Ventilation shutdown is undoubtedly an inhumane practice, and it's a tragedy so many birds have had to endure it. However, simply banning it is infeasible under USDA's current policy framework for addressing bird flu. I discuss one of the main alternatives, high-expansion nitrogen foam here: https://optimistsbarn.substack.com/p/the-challenge-and-promise-of-high
Just curious, what alternative method of culling would you propose be used instead of ventilation shutdown? With the current bird flu epidemic culling is necessary to stop the spread, so presumably there's some third way between ventilation shutdown and just letting chickens die of bird flu.
Based on a quick google search, it appears that vaccinating chickens doesn't prevent them from catching or spreading bird flu, but only prevents severe illness or death. So culling infected chickens would still be necessary to stop the spread.
I don't think we're going to legislate our way to a compassionate society. Legislation may be well-intentioned, but it acts to regulate animal exploitation, rather than to eliminate it. The downside is that consumers get the false impression that the problem has been solved, so they become more comfortable in exploiting animals. What we need is a fundamental shift in moral perspective – a recognition that animals are sentient beings with inherent worth, not resources to be used. We should promote veganism as an ethical baseline, thereby encouraging people to reject animal exploitation entirely in their daily choices. This grassroots approach of changing hearts and minds can create a genuine cultural transformation in how society views and treats animals. Gary Francione has been making this argument for years, and I find it convincing.
There is already enough recognition of that animal suffering is bad to get the Humane Slaughter Act passed in 1958. It seems like it wouldn't take that big as social change to revise it to add poultry to the list of animals it covers.
I agree that everyone who cares about animal suffering should abstain from advocating for legislative and regulatory changes in favor of a prophecized total shift in moral perspective where everyone suddenly realizes that animals matter too. Advocating for material top-down change will obviously make problems worse. It's all or nothing for mass grassroots buy-in.
With luck, this highly effective strategy will let me enjoy my chicken pizza for as long as I care to.
> where everyone suddenly realizes that animals matter too
These changes happen gradually, not suddenly. With regard to social change in the US: Look, for example, at societal acceptance of gay marriage and legalization of marijuana.
Legalizing Gay Marriage = Zero (or very very small) costs on people.
Marijuana remains nominally illegal in the U.S. even though legalization economic benefits arguably outweigh costs and personal consumption harms only the user…
Banning Meat Consumption = Trillions of Dollars in costs + destroy entire modes of living. There is no comparison.
You don't consider how miserable dying from bird flu might be. Maybe it's just as subjectively miserable, and takes 100x as long.
Even if a chicken survives bird flu, they're still living the rest of their life in a factory farm. Given the choice between a relatively rapid death, vs a miserable infection followed by a miserable life, it's unclear which is preferable.
Weirdly in other situations it's a crime to do this. This guy was arrested for leaving farm animals in his hot van. https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/bang-bus-porn-star-raul-ramon-armenteros-busted-for-keeping-21-farm-animals-locked-in-hot-car-6558666
Another insanity generated by non-vegans
Lord have mercy
Ventilation shutdown is undoubtedly an inhumane practice, and it's a tragedy so many birds have had to endure it. However, simply banning it is infeasible under USDA's current policy framework for addressing bird flu. I discuss one of the main alternatives, high-expansion nitrogen foam here: https://optimistsbarn.substack.com/p/the-challenge-and-promise-of-high
More realistic is to make it obsolete by undertaking a mass vaccination campaign for layers: https://optimistsbarn.substack.com/p/we-should-vaccinate-egg-laying-hens
What's wrong with just banning it? They're use other less horrendous slaughter methods.
Just curious, what alternative method of culling would you propose be used instead of ventilation shutdown? With the current bird flu epidemic culling is necessary to stop the spread, so presumably there's some third way between ventilation shutdown and just letting chickens die of bird flu.
Ideally we'd vaccinate them so they don't need to be brutally killed.
Based on a quick google search, it appears that vaccinating chickens doesn't prevent them from catching or spreading bird flu, but only prevents severe illness or death. So culling infected chickens would still be necessary to stop the spread.
Well he said gassing them like the Nazis would be more humane but there's got to be something better than that
> Contact your local representatives
I don't think we're going to legislate our way to a compassionate society. Legislation may be well-intentioned, but it acts to regulate animal exploitation, rather than to eliminate it. The downside is that consumers get the false impression that the problem has been solved, so they become more comfortable in exploiting animals. What we need is a fundamental shift in moral perspective – a recognition that animals are sentient beings with inherent worth, not resources to be used. We should promote veganism as an ethical baseline, thereby encouraging people to reject animal exploitation entirely in their daily choices. This grassroots approach of changing hearts and minds can create a genuine cultural transformation in how society views and treats animals. Gary Francione has been making this argument for years, and I find it convincing.
https://benthams.substack.com/p/against-addressing-root-causes
There is already enough recognition of that animal suffering is bad to get the Humane Slaughter Act passed in 1958. It seems like it wouldn't take that big as social change to revise it to add poultry to the list of animals it covers.
The Humane Slaughter Act is routinely ignored. See, for example, this article:
https://www.organicauthority.com/buzz-news/virtually-all-usda-inspectors-ignoring-the-humane-slaughter-act
I agree that everyone who cares about animal suffering should abstain from advocating for legislative and regulatory changes in favor of a prophecized total shift in moral perspective where everyone suddenly realizes that animals matter too. Advocating for material top-down change will obviously make problems worse. It's all or nothing for mass grassroots buy-in.
With luck, this highly effective strategy will let me enjoy my chicken pizza for as long as I care to.
> where everyone suddenly realizes that animals matter too
These changes happen gradually, not suddenly. With regard to social change in the US: Look, for example, at societal acceptance of gay marriage and legalization of marijuana.
Legalizing Gay Marriage = Zero (or very very small) costs on people.
Marijuana remains nominally illegal in the U.S. even though legalization economic benefits arguably outweigh costs and personal consumption harms only the user…
Banning Meat Consumption = Trillions of Dollars in costs + destroy entire modes of living. There is no comparison.
> Banning Meat Consumption
I'm not in favor of banning the consumption of animal products (note: not just meat), since that obviously wouldn't work.
Yes. You appear to be in favor of moralizing, which serves my interests plenty.
You don't consider how miserable dying from bird flu might be. Maybe it's just as subjectively miserable, and takes 100x as long.
Even if a chicken survives bird flu, they're still living the rest of their life in a factory farm. Given the choice between a relatively rapid death, vs a miserable infection followed by a miserable life, it's unclear which is preferable.
This is horrifying.
> regarding out treatment
Should be our
Thanks!