The Irish Ham wars

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-05-2019 5:27pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:28pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:30pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:30pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:32pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:32pm

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.

19-05-2019 5:32pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:33pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:34pm

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

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-05-2019 5:35pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:36pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:36pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:38pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:40pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:41pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:41pm

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.

19-05-2019 5:43pm

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 · 19-05-2019 5:46pm

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.

19-05-2019 5:48pm

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 · 19-05-2019 6:21pm

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.

Muahahaha · 19-05-2019 6:45pm

sdanseo wrote: »

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.

Why not in future buy the 700g bacon, use what you need and then cut the rest into portions for freezing and using in a week or twos time? As you said there is better value in buying meat in bigger quantities, freezing lets you take advantage of that and you get a better product than the smaller packets of ham

Buford T. Justice XIX · 19-05-2019 7:49pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

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.

Yes, I said pain killing is used where appropriate.

Now, in the 20 or more years since I was working in the industry, there have been advances in medicines and restrictions on their usage along with ever increasing withdrawl periods where an animal treated will be restricted or prohibited from being killed for human consumption while traces of the used meds are still present in their systems.

I never said using anaesthetic was inappropriate. What I said was there were high risks involved in using those drugs on piglets and there would be a high risk of both over and underdosing unless there were procedures in place to ensure the correct dose was used. Along with the labour issue of catching, holding, weighing, calibrating and dosing. And this done many many times in a short period of time.

Iron supplementation would be given to young pigs and there are a wide range of pig weights given the exact same injection because the was such a low risk of overdosing the animal and harm occurring from that dose.

tempmailtest mail · 20-05-2019 7:51am

Thought this thread was about hobby radio... Breaker Breaker, 10-4

TuringBot47 · 20-05-2019 8:03am

Charles Ingles wrote: »

How offensive to the memories of those who died during the famine

Can you name anyone who died in the famine?

Which memories are you talking about?

20-05-2019 9:31am

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I never said using anaesthetic was inappropriate. What I said was there were high risks involved in using those drugs on piglets and there would be a high risk of both over and underdosing unless there were procedures in place to ensure the correct dose was used. Along with the labour issue of catching, holding, weighing, calibrating and dosing. And this done many many times in a short period of time.

Let's add to that, the cost of acquiring and administering the anaesthetic, and where are we now?

Convenience. It is not convenient to consider pig welfare on an intensive farm. Evidently, this is fine by you. You seem to favour practicality over the burden of maintaining welfare standards, something that every other farmer (with the possible exception of poultry, I don't know anything about poultry) manages fairly easily.

The difference between pig farming and those of beef, dairy and sheep systems is one of magnitude. Pig farms are too huge. There are farmers in this country with well over 10,000 pigs. Given the sheer size of these farms, no farmer or farm-worker can possibly maintain veterinary and welfare standards like other farmers can. And that is simply what I have been saying all along, and I am struggling to understand which part of this you object to.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 20-05-2019 1:30pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Let's add to that, the cost of acquiring and administering the anaesthetic, and where are we now?

Convenience. It is not convenient to consider pig welfare on an intensive farm. Evidently, this is fine by you. You seem to favour practicality over the burden of maintaining welfare standards, something that every other farmer (with the possible exception of poultry, I don't know anything about poultry) manages fairly easily.

It's you characterising my responses that way. You're looking for a black and white answer in a world of different shades of grey. If there's a need for anaestethic, I'm sure it will be given. I pointed out the numerous obstacles that would have to be surmounted before that would be accepted as a standard practice.

Incidentally, you still haven't shown a need for that course of action, that the stresses caused by this management practice would be sufficiently controlled by usage of anaestethic and that the relevant drugs are safely capable of sufficient relief and will not cause issues with drug residues down the line.

The difference between pig farming and those of beef, dairy and sheep systems is one of magnitude. Pig farms are too huge. There are farmers in this country with well over 10,000 pigs. Given the sheer size of these farms, no farmer or farm-worker can possibly maintain veterinary and welfare standards like other farmers can. And that is simply what I have been saying all along, and I am struggling to understand which part of this you object to.

That's your opinion and it's one you're entitled to.

That doesn't, however, make it a universal truth.

gozunda · 20-05-2019 4:26pm

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.

They're not.

longgonesilver · 21-05-2019 2:49pm

There is so so so much misinformation in this thread.

For a start piglets needle or corner teeth are not pulled, extracted, smashed or crushed, they are clipped or ground down. No anaesthetic is needed. Why? There should be no pain associated wit the procedure if carried out properly.
My father kept pigs when we were young, not a large number up to 8 breeding sows at a time. As teenagers clipping teeth was one of the jobs we were given. It was possible to sneak into the house without waking either the sow or piglets and with two people, one holding, one clipping you could pick each piglet up gently,still asleep and be finished before it realised that something was happening.

Why is it done? Like outlined further back in the thread, to prevent the mother being bitten, as well as the mastitis risk a sow with sore nipples or udder is cranky and tries to avoid feeding the piglets. Every time she stands up and lies down or turns over there is a big risk of piglets being crushed to death.

Why do piglets bite their mother? Her injuries are just collateral damage in the battle for supremacy between the piglets.

Pigs are different to other domesticated animals. There is little love between siblings, there is an intense rivalry to be the top pig. The front nipple is the best and they know it when they are born. When feeding they are continually trying to move forward if possible. The strongest piglet most willing to push and bite wins and the runt ends up on the hindmost teat. This competition is far more than a playful wrestling match. The teeth are very sharp and pointed and stick out sideways slightly. They cut the sow and her nipples. The piglets tear the sides of each others faces and lips and can bleed profusely and they will not stop unless there rival gives up.
Not clipping their teeth can become an animal welfare issue.

igCorcaigh wrote: »

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

There is no "a la carte approach", procedures that are allowed to be carried out without anaesthetic are laid out in national legislation.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/si/107/made/en/print

The Irish Ham wars

Comments