"Kevan Smith" > wrote
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> I think both of you are missing the truth from opposite ends. People
>> don't
>> deserve moral brownie points for raising livestock, that's absurd, but
>> calling their lives a living hell is just hyperbole designed to inflame.
>> Animals in such a state would not thrive and unhealthy animals is not
>> good
>> business. Also, saying categorically that slaughter is inhumane is just
>> untrue. Check out this site
>> http://www.grandin.com/survey/2005.r...nt.audits.html These audits
>> reveal when there are problems. These issues have been decreasing
>> steadily
>> over the years, and when sound practises are employed, few problems are
>> reported.
>
> I am specifically singling out large factory farms.

So you are OK with smaller farms? Where do you draw the line?

> Life for animals on
> those farms is indeed a living hell.

Define that. What makes it a living hell?

>They definitely do not thrive, and
> they are often unhealthy. Sick and diseased animals do make it into the
> human food chain that way.

Prove that is a systemic problem, not isolated.

> Mass mechanized slaughter as practiced in today's slaughterhouses is
> inhumane to many of the animals rendered,

What do mean by "mechanized slaughter"? Afaik, killing is done by humans.

>as even your link shows.

It shows a very low instance of measurable problems. Certainly when compared
to death in the wild like starving, drowning, freezing to death, or being
disembowelled alive by a predator, not to mention being poisoned by
herbicides or chopped up in a threshing machine, dying in a slaughterhouse
offers a much higher probability of a death free of suffering.

> Further, the study you cite doesn't mention methodology. How was the
> data collected? Was a non-biased observer collecting the data, or did it
> come from factory-supplied paperwork?

Grandin's teams are independent and the audits are done without prior
warning. All the info is on the site. www.grandin.com

> Anyway, there is plenty of video footage of factory farms and
> slaughterhouses available on the internet. Since seeing is believing,
> you should try to view some.

I find it a little suspicious that you are so skeptical when reading
statistics like those I provided, yet you are willing to accept photos as
conclusive evidence that the entire industry is frought with abuse. Of
course there are instances of harm and abuse, that is anecdotal however, not
necessarily indicative of the whole industry. Could it be that what you
really believe is that all animal use should be discontinued?