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.

    • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      "capitalism is more effective than alternatives"

      Capitalism showing why it is more effective :

      • Drusas@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

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

        • BigAssFan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Still, eating meat in today's society is a choice you don't have to make. Having a pleasant taste in your mouth on one hand versus climate warming, loss of biodiversity and animal cruelty. Even when locally grown. For me, the choice is not hard to make.

      • LuckyBoy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year 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
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year 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
              2
              ·
              1 year 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
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year 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.

                • triangle5106@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I'd argue the most ethical course of action is to halt the breeding of additional animals for the purpose of slaughter. We have complete control of the situation here: not all wild animals die gruesome deaths, but a livestock animal's fate is decided far before they are even born. It feels a little less than 'humane'.

                  • Drusas@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    And that's why the truly realistic and humane people reduce their animal product consumption and try to limit it to local products.