Belgium Wallooon region, bans the slaughter of unstunned livestock animals.

[Gigantus]

I can't get hold of the February 1978 issue of 'Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift' were the study by Dr Schulze and others is published but it was summed up like this (marking by myself):

The scientific setup
A team at the university of Hanover in Germany [Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover - Gig] examined the claims through the use of EEG and ECG records during slaughter. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all the animals used in the experiment and they were then allowed to recover for several weeks. Some of the animals were subsequently slaughtered the halal way by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides together with the trachea and esophagus but leaving the spinal cord intact. The remainder were stunned before slaughter using a captive bolt pistol method as is customary in Western slaughterhouses. The EEG and ECG recordings allowed to monitor the condition of the brain and heart throughout.

The 'Halal' method
With the halal method of slaughter, there was no change in the EEG graph for the first three seconds after the incision was made, indicating that the animal did not feel any pain from the cut itself. This is not surprising. Often, if we cut ourselves with a sharp implement, we do not notice until some time later. The following three seconds were characterised by a condition of deep sleep-like unconsciousness brought about by the draining of large quantities of blood from the body. Thereafter the EEG recorded a zero reading, indicating no pain at all, yet at that time the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously as a reflex reaction of the spinal cord. It is this phase which is most unpleasant to onlookers who are falsely convinced that the animal suffers whilst its brain does actually no longer record any sensual messages.

The 'Western' method
Using the Western method, the animals were apparently unconscious after stunning, and this method of dispatch would appear to be much more peaceful for the onlooker. However, the EEG readings indicated severe pain immediately after stunning. Whereas in the first example, the animal ceases to feel pain due to the brain starvation of blood and oxygen – a brain death, to put it in laymen terms – the second example first causes a stoppage of the heart whilst the animal still feels pain. However, there are no unsightly convulsions, which not only means that there is more blood retention in the meat, but also that this method lends itself much more conveniently to the efficiency demands of modern mass slaughter procedures (it is easier to dispatch an animal on the conveyor belt, if it does not move).

[StarDreamer]

Animals should be slaughtered according to the law and not "religious sentiment". There should be no exeptions to the law. If a method can be demostrated to be better for the animal it should be adopted as the method allowed by the law.

[mongrel]

Animals should be slaughtered according to the law and not "religious sentiment". There should be no exeptions to the law. If a method can be demostrated to be better for the animal it should be adopted as the method allowed by the law.

Animals are slaughtered according to the law. it's sectarian and atheist sentiment that's making all the whining.

When it comes to de-facto animal cruelty, then it is a "commercial exercise" to a same extent as slavery is.
If you make fake income, then you get to eat fake food, as simple as that.

Yep definitely sounding like one of those animal rights extremists. There is nothing wrong with farming , nor consuming animals for food. its a normal part of life, yes even for poorer people.

[StarDreamer]

Animals are slaughtered according to the law. it's sectarian and atheist sentiment that's making all the whining.

The law shouldn't be different for differing religions or lack of. That means there is a serious breach of equality before the law and seperation of church and state. Religious reasons should not be catered to in law.

[Heathen Hammer]

Yep definitely sounding like one of those animal rights extremists. There is nothing wrong with farming , nor consuming animals for food. its a normal part of life, yes even for poorer people.

So you support torture of animals. That's all we need to know.

[Anthropoid]

I can't get hold of the February 1978 issue of 'Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift' were the study by Dr Schulze and others is published but it was summed up like this (marking by myself):

The scientific setup
A team at the university of Hanover in Germany [Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover - Gig] examined the claims through the use of EEG and ECG records during slaughter. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all the animals used in the experiment and they were then allowed to recover for several weeks. Some of the animals were subsequently slaughtered the halal way by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides together with the trachea and esophagus but leaving the spinal cord intact. The remainder were stunned before slaughter using a captive bolt pistol method as is customary in Western slaughterhouses. The EEG and ECG recordings allowed to monitor the condition of the brain and heart throughout.

The 'Halal' method
With the halal method of slaughter, there was no change in the EEG graph for the first three seconds after the incision was made, indicating that the animal did not feel any pain from the cut itself. This is not surprising. Often, if we cut ourselves with a sharp implement, we do not notice until some time later. The following three seconds were characterised by a condition of deep sleep-like unconsciousness brought about by the draining of large quantities of blood from the body. Thereafter the EEG recorded a zero reading, indicating no pain at all, yet at that time the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously as a reflex reaction of the spinal cord. It is this phase which is most unpleasant to onlookers who are falsely convinced that the animal suffers whilst its brain does actually no longer record any sensual messages.

The 'Western' method
Using the Western method, the animals were apparently unconscious after stunning, and this method of dispatch would appear to be much more peaceful for the onlooker. However, the EEG readings indicated severe pain immediately after stunning. Whereas in the first example, the animal ceases to feel pain due to the brain starvation of blood and oxygen – a brain death, to put it in laymen terms – the second example first causes a stoppage of the heart whilst the animal still feels pain. However, there are no unsightly convulsions, which not only means that there is more blood retention in the meat, but also that this method lends itself much more conveniently to the efficiency demands of modern mass slaughter procedures (it is easier to dispatch an animal on the conveyor belt, if it does not move).

That is pretty interesting. Course, EEG and ECG do not measure "pain" per se; to do that well . . . I'm not even sure there is a physiological way to do that . . . I'm a couple years behind the neuropsychology now but, if memory serves as of 5 years ago, there were no easily implemented neurophysiological measures of pain. The pathways and brain centers involved in pain and anxiety are _reasonably_ well understood, but it is anything but 'simple.' Not to mention that acute pain (what is going on in any slaughter) can be very different from chronic pain (the topic that is of greatest interest to researchers because it troubles humans.

I suppose it might be possible to implant electrodes inside the brain (these would need to be very deep/invasive, unpleasant instrumentation to say the least . . . so . . . sort of defeats the purpose) and then observe activity in pain centers and that would be just about as close to highly valid measure of pain as is possible.

The thing with EEG is: it measures surficial cortical activity. with enough electrodes on the scalp, it is possible to derive some rather amazingly good understandings of various processes that are mediated or moderated in the most distal regions of the cortex. But the thing is . . . few functions are mediated in the distal cortex, and pain certainly is not. What they are reading most likely is just "brain activity" not pain. ECG (actually is that EKG??) also . . . not pain directly, but rather cardiac activity.

The best measures of pain are likely:
1. for a human ask them and use a lickert scale to put their response onto an ordinal scale
2. for an animal, observe stereotypical behaviors which are reasonably understood to be evoked by pain.

All of that said . . . I doubt there is that much difference in the horror of the two experiences, though the "industrial" technique would be MY preference were I to be slaughtered (and with zero opportunity to fight back, which is in my opinion how I'd always face being executed . . . take as many of the bastards with me as I can . . .). If you are unconscious then you do not feel pain. I know this from personal experience!

If the goal really is to do everything reasonable to insure the animals do not "suffer" (which is a bit of a paradox given that they are being slaughtered, which is arguably an inherently unpleasant experience no matter how innocuous is looks and feels . . .) then what they should do is determine a minimum and an optimum dose of a bartibuturate/opiod cocktail (not a pharmacologist, but I would think something along those lines . . .) and dose them with that. In fact, while they are at it, why even bother using traumatic methods to kill them, just give them a dose of whatever drugs the vets use to euthanize pets.

I suppose one _possible_ problem with that is fear of the meat being contaminated by the drug, which may be a reasonable fear, I'm not sure. My guess though is: by the time the animal has been butchered and the body cleaved into its component cuts, the drugs half-life would have passed, and that combined with inherent degradation by the lingering physiological processes of the animal immediately post death would likely degrade most of the drugs traces. As I said, not a pharmacologist, but I'd suspect that if they really wanted a drug that would do what was needed: put the animal calmly into a slumber then death AND pose nearly zero risk of contaminating the meat (like ~0.000001% or 1 in 100,000,000 [which is effectively "zero"] chance) they'd be able to concoct such a thing. The existing systems just plain work, they are cheap, and the animals rights folks don't make enough noise to pressure the meat industry to explore less traumatic methods.

I helped to slaughter a goat once while I was living in and doing fieldwork in Botswana, and it was a bit botched . . . poor thing took about 2 or 3 minutes to die. It was horrific, and I have no desire to ever do such a thing again, short of self-defense. Apart from the mentally ill, I don't see how any human being can watch any mammal (or even most vertebrates) suffer and not be moved by it and find it aversive. In sum, you've got to be ed up / numbed to it.

But the fact is: meat is extremely nutritious, and people love the taste of it. People enjoy it, hell I enjoy it! Bacon is food of the Gods . . . Salmon is food of the Gods . . .

Seeing that goat suffer _almost_ made me consider becoming a non-meat-eater but I'm just not that disciplined.

[sumskilz]

I suppose one _possible_ problem with that is fear of the meat being contaminated by the drug, which may be a reasonable fear, I'm not sure.

A captive bolt pistol to the head doesn't involve any drugs. My understanding is that is the standard procedure. Maybe not everywhere though. In any case, there are many ways it can go wrong.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

Just hire Hafthor Julius Bjornsson already, he can use a great sword to decapitate the cows in one blow. Clean!

[Anthropoid]

A captive bolt pistol to the head doesn't involve any drugs. My understanding is that is the standard procedure. Maybe not everywhere though. In any case, there are many ways it can go wrong.

Yep, that was my understanding too.

The thing that is worth keeping in mind: the entire process of being taken to slaughter is likely "stressful" for most domesticated animals. They've been living in their feed lot in 'relative' comfort, and now everything has changed. They are being herded into vehicles and confined during a journey = stress. They are herded off the vehicles and into a funnel while drivers keep them moving forward; it is my understanding this is the standard method . . . something like, the vehicle backs up and the gate is opened, the animals exit into a relatively small fenced lot with only two ways out, the way they just came in (which is just about to be closed), and the way they are going to their deaths, a lobster trap funnel that narrows down to one animal wide. The methods used to drive them may vary dramatically across world regions but fear and or pain are inevitably involved, at least for larger herd animals like sheep or cattle. These are not pets, they don't know to "come" or "stay" and while many may approach the caretaker who fed them simply because he/she is associated with food, they will generally not been given any opportunity to form any bonds or behavioral response repertoires in association with humans. Which means the only way to control or rather "influence" their behavior is by pushing the buttons that tick their fixed action patterns: loud noise, threatening motions, pain, anything that the animal is evolved more or less "hard-wired" to flee from. I can guarantee you that this is NOT a pleasant experience.

By the time they are funneled into the death walk part and the animals ahead of them are being slaughtered, they may experience a brief respite in which they lose awareness of immediately threatening circumstances; oh sure, being confined with fences on your sides and animals in front and behind is quite possibly stressful all by itself. In fact, some animals freak out and leap out of the channel! But that is probably more down to individual temperament than anything else; the method generally works.

By the time they are "getting close" to the captive bolt gun area (where the butchering process begins and there will be some humans working) they are bound to smell the blood, the pheromones, the urine, the bile and the contents of the bowels of their conspecifics who have already been killed up ahead . . . again, major stress. So then they arrive at their final destination at the end of the narrow channel and they receive a shock that presumably knocks them unconscious, then the captive bolt gun is used to destroy their brain and they are dead.

The idea that the shock which mitigates anywhere from 5 seconds to one minute of anguish is somehow "humane" when the entire process is just about as horrific as it could be while not compromising straight out sadism seems to me to be silly. In the instance of a true industrial slaughter facility there are so many other stressors that the animals inevitably experience on their way to death, including the shock or not seems like a fairly trivial issue. Now granted, I do think it is good practice; it is probably almost impossible to "miss" or to "fail" with the shock and if that does happen, the operator just shocks it again, problem solved. Animal is knocked out and in the right position to kill it and begin butchering (whatever the specifics of that arrangement might be). This prevents probably 99% of the accidents which might transpire with the captive-bolt gun and makes the process safer for the human operators and butchers. But the idea that this shock "removes the pain" of being slaughtered strikes me as an exceptional euphemism.

Then we come to the issue of "traditional" methods of slaughter, those to which the Muslim and Jewish norms adhere today. Tremendous variability. In some cases, humans were so wanton and uncaring of "animal welfare" that they wasted twice as much meat as they harvested simply because they figured out how to do it. Example being the use of stampede methods for eradicating large herds of bison or horse in Paleolithic American southwestern regions. Assuming that what I learned in the 1990s remains accepted, there are sites where Clovis hunters repeatedly stampeded large herds on the order of hundreds of animals into cul de sacs and thence off of clifs where they could be safely dispatched at their leisure (if the stampede/fall did not kill them). Given that the maximum band size was probably under 200 even for high seasonal aggregations, there was probably no way that they could have effectively harvested and utilized all of that animal product, and my recollection is that my archy prof reported it was estimated that often times herds of scores or hundreds of animals might be stampeded to their deaths while only a couple dozen at most were harvested (this is obvious from marks on the bones and the way the bones are arranged in the kill pits as well as the butchery sites).

On the other hand, I believe that many societies understood that nonhuman animals experience fear, that they respected them and/or did not want to deal with the risk of them becoming terrified and went to considerable lengths to slaughter them as gently as possible. A cow or sheep who does not smell anything amiss, and which has not been carted around to some strange locale and driven into a corner is not likely to know what that axe/knife is and if the slaughterer and handlers are reassuring and calming the animal then it may not even know what hit 'em!

I have no idea how the halal slaughter houses work, but all this detail to simply say: IMO, as an outside observer with training in animal behavior as well as stress psychophysiology, I don't see anything "magically humane" about a "modern" method that includes a shock (but allows for alternative methods of killing) nor anything inherently inhumane about a "traditional" method that does not use a shock. The details of what can or cannot be stressful or even so stressful that it legitimately counts as "inhumane" are myriad. It is true, knocking the animal out with a shock is generally going to be humane--assuming that that method works reliably and actually does induce unconsciousness.

[Megasalexandros]

the "value" meter of the internationalist globalist establishment that wants Europe and its nations eradicated.
First of all dont insult the Jews and dont be "antisemitic" that is a "crime" punishable by law
Secondly whatever helps the invasion of non europeans inside Europe is something that absolutely MUST be enforced and it is currently illegal to disagree with it, the only thing that comes above that is the "dont say anything against Jews and Jewish influence etc", everything else submits to the "need" of "diversification" that is to say the eradication of Europe,
and bellow that comes the various "rightS" of every degeneracy that the most vile and sick brain could come up with
So of course the "vegetarians" "animal rights activists" etc will in that case , TOTALLY be ignored by the anti nation , anti European establishment and halal and Jewish practices of torturing animals would eventually be enforced to the "whore" that Europe and dying European nations nowadays have become.

[Harith]

the "value" meter of the internationalist globalist establishment that wants Europe and its nations eradicated.
First of all dont insult the Jews and dont be "antisemitic" that is a "crime" punishable by law
Secondly whatever helps the invasion of non europeans inside Europe is something that absolutely MUST be enforced and it is currently illegal to disagree with it, the only thing that comes above that is the "dont say anything against Jews and Jewish influence etc", everything else submits to the "need" of "diversification" that is to say the eradication of Europe,
and bellow that comes the various "rightS" of every degeneracy that the most vile and sick brain could come up with
So of course the "vegetarians" "animal rights activists" etc will in that case , TOTALLY be ignored by the anti nation , anti European establishment and halal and Jewish practices of torturing animals would eventually be enforced to the "whore" that Europe and dying European nations nowadays have become.

Dude, the thread is about banning Halal slaughter, not Kosher slaughter.

[ArBo]

Nope, it's about banning unstunned slaughter, regardless of religion. Therefore it is applicable to both Halal and Kosher.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

[DaniCatBurger]

non europeans inside Europe

True Europeans eat Neanderthal.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://www.academia.edu/8487475/Nean...3%A8che_France

Maybe they had eaten each another, till no one was left. :/