[Queen of the Universe]

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/dynami...text_id=558671

it's just too darn wierd........qotu

[Mac Zealot]

dunno, I feel sorry for the poor things...

Something tells me they're going to have a shyteload of bacteria problems and such with the chickens.

[ringo]

Sure, I would. It may be a monster, but can't monsters be tasty too?

[AlbertWu]

No problem here. The bottom line isn't profit, it's efficiency. I'd eat it.

[FERRO]

I'd eat'em too...

Only thing I would point out is now they are a major source of bug food... flys, etc.

And therefore I would think they would be very susceptible to bug-born deseases...

And if they have to keep the bugs out of the situation maybe the general conditions of the food plants may get better for those "genetically enhanced" chickens...

[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: FERRO ]

[Mac Zealot]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, I would eat them, but all the things that they could, and probably WOULD get knowing the condition of the farms they are usually raised on (they don't check for bugs normally)

[Knof8]

mmmm..... Still tastes like chicken

[OldManMac]

If it walks like a duck, squaks like a duck, ....oh wait, it's a chicken! Yeah, I'd eat it; We don't know half of what goes on in the process of preparing the food we eat, and, even if we did, we would still eat it, so a bird without feathers is no big thing!

[juanvaldes]

ummm, grills up

[wataru]

Animal rights my ass. I'd eat it.

[Queen of the Universe]

Hey man, how can it fly without wings!?!?

[Ratspittle]

um..er..feathers

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by Ratspittle:
<STRONG>um..er..feathers</STRONG>

Nah. I'm with this guy:

Spencer Fitzgibbon, of the Green Party, said: "It's a monster of an animal. We should be working with nature, not against it. The bottom line is profit, but it should be animal welfare.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by Mastrap:
<STRONG>Nah. I'm with this guy:

Spencer Fitzgibbon, of the Green Party, said: "It's a monster of an animal. We should be working with nature, not against it. The bottom line is profit, but it should be animal welfare.</STRONG>

We went against the nature everyday so why is it any different now?

Same as people above, I'm willing to eat it. I bet it'll be tastier!

[IUJHJSDHE]

I would eat it, I am hungry just reading about it now

[Tigerabbit]

Adrian Bebb of Friends of the Earth said:
<STRONG>This is scientists tampering with our food again just to make it even cheaper. I think it will have a traumatic effect on animals and the public will be horrified.</STRONG>

The chickens aren't going to know that they're featherless. You can't miss what you've never had. As for the public being horrified, they'll get used to the red skin. If you think the public will be bothered by a featherless chicken, then you haven't seen the conditions under which chickens are normally raised.

I do wonder if there can be sufficient genetic diversity to prevent mass epidemics. The more genetic diversity, the greater the resistance in the whole populations to virulent strains; while individuals may still be susceptible, the whole flock wouldn't die off.

Spencer Fitzgibbon, of the Green Party, said:
<STRONG>It's a monster of an animal. We should be working with nature, not against it. The bottom line is profit, but it should be animal welfare.</STRONG>

So reducing electricity consumption and landfill waste is working against nature? Having an animal overheating under a coat of superfluous feathers is beneficial to the animal's welfare? Am I the only one wondering on whose side is Mr. Fitzgibbon? Sounds to me like he supports the unnecessary squandering of resources, but I could be way off.

Bottom line: Fry up the bird, I take a leg quarter.

[KellyHogan]

Coming soon: Food that doesn't need to be cooked!

I know WASPs hate to prepare decent food but this goes to demonstrate just how lazy they are.

[IUJHJSDHE]

DAMN NOW I AM TOO HUNGRY!

I AM GOING TO EAT CHICKEN FOR DINNER TONIGHT AND THATS THAT!

[Face Ache]

Can you cook them live like lobster?

[philzilla]

i don't eat anything that has previously lived. you'll all come back as one of those things...

[undotwa]

Originally posted by philzilla:
<STRONG>i don't eat anything that has previously lived. you'll all come back as one of those things... </STRONG>

lol, be a good boy and you'll get to heaven. Oh **** ! Too much porn for you, time to be a featherless chicken

[philzilla]

Originally posted by undotwa:
<STRONG>Too much porn for you, time to be a featherless chicken </STRONG>

too much!? i'm vegetarian, not gay!

[undotwa]

Never said you were gay.

[Knof8]

Think they could make the chickens sweat BBQ sauce instead?! YUMM

[Queen of the Universe]

The chickens aren't going to know that they're featherless. You can't miss what you've never had.

okay, but what i'm wondering is: do these chickens sunburn?

qotu

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by KellyHogan:
<STRONG>Coming soon: Food that doesn't need to be cooked!

I know WASPs hate to prepare decent food but this goes to demonstrate just how lazy they are.</STRONG>

when i stop laughing at this post i'll actually add something to the discussion.

-r.

[Tigerabbit]

Originally posted by Queen of the Universe:
<STRONG>okay, but what i'm wondering is: do these chickens sunburn?

qotu</STRONG>

These aren't free-range chickens. They'll live their entire lives (3-4 months) in either a large shed with 10000+ of their fellow birds until they are sent to 'processing' (preparation for market or restaurant) or kept in a small cage inside of a large building for 3-4 years laying an egg about once every 26 hours or so, then made into dog food and McNuggets. They'll never see the light of day. They're more akin to living food machines than animals.

Sad? Maybe. But would you rather starve?

[mrfrost]

Originally posted by philzilla:
<STRONG>i don't eat anything that has previously lived. you'll all come back as one of those things... </STRONG>

So what if you come back as one of those things...It'll be over before you know it.

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by Tigerabbit:
<STRONG>

These aren't free-range chickens. They'll live their entire lives (3-4 months) in either a large shed with 10000+ of their fellow birds until they are sent to 'processing' (preparation for market or restaurant) or kept in a small cage inside of a large building for 3-4 years laying an egg about once every 26 hours or so, then made into dog food and McNuggets. They'll never see the light of day. They're more akin to living food machines than animals.

Sad? Maybe. But would you rather starve?</STRONG>

Am I the only one who thinks that this is seriously wrong? Come on fellow Buddhist left leaning pinko ex punk with a hippie slant now integrated in society sort of people, where are you?

::wind whistling through the lounge, wolves howling in the distance. A shooting star dies in a fiery flash::


Ah, well. Sings:"We shall overcoooome, we shall overcooooome..."

But seriously, you make it sound as if there's no alternative between having battery farmed chicken and starvation. That is simply not true. I am a signed up carnivore but I only buy meat that comes from organic farms where the animals had a reasonably happy life that did not force them to live in a way that is alien to their species.

It also means that they taste a lot better.

Edited the lyrics (see below)

[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: Mastrap ]

[jholmes]

Now if they can just engineer one that's pre-breaded with eleven herbs and spices!

I see a lot of folks being out of work because of this though. Imagine the single mom supporting her family only because she can get a job at Tyson removing feathers from chickens.

Now she'll be just another out of work mother plucker.

[Tigerabbit]

Originally posted by Mastrap:
<STRONG>Ah, well. Sings:"We will overcoooome, we will overcooooome..."

But seriously, you make it sound as if there's no alternative between having battery farmed chicken and starvation. That is simply not true. I am a signed up carnivore but I only buy meat that comes from organic farms where the animals had a reasonably happy life that did not force them to live in a way that is alien to their species.

It also means that they taste a lot better. </STRONG>

I agree, but for most people it is simply not available. (I raised chickens when I was growing up out in the boonies of southeastern Oklahoma.)

Here, free-range chicken is about 5 times the price of the regular stuff, only three times if you know the farmer. Unfortunately, our societal demand for chicken is such that it would be hard to have enough chicken available without the current farm system, for ill or for good. Can you imagine paying US$30-35 for the 8-piece bucket of KFC? That's what you'd be looking at if it were all free-range. I don't know about you, but I couldn't afford it.

There are too many people and too much money to be made in economies of scale. Until the situation changes, we're stuck with it.

BTW, it's we SHALL overcome.


[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: Tigerabbit ]

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by Tigerabbit:
<STRONG>

BTW, it's we SHALL overcome.


</STRONG>

Aaaaargh, you're right. My credibility is in tatters


::rushes away to edit::

[jholmes]

I don't see it changing anytime soon. Agribusiness has done a really good job of keeping alive the myth of the family farmer and the wide open range. I grew up in cattle country and everyone thinks of the vast Texas ranches and the wide panoramas out of the movie Giant or something. Tain't necessarily so.

We lived five miles downwind from one of the largest cattle feeding operations in the world. Five miles is not far enough when you're talking 100,000 head. All boxed into small pens and standing on mountains of their own manure. The modern 'cowboy' wears a gimme cap and drives a pickup between rows of 30x30 pipe fenced cages filled with animals awaiting their trip to the slaughterhouse.

Today's agriculture is designed to create food as efficiently as possible. All food, whether chicken, beef, lamb, pork, fruit or vegatable - is engineered for the most yield at the lowest cost and least effort on the part of the grower. And for what it does it works very well. The reality isn't pretty to look at or think about, but as long as they can keep the warm and fuzzy facade the nobody will raise a big stink. Even when Congress kicks through a Farm Bill bigger than the budget of some states.

[itomato]

Originally posted by Tigerabbit:
<STRONG>

These aren't free-range chickens. They'll live their entire lives (3-4 months) in either a large shed with 10000+ of their fellow birds until they are sent to 'processing' (preparation for market or restaurant) or kept in a small cage inside of a large building for 3-4 years laying an egg about once every 26 hours or so, then made into dog food and McNuggets. They'll never see the light of day. They're more akin to living food machines than animals.

Sad? Maybe. But would you rather starve?</STRONG>

Starvation isn't the alternative, this is:


They might as well have engineered it to be beakless, too.

(some education for the poultry lovers out there both types. http://www.factoryfarming.com/poultry.htm )

[itomato]

Originally posted by Tigerabbit:
<STRONG>

...Can you imagine paying US$30-35 for the 8-piece bucket of KFC? That's what you'd be looking at if it were all free-range. I don't know about you, but I couldn't afford it...
[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: Tigerabbit ]</STRONG>

That's what it should cost. Taking the lives of creatures for food should be a luxury, in my view. Especially if you can't bear to do it on your own, in your own back yard. If cost is the issue, imagine how cheap a live chicken would be! No plucking, no debeaking, no massive slaughterhouse, no cleanup..

Anyway, if free-range chicken would cost $30 a bucket at present, imagine what would happen if farming practices were shifted off factory farming, and onto free-range/organic techniques. The price would drop. Couple that with killing and cooking your own food, and you'd have a bunch of extra cash to spend, plus a lot more vegetarians in the world.

[The Jackalope]

You guys are wimps. I've eaten far stranger stuff. What's another chicken without feathers except something to make green weenies flip their lids over?

Chicken it is. When I'm in Osaka next time, I'm all over the whale. I might be in Seoul in the late summer, and I might hit the old dog restraunt while I'm there.

Don't forget to eat your vegetables, kiddies!

[chris v]

Originally posted by philzilla:
<STRONG>i don't eat anything that has previously lived. you'll all come back as one of those things... </STRONG>

You're just asking G*d, with his infinite sense of irony, to reincarnate you as a carrot.

Every time someone mutates a chicken, god kills a kitten. Think of the kittens.

CV

[WildZero]

Can't imagine it being any less healthy than one of these...

[G Barnett]

Originally posted by itomato:
<STRONG>

That's what it should cost. Taking the lives of creatures for food should be a luxury, in my view. Especially if you can't bear to do it on your own, in your own back yard. If cost is the issue, imagine how cheap a live chicken would be! No plucking, no debeaking, no massive slaughterhouse, no cleanup..

Anyway, if free-range chicken would cost $30 a bucket at present, imagine what would happen if farming practices were shifted off factory farming, and onto free-range/organic techniques. The price would drop. Couple that with killing and cooking your own food, and you'd have a bunch of extra cash to spend, plus a lot more vegetarians in the world. </STRONG>

Maybe --and I mean it's a big maybe-- more vegetarians in the US. Not in the world. I spent a year in Bulgaria and it's no big thing to see the public markets full of people selling and buying live poultry. Ducks, geese, chickens, turkeys: you name it, it was there. Only Americans are squeamish enough that some might turn veggie if they had to kill their own food. Won't be many, though, as --among other things-- deer, duck & turkey hunting are quite big in the States. In most of the world, it's a daily fact of life.

G Barnett

[Tigerabbit]

Originally posted by itomato:
<STRONG>Starvation isn't the alternative, this is:
{tofu image}</STRONG>

Were you aware that a pregnant woman who consumes too much soy in the first trimester will cause her embryo to be feminized? Not a real problem for a female embryo, but a male embryo can be born with a small but noticeable degree of feminization.

For example, the male urethra normally extends through the length of the penis. A male child born to a mother whose main protein source is soy has a significant chance of being without the urethra in the penis. (I have the information in the material I received from my Ob/Gyn, but looking for it online results in finding a lot of people giving opinions instead of facts.) The high amounts of isoflavones in soybeans are the culprit. While this is a slight deformity and easily corrected, there are other possible complications from embryonic- and fetal-exposure to excessive levels of phytoestrogens.

If some of the anti-soy faction is to be believed, a high soy diet may be more harmful to human than the hormones currently fed to American food animals due to the phytoestrogens in soybeans.

Personally, I think soy is fine, but it will never be a substitute for real meat.

[scaught]

Originally posted by itomato:
<STRONG>That's what it should cost. Taking the lives of creatures for food should be a luxury, in my view. Especially if you can't bear to do it on your own, in your own back yard. </STRONG>

good point.

have any of you actually killed a chicken? until you can hold that birds neck on the block, and chop its head off and watch it squirm and wiggle and bleed all over the place and go through its dying motions, i think you should be alot more humble about your meat eating instead of this cocksure "grill it up, dude!" garbage.

[Tigerabbit]

Originally posted by scaught:
<STRONG>good point.

have any of you actually killed a chicken? until you can hold that birds neck on the block, and chop its head off and watch it squirm and wiggle and bleed all over the place and go through its dying motions, i think you should be alot more humble about your meat eating instead of this cocksure "grill it up, dude!" garbage.</STRONG>

I have. I killed 2 or 3 chickens each week during most the 1980s; they were dinner. It's more efficient if you're just killing one or two to simply wring their necks. There's a lot less movement afterward.

[Mskr]

Damn. I don't usually talk about being vegan, but this is a case where I'll just throw in my 0.02$US and see if people will think over it:

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Vegetarians here, think about this: Is it any better to eat eggs from factory farmed chickens than the chickens themselves? Do the chickens suffer any more by being killed and eaten?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

For the self-proclaimed "carnivores": Would it be ethically right for aliens to land on this planet, declare that they are superior to us, enslave us and farm us?

Discuss... I'm interested in what you all think.

[�]

Now I predict the barkless tree, the scale-less fish, and the brainless politician.

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by Tigerabbit:
<STRONG>

I have. I killed 2 or 3 chickens each week during most the 1980s; they were dinner. It's more efficient if you're just killing one or two to simply wring their necks. There's a lot less movement afterward.</STRONG>

I've got a French Cookbook from the 1950's. It contains a recipe that starts with the words: "Kill a duck by strangulation as you'll need the blood for the sauce later"

Strangely enough I've given this a miss so far...

[The Jackalope]

Originally posted by scaught:
<STRONG>

good point.

have any of you actually killed a chicken? until you can hold that birds neck on the block, and chop its head off and watch it squirm and wiggle and bleed all over the place and go through its dying motions, i think you should be alot more humble about your meat eating instead of this cocksure "grill it up, dude!" garbage.</STRONG>

Um, I used to to that often. Got rabbits too. And fish. Chickens are easy. If you don't want the dance of death, then just grab them by the head and spin them around the air once. Breaks their necks clean.

oh also-

Originaly posted by Mskr
<STRONG>

For the self-proclaimed "carnivores": Would it be ethically right for aliens to land on this planet, declare that they are superior to us, enslave us and farm us?</STRONG>

Animals are not sapient. Other than saying something ludicrous, what's your point?

And-

Originaly posted �

<STRONG>Now I predict the barkless tree, the scale-less fish, and the brainless politician.</STRONG>

I hear they are still working on the tree, but we allready have catfish, democrats, republicans, greens, socialists, etc, etc.

[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: The Jackalope ]

[Thunderbird]

Originally posted by Mskr:
<STRONG>For the self-proclaimed "carnivores": Would it be ethically right for aliens to land on this planet, declare that they are superior to us, enslave us and farm us?
</STRONG>

It doesn't seem to be bothering the chickens at all. If they were emotionally disturbed by this, I think you'd constantly be reading about mass chicken suicides and chicken revolts & the Great Chicken War for Independence!

[itomato]

Originally posted by Thunderbird:
<STRONG>

It doesn't seem to be bothering the chickens at all. If they were emotionally disturbed by this, I think you'd constantly be reading about mass chicken suicides and chicken revolts & the Great Chicken War for Independence!</STRONG>

About all a chicken can do to revolt is squawk, flap, and try to run. If you honor that as their "Great Chicken War for Independance", then let 'em be. Humans, as stronger, smarter animals have the ability to easily conquer the chicken, as well as every other animal on the planet. Does that mean that we should?