# Ritual Animal Slaughter Change Urged ...



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

... but Clegg says 'No'

BBC News - Religious animal slaughter change urged


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

a step in the right direction


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

clegg can say what he likes......this is still the way forwards.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

I hope I live to see a ban on ritual slaughter. I have nothing against religion but in this country I believe animal welfare ranks higher.


----------



## Dianne58 (Feb 22, 2014)

Shoshannah said:


> I hope I live to see a ban on ritual slaughter. I have nothing against religion but in this country I believe animal welfare ranks higher.


I must admit I have to agree with you :thumbup1: x x x


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I hope our country follows Denmark who have just banned Kosher and Halal meat.*


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Let's get the "humane" slaughter up to standard before pointing fingers elsewhere.

Animal Aid: The 'Humane Slaughter' Myth

Just for a start - even if these cases had all gone according to plan - why are other animals present?


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Here's a documentary, now I don't know if this is standard practice but this is a British abattoir. Look what they do after the animal has been stunned. I don't see the difference.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

In non-ritual slaughter, the animals are bled after they are stunned and unconscious.

I worked in an abbatoir for a short time. It made me more comfortable about eating meat than I was before. I was comfortable with the way the animals were handled; but I can understand why others might feel differently.

But slitting a conscious animal's throat...? No, I can't condone that. Sorry.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

I'm very unhappy about the way animals are slaughtered in front of others, I find that profoundly wrong. It's clear stunning does not always go to plan and if the animal is not killed by the stun thing I remain to be convinced that they don't suffer. 

The toc on the forehead as given to that poor pig that collapsed seems to me the most humane of the lot. Why can't that method be used?


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> I'm very unhappy about the way animals are slaughtered in front of others, I find that profoundly wrong.


For herd animals, being forcefully separated from their companions is one of the most distressing things that can happen to them. It might not seem the best option to you but for a sheep group slaughter is far better than being alone.



ForeverHome said:


> stunning does not always go to plan and if the animal is not killed by the stun thing I remain to be convinced that they don't suffer.
> 
> The toc on the forehead as given to that poor pig that collapsed seems to me the most humane of the lot. Why can't that method be used?


Shooting pigs is actually pretty hard and does go wrong which is why electric tongs are used more often.

It's hard to know how many animals are mis-stunned in conventional slaughter but figures range from 9-31% - not great.

Slaughter without pre-stunning should be banned, 'religious offence' just doesn't cut it as an excuse not to.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Something I have been banning on about for years!
Not before time imo! lets hope it comes sooner rather then later!
And as for Nick Clegg! who's he anyway??? think there is little or no respect for that turncoat!


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lennythecloud said:


> For herd animals, being forcefully separated from their companions is one of the most distressing things that can happen to them. It might not seem the best option to you but for a sheep group slaughter is far better than being alone.
> 
> Shooting pigs is actually pretty hard and does go wrong which is why electric tongs are used more often.
> 
> ...


Thank you for putting me right on that, some of that footage showed animals clearly distressed in the room with another one as it was killed so I didn't appreciate that point.

What's the evidence that stunning eliminates suffering?


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2014)

The question everyone should be asking is how does ritual salughter benefit animal welfare ?

Why does ritual slaughter need to continue?


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

I don't know enough about this. The halaal and kosher way: how does it compare pain wise to the "European/western" way of slaughter? 
The more I learn, the more I am beginning to think that there is no humane way to get our meat and that perhaps vegans have a point.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Haven't read the thread but just want to note:

Kosher method of killing animals is entirely humane and very fast. In fact there are strict rules that have been in place for a long time to ensure that there is no suffering. The animal is killed by ONE very quick cut to the throat - and the knife used is ALWAYS inspected first, it can't be used if it has any 'blemishes' or nicks or anything that might affect the speed of the cut or that might cause extra pain.

Compared to what I have read and videos I've watched on the so called 'humane' way of killing, the Kosher way is faster which is surely better than a long drawn out death?


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Haven't read the thread but just want to note:
> 
> Kosher method of killing animals is entirely humane and very fast. In fact there are strict rules that have been in place for a long time to ensure that there is no suffering. The animal is killed by ONE very quick cut to the throat - and the knife used is ALWAYS inspected first, it can't be used if it has any 'blemishes' or nicks or anything that might affect the speed of the cut or that might cause extra pain.
> 
> Compared to what I have read and videos I've watched on the so called 'humane' way of killing, the Kosher way is faster which is surely better than a long drawn out death?


What are you basing your claim that it's 'entirely humane' on? No matter how quick and sharp you are with a knife the animals basic anatomy can increase the time taken for them to die without stunning. Ruminants, particularly cattle, have an alternative blood supply to the brain that takes the route of their spinal cord and is not injured in the throat cut. There can also be a delay in bleeding out due to 'pseudoaneurisms'. There's been multiple studies done on this that show that animals do suffer because of it eg:

"The combination of false aneurysms and collateral routes to the brain present a risk of sustained consciousness during religious slaughter in cattle."

False aneurysms in carotid arteries of cattle and water buffalo during shechita and halal slaughter

I agree that modern conventional slaughter has big issues but this is more down to the industrial, production line way it's done. If there were no religious ties to no stun slaughter then it would have been banned years ago because of the inherent risk of suffering.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

I've never had my throat slit open while I was still breathing, so I'm just speculating, but I bet it's bloody unpleasant.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Shoshannah - from what I have gathered, the death is far more prolonged in conventional slaughter, because the stunning quite often doesn't work... In Kosher slaughter, it is done so swiftly there is barely a chance of pain, that's why the animals don't even get a chance to cry out etc. 

In an ideal world we wouldn't kill any animal for food, and I rarely eat meat myself.

But I have to think that the faster the kill, the better?

RE YOUR LINK

I think, and will try to confirm this tomorrow, that for every link you find 'proving' things one way, I can find a link 'proving' that the opposite is true. In the past there have been many inaccuracies in 'scientific' critiques of Kosher and Halal slaughter.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Shoshannah - from what I have gathered, the death is far more prolonged in conventional slaughter, because the stunning quite often doesn't work...


Can you define 'quite often'?

I've never seen a single stun failure. Of course it happens and that is regrettable, but in my personal experience it has not been a common thing.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Shoshannah said:


> Can you define 'quite often'?
> 
> I've never seen a single stun failure. Of course it happens and that is regrettable, but in my personal experience it has not been a common thing.


When I'm back on here later I will try to find some links and more facts to back up my statement.

And of course if I am proven wrong, I will acknowledge it.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> RE YOUR LINK
> 
> I think, and will try to confirm this tomorrow, that for every link you find 'proving' things one way, I can find a link 'proving' that the opposite is true. In the past there have been many inaccuracies in 'scientific' critiques of Kosher and Halal slaughter.


I'd really like to see what evidence you come up with. I happen to have met one of the authors of that study and would fully trust his integrity. It's a fact that cattle have a significant collateral blood supply to the brain and the evidence I've seen is that it does leave some individuals conscious for some time after the throat cut.

Another study:

"Time to physical collapse was examined in 174 cattle which were restrained in the upright position and then released immediately from the restraint following the halal cut.......Fourteen percent of the cattle collapsed and stood up again before finally collapsing." <<<<<That is an absolutely disgraceful finding.

Time to collapse following slaughter without stunning in cattle


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

In both Kosher and Halal slaughter, the severing of the major arteries means the blood supply to the animal's brain is cut, which should render it unconscious within seconds and incapable of feeling pain.

Death is extremely swift.

I am looking at info on what happens when stunning fails, and will post again.

There's quite a lot of info here on problems with two types of stunning:

http://animalaid.org.uk/images/pdf/slaughterreport.pdf


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> In both Kosher and Halal slaughter, the severing of the major arteries means the blood supply to the animal's brain is cut, which should render it unconscious within seconds and incapable of feeling pain.


No. It doesn't sever the blood supply that runs through the basi-occipital plexus which is a significant collateral supply in cattle. ETA there's also the problem of the carotids going into vasospasm when cut which has again been shown to be the case with cattle.



Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Death is extremely swift.


Again, what are you basing that on? I don't call an animal being conscious long enough to fall, get back up and then fall again swift enough....


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> In both Kosher and Halal slaughter, the severing of the major arteries means the blood supply to the animals brain is cut, which should render it unconscious within seconds and incapable of feeling pain.


But the brains of cattle are also supplied by blood from the vertebral arteries, which (as their name suggests) run alongside the spinal cord within the bones of the neck.

They are not touched by any instrument slitting the throat, so there is a very real and acknowledged probability that cattle remain conscious after the carotids are cut. IMO, prior effective stunning is preferable because the animal is definitely rendered unconscious.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *I hope our country follows Denmark who have just banned Kosher and Halal meat.*


I'm glad to hear that - but animal rape and sexual abuse of animals is legal there.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Shoshannah - from what I have gathered, the death is far more prolonged in conventional slaughter, because the stunning quite often doesn't work... In Kosher slaughter, it is done so swiftly there is barely a chance of pain, that's why *the animals don't even get a chance to cry out etc.
> *
> In an ideal world we wouldn't kill any animal for food, and I rarely eat meat myself.
> 
> ...


They don't cry out because when your throat is cut you CAN'T make a noise - the nerves to the vocal folds are severed, and the air needed to move them is non-existent.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Shoshannah said:


> I've never had my throat slit open while I was still breathing, so I'm just speculating, but I bet it's bloody unpleasant.


Just got to rep you for that pearler


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

koekemakranka said:


> I don't know enough about this. The halaal and kosher way: how does it compare pain wise to the "European/western" way of slaughter?
> The more I learn, the more I am beginning to think that there is no humane way to get our meat and that perhaps vegans have a point.


Neither do I . but if I went out and slit an animals throat then I would be prosecuted. And rightly so


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Haven't read the thread but just want to note:
> 
> Kosher method of killing animals is entirely humane and very fast. In fact there are strict rules that have been in place for a long time to ensure that there is no suffering. The animal is killed by ONE very quick cut to the throat - and the knife used is ALWAYS inspected first, it can't be used if it has any 'blemishes' or nicks or anything that might affect the speed of the cut or that might cause extra pain.
> 
> Compared to what I have read and videos I've watched on the so called 'humane' way of killing, the Kosher way is faster which is surely better than a long drawn out death?


So maybe it the kosher/halal method of slaughter is so much kinder perhaps you would explain to me why I would be prosecuted if I were to dispose of an animal is such a way rather then employing a vet to administrate a lethal injection when the time arrives.


----------

