowed. The books Slaughterhouse, and Eating Animals can help in running down primary sources, if you have them or can get them. -->
General Information
Heritage
Numbers
<-- when referring to numbers slaughtered, link to this table instead of using a footnote. -->
Injustices and Suffering
The injustices inherent in exploiting pigs and other non-human animals stem from seeing them as having only instrumental value, lacking any inherent worth apart from their usefulness to humans.
As Tom Regan put it, the animals we use "have a life of their own that is of importance to them, apart from their utility to us. They are not only in the world, they are aware of it and also of what happens to them. And what happens to them matters to them. Each has a life that fares experientially better or worse for the one whose life it is."[1]
As shown in the section on sentience and cognition, pigs not only have a will to live and value their lives, just as humans do, but also have desires, preferences, emotions, families, social communities, natural behaviors, a sense of themselves, and a sense of the future.
The injustices discussed below—all arising from a failure to recognize the inherent worth of other sentient beings—are either standard practice or not unusual. And, as shown in the section below on humane labels and certifications, this is true even for those chicken products with a humane label or certification. To omit a significant number of these injustices would likely increase costs to the point of rendering chicken meat and eggs unaffordable by all but the most affluent.
Loss of Life
We have no nutritional need for pork, so denying pigs their lives is unnecessary, as are the other forms of suffering enumerated here.[2]
Not only are we taking their lives—we are doing so after allowing them to live only about three percent of their natural life spans. Pigs are slaughtered after living only 5 to 6 weeks of a 10 to 12-year natural lifespan. Table: Age of Animals Slaughtered vs. Natural Life Span
To take the life of any sentient being is to harm that being by depriving them of opportunities for fulfillment, even if it is done suddenly and painlessly (which it is not, as explained below).
Slaughter
<-- discuss methods of slaughter, USDA inspecter testimonials, slaughter speed lines, and the cruelty involved. The book Slaughterhouse" and
Another Injustice / Abuse
Another Injustice / Abuse, etc
Humane Labels and Certifications
Many believe that we are not harming animals when we use them for food as long as we treat them well while they are living. The justification given for this view is that animals don't have a sense of the future, and thus don’t have an interest in continuing to live. However, current research in cognitive ethology and neurobiology [as shown below], says otherwise.
But if one holds this belief in spite of the science, and wants to live by their own values, they might, with good intentions, decide to buy only animal products that have some sort of humane label or certification.
In the sections that follow, we show that standards are weak and unenforced, audits and inspections are rarely done, and if they are done and violations are found, which is infrequent, no one gets fined.
So even if you buy into the idea that it’s OK to eat animal products as long as the animals are treated well, there is virtually no chance that the animals have, in fact, been treated well, regardless of what label is on the package. While certain labels may represent less suffering for some of the abuses, other abuses remain. The mitigation of some of the cruelties does not justify the remaining ones.
Humane labels and certifications are, for the most part, marketing ploys. They are designed to assuage our guilt, and they can engender higher profits because the industry knows that concerned, kindhearted consumers are willing to pay more for products they perceive to be humanely produced.
The life of any farmed animal can only be described as one of commodified, abusive servitude ending in brutal slaughter. When viewed objectively, free from the fog of our cultural norms, their treatment and slaughter, by any standard of fairness and justice—cannot be considered humane.
Label or Certification 1
Label or Certification 2, etc
Sentience and Cognition
While we are not suggesting that the degree of moral consideration given to an animal be based on their cognitive capacity, it seems that most people are not fully aware of the rich cognitive, emotional, and psychological lives that pigs experience.
<-- discuss -->
Environmental Consequences
The breeding, confinement, and slaughter of pigs have a profoundly negative impact on the environment.
Human Health, Nutrition
But a 2019 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition says that there is no reason to choose white meat over red meat for the reduction of cardiovascular disease, and it recommends plant-based food for lowering the risk of cardiovascular disease.[3]
All animal protein, chicken or otherwise, carries risks that are not associated with plant protein. A review by Dr. Sofia Ochoa cites 42 studies showing that animal protein…
- elevates hormone insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), which stimulates cell division and growth in both healthy and cancer cells and "has been consistently associated with increased cancer risk, proliferation, and malignancy"
- "results in us having higher circulating levels of trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO)," which "injures the lining of our vessels, creates inflammation, and facilitates the formation of cholesterol plaques in our blood vessels"
- causes the overproduction of the hormone fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23), which damages our blood vessels, can "lead to enlargement of the cardiac ventricle, and is associated with heart attacks, sudden death, and heart failure"
- can result in the overabsorption of heme iron, causing the conversion of other oxidants into highly reactive free radicals that "can damage different cell structures like proteins, membranes, and DNA" (heme iron "has also been associated with many kinds of gastrointestinal cancers")
- can result in a higher incidence of bone fractures because of animal protein's high concentrations of sulfur
- contributes to atherosclerosis—plaques of cholesterol that accumulate in the lining of our vessels; this condition is far less common on a vegan diet because absorbable cholesterol is not found in plants
Social Consequences of Pig Production
Meta
This article was originally authored by xxx with contributions by Greg Fuller . The contents may have been edited since that time by others.
