On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 09:38:36 -0700, Gerry >
wrote:

>On 2007-09-01 06:40:50 -0700, John Doe > said:
>
>> On Aug 30, 12:50 am, Gerry > wrote:
>>> On 2007-08-29 12:51:00 -0700, "James Silverton"
>>> > said:
>>>
>>>> Apart from over-scrupulous thinking about it, what's wrong with blood
>>>> in cooking?
>>>
>>> Apart from what makes it disgusting? I guess that's about it. Just like
>>> a lot of adults don't want to eat bunnies and sheep, though if you fed
>>> them blind they'd love rabbit and lambchops.
>>>
>>>> I suppose some people might not like to have it for religious reasons
>>>> but blood sausage is eaten in Europe (don't the British like "black
>>>> pudding"?), blood is used in some French sauces etc.and lot's of people
>>>> like their steak very rare!
>>>
>>> I was reading in a Scandanavian cookbook about Danish blodpudding and
>>> it sounded like it would taste great. Reading about it's preparation?
>>> ("Continue to stir constantly so the blood won't congeal") Not so
>>> much. But Mr. wolf, in humor or otherwise, has dismissed a few
>>> cuisines to a purgatory, at least temporarily, because of some
>>> referential aspect.
>>>
>>> Like there was a story about a guy who knew somebody what ATE A DOG!!!
>>> So Korean food, BBQ, rice porridge, seafood pancakes, tofu soup and all
>>> get the summary evaluation: Barf: Dog burgers.
>>
>> About 20 years ago, I was shown an article written by, of all things,
>> a Veterinarian. The article was explaining that dog was actually a
>> very healthy, nutritious and tasty thing to eat.
>>
>> I will tell you that at the time, I thought that a veterinarian who
>> would write such a thing stuck me pretty funny. Why would a person who
>> is entrusted with the care and well-being of all animals would say
>> such a thing?
>>
>> Of course, Vets take care of chickens, cows and pigs too. They also
>> eat them.
>>
>> In many countries, dogs are seen as lots of things other than as
>> domestic pets.
>>
>> In the 1970's, I had an occasion to eat dog that was served by a
>> Korean family to me as a guest in their home.
>>
>> At the moment I was eating it, I was unaware that it was dog. It was
>> served in a meat salad much like kimche, but with meat added.
>>
>> The kimche was fresh, not fermented, and as lots of Korean dishes, it
>> was pretty spicy. The flavor of the dog was pleasant and light. The
>> texture was a tight grained meat with almost no fat, no gristle and
>> very tender.
>>
>> It reminded me of a center cut pork chop in flavor and texture.
>>
>> Lots of people keep horses as pets also, but they can be bought in
>> many countries as food as well. When I was in Germany, it was
>> available in butcher shops for human consumption.
>>
>> Bunnies. Millions of bunnies are kept as pets by children and some
>> adults. I love eating bunnies.
>>
>> I'm rather surprised that folks in a group for sushi would have an
>> aversion to eating unusual foods. Sushi itself has many, many unusual
>> items included in it's fare.
>
>As werewolf points out upstream, ostensibly it wasn't the dog that was
>off-putting, but the rumor/inuendo/myth that the dog was tortured
>before death inorder to produce more tasty enzymes/hormones or
>whatever. The implication was that torturing the animal before death
>would make it taste better.
>
>I think that's a total crock of shit, and would like to read any
>article (if someone posseses such a link) that indicates that. It
>sounds like PETA/SPCA agit-prop. All good things to them and their
>cause(s), but I don't believe this. In fact I have read the opposite
>regarding beef; that if the cattle is terrorized in a slaughterhouse
>environment prior to being butchered, their adrenalin/body chemistry
>makes for inferior taste but it is a minor distinction and one that
>simply can't be addressed in a large commercial venture.
>
>Now I didn't hear that from a guy who knew a guy, I saw it in a story
>related to (of all things) autism in a 60 minutes program years ago.
>
>Both may be false I don't know. My only perspective is that a Korean
>somewhere tortures dogs as a tenderizer, it doesn't change my interest
>in the whole of (accessible) Korean cuisine.

The Koreans I've met are pretty logical people. I've never met one
that had the time to even try such a silly theory as torturing an
animal to improve it's taste. I agree, it sounds like an urban legend
of something to dissuade a person from even trying it.

>> Now, don't get me wrong. I won't be going to anyone's house,
>> scratching poochie behind the ears and slicing it's throat. But if dog
>> were available as a meat in my country, I'd eat it once in awhile.
>> It's good.
>>
>> Eaten much the same as Kobe beef is, I can imagine that many of you
>> would like it.
>
>It's logical that those animals we have most closely associated with
>personally would be difficult to eat. I figured that was one of the
>reasons for 4H--to torque children's brains where they could find a way
>to understand loving an animal, and then killing it for dinner. I
>assume this is not a normal relationship to domesticated animals and
>foodstuffs and has to be learned, and learned before one's brain sets
>up all the logical civilized associations.

I was raised on a farm, for part of my childhood. Having watched the
butchering and cleaning of animals from an early age, I seem to be
immune to any ill feelings regarding the process.

When an animal is walking around mooing, I see them as a live animal
and treat them as well as possible. I certainly have never gone out of
my way to make their simple lives harder for them.

When I dispatch an animal, it's with a means that is suitable for a
speedy death. Most of the larger animals, I shoot. The smaller are
decapitated and then hung to drain.

Living on a farm will toughen up almost everyone in regards to
slaughtering for food.