The Irish Ham wars

Buford T. Justice XIX

Muahahaha wrote: »

Just on anaesthesia and animals the advances in veterinary medicine have been pretty astoininshing over the last decade. Vets are now routinely putting small kittens to sleep for surgery.

I'm not saying it isn't complicated to do the same to a piglet when you've got thousands of them on a farm. But it is the humane thing to do rather than pulling their teeth out and cutting their tails off without giving numbing them before hand.

I doubt any consumer of pork would care all that much to pay a few cents more for a packet of ham if it meant that the piglets didnt suffer in what I can only imagine is excruciating pain at have their teeth pulled and tails chopped off. Its obviously something that could only be introduced at the regulatory level with all farms having to do it in order for it to work. EU level would be better to ensure a level playing field for all piggerys across Europe.

I wouldn't disagree with you there but you're then into the narrative of criticism of farmers routine use of medicines while simultaneously criticising farmers for not routinely using medicines.

Like I said, you're dealing with perceptions of different shades of grey. Theres no black and white solution when dealing with simultaneous conflicting objectives.

Muahahaha

I hear ya but whatever about what some people think of farming and eating animals I think most consumers of meat would want those animals to be treated as humanely as possible when they are alive. Even if putting them to sleep to extract their teeth and cut tails cost €10 per animal I think most consumers would agree with it and wouldnt mind paying extra for that peace of mind. Anyway as said it really is something that should be regulated at the EU level so there is a level playing field for all pig farmers, it would be pointless one farm doing it and the others don't.

Zubeneschamali

Muahahaha wrote: »

II think most consumers of meat would want those animals to be treated as humanely as possible when they are alive...

it really is something that should be regulated at the EU level so there is a level playing field for all pig farmers, it would be pointless one farm doing it and the others don't.

No, we need regulation because most consumers are grand with cruel factory farming if the food is cheaper.

gozunda

Muahahaha wrote: »

I hear ya but whatever about what some people think of farming and eating animals I think most consumers of meat would want those animals to be treated as humanely as possible when they are alive. Even if putting them to sleep to extract their teeth and cut tails cost €10 per animal I think most consumers would agree with it and wouldnt mind paying extra for that peace of mind. Anyway as said it really is something that should be regulated at the EU level so there is a level playing field for all pig farmers, it would be pointless one farm doing it and the others don't.

Anaesthetisia excepted and on the teeth issue. Afaik corner teeth are not extracted rather they are trimmed or ground to reduce the incidence of biting or damage to the sow. EU regulations state this should not be done on routine basis.

Some details here:

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.fawac.ie/media/fawac/content/publications/animalwelfare/CodePracticePigWelfare.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiAie7x2qXiAhVYTBUIHbanCDsQFjAPegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw2E_gz5aUYjBnpgN7NzzkY7

Muahahaha

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, we need regulation because most consumers are grand with cruel factory farming if the food is cheaper.

Can only speak for myself but I didnt know pigs tails were cut and teeth extracted without anesthesia until this thread. Its not exactly something you read in the media and I'd hazard a guess that most consumers of meat don't know it happens either.

I'm fine with eating meat and won't be giving it up but also feel it is important that the animal does not endure any unnecessary suffering when they are alive. Even if an anesthetic cost €10 per pig that finishes at 100kg it would only add a few cents to your 200g packet of ham, the difference in price would be negligible. Id imagine meat consumers wouldnt have a problem paying a bit extra to know that the pig hasn't suffered.

Thelonious Monk

It’s quite easy not to eat pork but Ireland would never stop eating breakfast fry’s etc so factory pig farming isn’t going away. If you have a problem with it just don’t eat pig and it’s not really your problem any more as you’re not contributing. There are plenty of other good things to eat.

OldMrBrennan83

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It’s quite easy not to eat pork but Ireland would never stop eating breakfast fry’s etc so factory pig farming isn’t going away. If you have a problem with it just don’t eat pig and it’s not really your problem any more as you’re not contributing.

And, more importantly, if you make this decision then gran job but leave the people alone who didn't want to do the same.

igCorcaigh

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, we need regulation because most consumers are grand with cruel factory farming if the food is cheaper.

100% this.
There should not be an a la carte approach to animal welfare.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Muahahaha wrote: »

Can only speak for myself but I didnt know pigs tails were cut and teeth extracted without anesthesia until this thread. Its not exactly something you read in the media and I'd hazard a guess that most consumers of meat don't know it happens either.

I'm fine with eating meat and won't be giving it up but also feel it is important that the animal does not endure any unnecessary suffering when they are alive. Even if an anesthetic cost €10 per pig that finishes at 100kg it would only add a few cents to your 200g packet of ham, the difference in price would be negligible. Id imagine meat consumers wouldnt have a problem paying a bit extra to know that the pig hasn't suffered.

With the increasing cull of pigs in China and rise in demand for both pig and other meats because of it, I'd say you're close to putting that sort of rise in pig prices to the test.

€10 would be at the lower range of predicted rises.

Thelonious Monk

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

And, more importantly, if you make this decision then gran job but leave the people alone who didn't want to do the same.

The whole country constantly eats pork it’s not like you’re being hassled constantly over it. A few posters in town is about all you’ve to put up with.

OldMrBrennan83

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The whole country constantly eats pork it’s not like you’re being hassled constantly over it. A few posters in town is about all you’ve to put up with.

For now, but these campaigners are violent and unhinged so as the numbers grow so will the threat.

Thelonious Monk

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

For now, but these campaigners are violent and unhinged so as the numbers grow so will the threat.

Like those gobsh*tes shouting at the Taoiseach for not eating enough meat you mean? If the numbers of vegans grow than so be it. Times change.

JohnnyFlash

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

For now, but these campaigners are violent and unhinged so as the numbers grow so will the threat.

Ya, you’re in danger of being assaulted by a vegan for having a ham sandwich. :rolleyes:

OldMrBrennan83

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Like those gobsh*tes shouting at the Taoiseach for not eating enough meat you mean? If the numbers of vegans grow than so be it. Times change.

Not when they can't quietly be vegan and are a danger to others. So no, not "so be it" just because it's something that you agree with.

OldMrBrennan83

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Ya, you’re in danger of being assaulted by a vegan for having a ham sandwich. :rolleyes:

Meat producers have had the biggest threats made and damage done at this stage but, like I said, as the numbers grow then the threat will widen and users of meat will be targeted.

Thelonious Monk

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Not when they can't quietly be vegan and are a danger to others. So no, not "so be it" just because it's something that you agree with.

The only people getting unruly in Ireland have been beef farmers.

Buford T. Justice V

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Remember also that, by it's nature, said drug would have a high death rate if given at higher than recommended levels and would have a barely perceptible effect at less than the recommended dose. Then, with a narrow range of effectiveness, you will have to contend with variable birth weights so every single piglet would have to be weighed, accurately (how to actually achieve that is worthy of a thread in itself:D), doseages calibrated individually and piglets securely held while all that is being performed which I doubt would receive much enthusiasm in a sector losing between 5 and 10 euro a pig currently.

I want to respond to this post more comprehensively in a later post, but I want to clear this thing up first. Are you saying it's not appropriate to anaesthetise pigs when cutting their teeth or burning their tails off through cauterisation? See also below.

Most beef farmers (at least, any I know) won't squeeze their cattle without some kind of pain relief. Yet, you somehow think it's appropriate to dismiss pig welfare.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You seem to have worked on a pig farm. Any opinions on the use of anaesthesia?

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

It's always used where required, from my experience.

Thelonious Monk

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Meat producers have had the biggest threats made and damage done at this stage but, like I said, as the numbers grow then the threat will widen and users of meat will be targeted.

You’re paranoid. Scared of the vegan threat. I’ve heard it all now.

Thelonious Monk

Sure they’ll be too weak to hurt anyone without eating pork all the time right?

OldMrBrennan83

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

You’re paranoid. Scared of the vegan threat. I’ve heard it all now.

You obviously want to bury your head about it as you're in with that mindset, but campaigners like this are unhinged and very dangerous.

A vegan is fine. A vegan obsessed with what other people are eating is a potential timebomb.

OldMrBrennan83

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The only people getting unruly in Ireland have been beef farmers.

Farmers and meat producers have had threats and damage done to their property.

Thelonious Monk

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

You obviously want to bury your head about it as you're in with that mindset, but campaigners like this are unhinged and very dangerous.

A vegan is fine. A vegan obsessed with what other people are eating is a potential timebomb.

I couldn’t tell you what they’re like as the only people I’ve seen getting angry in Ireland, in a large enough group at that, are meat eaters

Thelonious Monk

Anyway farmers have always been in bed with the governments here, don’t worry, it’s most likely well continue to produce more and more pork and beef in the next years

OldMrBrennan83

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I couldn’t tell you what they’re like as the only people I’ve seen getting angry in Ireland, in a large enough group at that, are meat eaters

You're basically lying with statements like that. Not that it's surprising though, your colours have been firmly nailed to the mast and you're not going to betray that by dealing in truths.

sdanseo

I had reason to buy ham today. Wanted a ham and coleslaw sandwich.

Cheapest was 5 slices (100g) for €2.

Meanwhile a 700g lump of bacon not far away is €4 and you don't need to be an expert to know it probably has far fewer chemicals and is 3.5 times the value, besides being a hell of a lot nicer in a sandwich.

I bought the €2 packet.

--

tldr; we, the consumers, are paying for environmentally disastrous, artificially preserved, neatly-packaged and convenient products. But when you have no need for the larger amount because you wouldn't eat it all before it went off, you have to cop out every so often.
It's frustrating.

Thelonious Monk

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

You're basically lying with statements like that. Not that it's surprising though, your colours have been firmly nailed to the mast and you're not going to betray that by dealing in truths.

I’m not lying it was on national news recently.

Thelonious Monk

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Anyway farmers have always been in bed with the governments here

This is a mad statement. My Grandad had his wife's kitchen table, and other furniture, seized for participating in the farmers' strikes of the 1960s. Politicians wouldn't even engage with the farmers back then (the Minister was one CJ Haughey), and they were portrayed as communists in the media (I know)

Seriously, you've plucked that statement from thin air.

Thelonious Monk

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

This is a mad statement. My Grandad had his wife's kitchen table, and other furniture, seized for participating in the farmers' strikes of the 1960s. Politicians wouldn't even engage with the farmers back then (the Minister was one CJ Haughey), and they were portrayed as communists in the media (I know)

Seriously, you've plucked that statement from thin air.

I suppose what I mean is I can’t see any measures from this government reducing out herds or reducing subsidies and grants for farming that isn’t really necessary. They seem to want to grow the herd more and more. Always is a stretch then sorry for your families plight.

Thelonious Monk

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I suppose what I mean is I can’t see any measures from this government reducing out herds or reducing subsidies and grants for farming that isn’t really necessary. Always is a stretch then sorry for your families plight.

It isn't a 'plight', everyone involved in that strike is dead.

I'm just saying that anyone who thinks that the Government is somehow 'in bed' with the farmers needs to experience farm-life as it actually is; where you are selling basic food-products to processors that you are barely able to purchase in kind.

EmmetSpiceland

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Meat producers have had the biggest threats made and damage done at this stage but, like I said, as the numbers grow then the threat will widen and users of meat will be targeted.

A risible suggestion.