Animal welfare panel finds little abuse in hidden camera video of hog farm

Print

KANSAS CITY — In an effort to foster a more balanced conversation about hidden camera livestock investigations and to provide credible feedback to promote continuous improvement in farm animal care, the Center for Food Integrity has created an Animal Care Review panel.

The panel, made up of recognized animal well-being experts, will examine video footage and report back to the public. The process has been established initially for the pork industry but CFI is willing to engage with other sectors of animal agriculture as they show interest.

The panel will include an animal scientist, a veterinarian and an ethicist to assure various perspectives are represented. CFI is recruiting several experts to participate in the process, but for the video investigation at a swine operation in Iowa released recently by Compassion Over Killing, the panel is comprised of Dr. Temple Grandin, Colorado State University; Dr. Candace Croney, Purdue University; and Dr. Tom Burkgren, American Association of Swine Veterinarians.

Video review

Ideally, the panel will receive complete and in-context video footage from the organization that obtained it. This will provide the best opportunity for the experts to have a full understanding of the situation.

Short of that, the panel will review edited segments that have been released to the public.

After reviewing the video released last week the panel made the following observations: Most of what is shown in the video are normally accepted production practices and there was nothing that could be considered abusive.

It was noted that employees appeared to be competent and well-trained and that the barn floors and the pigs themselves were clean. In one scene, an employee is shown castrating and docking the tail of a piglet in close proximity to the mother.

The video contends the sow is grunting in distress. One of the experts said that while it is likely that the sow experiences some distress in such a situation, both the sow and her piglets would probably experience similar or greater levels of stress if the piglet was transported elsewhere.

An employee is seen using tape on a piglet’s incisions following castration. One of the experts noted such a practice is considered more welfare friendly than stitches because it is less intrusive and requires less handling of the pig.

There was a short glimpse in the video of what appeared to be a herniated piglet and it was implied it was caused by incorrect castration. One expert noted the assertion is not correct — that the condition was likely related to genetics.

A scene showing several flies in a farrowing room was a point of concern and something the experts felt should be corrected. Another point of concern is a portion of the video addressing the practice of “back feeding” — a process in which organs of piglets that have died are fed to the sows to boost their immune systems.

The experts noted that it is unclear if this practice involves sows or pigs and its exact purpose. It is a normally accepted production practice used to stimulate the immune systems of pregnant sows late in gestation. This results in more effective and improved passive immunity that is passed from the mother to her offspring through the colostrum.

A sow shown walking awkwardly because its hooves had not been properly trimmed was also discussed. The experts noted the hooves should have been trimmed but they would have preferred seeing more than just a few seconds of the sow in question so it could be determined if there was a lameness issue.

Full context

The issue of only seeing brief scenes was a common concern for the experts. They noted that seeing longer excerpts from the video would allow them to place the practices in better context to allow for evaluation that encourages continuous improvement. Attempts by CFI to secure longer video segments from Compassion Over Killing were unsuccessful.

CFI remains committed to working with animal protection groups to secure more complete video for evaluation. The Animal Care Review Panel operates independently. Its reviews, assessments, recommendations and reports will not be submitted to the pork industry for review or approval.

CFI’s only role is to facilitate the review process and release the panel’s findings. The opinions expressed in the review are solely those of the expert panel.

66 Comments

  1. Janet Weeks says:

    As the season of Lent is upon us, it might be a good time to look at this issue of what constitutes abuse of farmed animals from a whole different perspective–a Christian perspective. Lent, of course, is the time when Christians prepare for the greatest of the Christian festivals known as Easter, by thinking of things they have done wrong and atoning for sins. ‎In today’s essay titled “A Suggestion for Lent from UK Bishops: Make it Meat-Free,” Bruce Friedrich wrote: “When Christians pray, ‘Your will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven,’ the one prayer given to us by Jesus, it seems to me that this should obligate us to, as much as we can, make choices that are as merciful and loving as possible.”

    I would take the Bishops’ Lenten suggestion a step further: Let’s not go meat-free just for a day or just for Lent, but for life, for always, forever. For who among us can imagine the heaven of which Jesus speaks filled with forced breeding facilities, mothers prevented from caring for their young, babies denied their mothers, bodily mutilation­s performed without pain relief, animals trapped for life in immobilizi­ng crates and cages, captive bolts to the brain, electrifie­d water baths, slaughterh­ouses, knives, butchers? Is this “God’s will on Earth as it is in Heaven”? If we cannot imagine Heaven as resembling anything we’ve created here on Earth, then something is dreadfully wrong with the way we’ve handled things.

    The decision to go meat-free is not about sacrifice or going without for a day or two; it is about making a lifetime commitment to live with love, compassion­, mercy, and honor for ALL of God’s creation. That means no senseless hurting, no senseless killing, no senseless violence, no senseless abuse–n­ot ever–not if we can help it. And we can help it. We can start treating others as we would be treated. We can start today by stopping these senseless discussions of what constitutes abuse and calling abuse what it is: just plain wrong!

  2. maggie b says:

    Jesus multiplied the fishes & the loaves and gave them to his followers to eat. Avoiding meat, eggs, & fish in the diet affects our brain and other organs which can cause long term harm. God gave man the earth and animals on it to husband for man’s use. Animals don’t have the same attachments to their relatives that people do. A mother pig will kill her offspring by accident if not properly protected with gestation crates and also intentionally at times for a variety of reasons. Many animal parents will kill their offspring at times. Those involved in animal agriculture know these things about the animals they raise. Bambi isn’t real, it’s a cartoon character. Charlotte the spider didn’t talk to the runt pig. A real chicken would eat a fellow chickens alive given an opportunity. It amazes me that I even need to explain these things.

    • Susan Willard says:

      Those involved in animal agriculture need to get a handle on their unbecoming arrogance and dismissiveness. You believe that you and you alone know what is best for animals by virtue of being involved in animal agriculture. Industrial ag and its’ cheerleaders have shown that what little you do know about animals has been smothered by a vile farming system that treats living beings as commodities, with little regard to their natures, needs and well-being. Keep it up, you exemplify the attitudes behind the industries that use animals. The public is getting to know you.

      • Rebecca says:

        So what makes you think that you are the only one to know either. Animal welfare is extremely important by making sure that they are taken care of and fed PROPERLY which doesn’t mean having food in front of them 24/7. MANY animals would and DO die if allowed to eat endlessly.

        I’ve also tried vegetarian eating and it was the only time in my life that I was sick and had a multitude of other ills. I’ll eat a balanced diet with the benefit of MEAT… and I thank you VERY MUCH to keep your lifestyle habits out of my business.

      • Rachel Allen says:

        Very well said and very true Susan.

    • Pam Miles says:

      Thanks Maggie…nice job.

  3. Rebecca says:

    I have an even BETTER idea. How bout if we go FREE of hearing Meat Free sermons for the rest of time ???

    I am truly getting sick of people trying to shove THEIR agendas or ideas down my throat and tramping on MY RIGHTS to EAT MEAT or VEGETABLES or whatever I WANT !!!

    Go preach to someone who gives a darn… go to CA where everyone wants to live that lifestyle. Just stay away from the people who want and love meat.

    • Susan Willard says:

      Rebecca Knock yourself out. Eat what you want. Society has a right and an interest in regulating businesses. Industries are required to meet standards, follow statutes and obey laws. That agriculture has escaped many of these regulations reflects the power of the agriculture industry. Child labor in agriculture, animal cruelty laws and environmental protections have all been weakened or non existent in the agriculture industry. The carte blanche given the ag industry is going to change in spite of apologist panels like this one set up by the ag front group, Center for Food Integrity.

      • jessica says:

        I wholeheartedly agree with you, Susan. And Rebecca, as a California native and 4th generation rancher, we have many folks here who do not eat meat and many others who do, just like any other state. The tired generalization about ‘liberal, crazy, animal rights Californians’ is quite old.

        I fully support animal rights organizations as a rancher and animal lover. I have seen too many farmers and others who make their living off animals and purport to be concerned about their animals treat them inhumanely. I applaud animals activists and hope they continue to expose the people who give involved in animal agriculture a bad name.

      • maggie b says:

        Agriculture is regulated. Animal welfare is regulated. The goal of animal rights activists now is to make eating meat very expensive so that fewer are able to afford it. A few with a radical agenda are trying to wag the dog. If you ate today, thank a farmer!

      • Dave says:

        You are, as usual Susan, incorrect. Agriculture has been regulated, you are busy with your misanthropy. Agriculture is an easy target for HSUS and the rest of the AR groups as it is a minority that many people in this country feel have been left behind in the dust-bin of progress. Considering that our ag industry is the most productive on the planet and has the least negative environmental impact as well, this is pure malignment and need for scapegoats. HSUS uses this perception of the populace to further the vegan agenda by marginilization, increasing the cost of ALL food-stuffs nationwide but specifically animal products, and engaging in a misinformation campaign. I daresay, noting your past posts on other sites, that you opposed SOPA, but that would be trampling your “freedom of expression and the market.”

      • Rachel Allen says:

        Susan’s right Rebecca when she says, “knock yourself out.” Clogged arteries, heart attacks, bypass surgeries. Enjoy. Bon Appetit.

  4. Steve H. says:

    I am always amazed that with meat, as with many other issues, it seems to be an all-or-nothing scenario with certain groups and people. A lifetime without meat is a radical concept to many; why not use the information available and find producers who grow animals in an environment that makes animals feel comfortable and makes quality meats grow. I believe that our Creator, however you name it, put animals on earth for us to use wisely very much like the other resources earth provides. With that in mind, when speaking about meats, let’s look toward the farms, producers and systems that do it right. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater is simply not expedient for many of us who enjoy the flavor and need the protein, vitamins and minerals from quality meat products.

  5. Jane says:

    Maggie, humans have been known to kill their offspring, too. Does that make it okay to raise & kill humans so some other species can eat them?

    Avoiding meat, eggs & fish affects the brain & all bodily organs in a POSITIVE way. (It amazes me that I even need to explain these things!) Do your research.

    Once upon a time & even now in some remote northern parts of the globe, humans need/ed to hunt & eat animals. They didn’t/don’t raise & slaughter them in horribly abusive ways. The vast majority of us do not need to eat animals, and shouldn’t. Period.

    Janet spoke in a very reasonable and compassionate way.

    “Most of what is shown in the video are normally accepted production practices and there was nothing that could be considered abusive.” If that’s normal, then castrating (not just removing the foreskin) human male babies without any pain control should be normal, too, along with everything else that’s shown in the video. The panel mentions a number of things that they weren’t comfortable with, but the bottom line is the quoted sentence???

    • Dave says:

      Jane, you fail to provide any credible scientific sources for your statement that veganism is a “positive”. Care to provide those?
      Once upon a time is just that, a story. Upon a time, before the cumulative knowledge was in existence to manage our food-sources. Animal husbandry is not horrible nor abusive. You project yourself onto the world and your anthropomorphism skews your perception. Additionally, a human child is not comparable to a piglet. That is an offensive statement and just one of the many problems with AR attempts to regulate agriculture.

      • Jane says:

        Dave, is a nurses’ organization creditable enough for you? Here are 57 ways that eating vegan is healthier, with links. There are loads of other sources. A simple Google search for “vegan health benefits” will bring up many. I haven’t commented since my original comment because I’m bothered by the tone of the ‘discussion’ here. Your comment to me is very combative & offensive as well, but I’m giving you the respect of responding anyway.

        I became vegetarian 27 years ago totally by accident. It wasn’t planned at all. I was at a summer pot luck block party. I looked at the salad & veg end of the tables, and I looked at the BBQ end, and decided then & there that I would never eat the flesh of an animal again. The salads & veg dishes were colourful & delightfully healthy looking, and the other end was, well, not.

        Since then, of course, my reasons have expanded to include compassion for the animals, my health, and the health of the environment. I’m sure you’ve all heard the stats on how many people could be fed on the amount of land required to feed one cow, etc., etc. I am actually quite bothered about the family farm part of this — I know that there are many farm families who do the very best they can. I’m even friends with some! My wish is simply that they would grow food for humans rather than raising animals to be killed. I know that this may not always be possible. I also know that the world isn’t going to become vegan overnight, but I believe that more and more people are going that route.

        BTW, in my books, comparing a human child to a piglet is not offensive in the least! Pigs are extremely intelligent and make wonderful pets. And also, I am not a part of any organization & nobody is telling me what to say. I’m not even in the U.S.! So, perhaps you & some of the others here could be a little more polite & maybe even agree that we do have some points, even if you don’t agree with everything.

      • Rachel Allen says:

        Here’s two scientific study resources supporting the vegan diet–there are many more…if it weren’t for people eating meat and dairy, most cardiologists would be out of business. Personally, I pass on the bypass; by the way, I’m 60 and have been vegan for over 10 years. I no longer take blood pressure or cholesterol medicine and have more energy than I did when I was 20. I’m not from California, I’m a native Floridian of Native American descent. If meat eaters care nothing for themselves or their spouses having heart attacks and bypass surgeries, why for God’s sake would they not care about teaching a healthy diet to their children and grandchildren.

        http://altmed.creighton.edu/vegan/scientific_research.htm
        The facts are presented, and then you click on “Resources” to find the source of the scientific studies

        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/04/060414012755.htm
        Science Daily article with study/research from University of Chicago

  6. Rebecca says:

    I do know saying all Californians wasn’t proper because I am friends with many who have some sense and are fighting very hard to keep the ARA nuts out of their lives but it’s becoming a losing battle. When laws are passed to hurt and hinder free enterprise and the love of owning and breeding animals… I KNOW IT IS WRONG ! By eliminating all breeding (via spay/neuter) you are dooming animals to extinction. Pooh poohing it and saying there are millions out there and yadda yadda yadda means NOTHING in 15 years when ALL of those millions are gone. Period.. AMEN. Then what? Then the tree huggers will blame us meat eaters again… wake up and realize that you are dooming the animals and very well could be dooming the entire human race.

    Mind YOUR business and be free and leave MY business and Freedom alone.

  7. Liz says:

    I don’t know a single smart minded rancher who supports animal rights activists and their groups. That is shooting yourself in the foot- those groups want your way of life eliminated and will stop at nothing to end that- including taking your life. Agriculture has made enormous leaps and bounds in the way of welfare and management in last 50 years and we will continue to improve them. People have stopped looking at animals like animals and look at them like they would look at their kids. Remember that the animal kingdom and what these animals evolved with is a lot more cruel than anything a human could do to these animals.

    When people ridicule practices in the modern industry without understanding why things are done you simply make yourself look bad. Things are done for a reason and if you ask a farmer why they are done that way, they will gladly let you know. I trust my friends and family to raise my food animals far better than any person looking in on a situation and just commenting on it. They know their animals, they know what is best for them. You observers do not.

    • Liz says:

      I feel that I should also note that I raise cattle and have raised pigs and sheep while in high school. I also own working dogs and horses. All the animals under my care receive the best they can and all falls within “accepted industry practices”. My cattle are not pets, they are food. But just because they are doesn’t mean I let them suffer- I don’t let them stay sickly, I don’t let them walk around injured. They are castrated at a certain time, vaccinated at a certain time and their diets are monitored closely to make sure they are receiving all that they need to be healthy.

      Media and animal rights people paint us as these cruel people who are out for money and nothing else. If you think that, you should listen to the speech made by Paul Harvey at the 1978 National FFA Convention. And if you still think we are cruel, heartless people just look around at the next generation of farmers- look at us college kids who are studying to make this industry better. Look at the 4-H kids who have slaved over their show animals, look at the number of kids involved in FFA and Young Farmers and Ranchers. Talk to the next generation. Get their opinions. Stop listening to people who want to see us fail and will stop at nothing to do that and talk to the people who live this life day in and day out.

    • jessica says:

      Liz,

      Perhaps you missed when you read my post, that I am a 4th generation rancher, not simply as you put it, an observer. We have over 1000 head of angus and I, too, was in 4-H, FFA and CFBF. I own horses, dogs and chickens. Never once did I say I treat my cows like children. It is a business. I know. But you seem naive to believe that just because you treat your animals well that EVERY farmer/rancher out there is doing the same. I know out here we now have industrial like ranches where the owner is a hedge fund investor who lives in NYC and hires out people from all over to manage the farm. These people have no stake in the animals and there have been fines and more fines for repeated instances of blatant animal abuse, way beyond the lines of normal everyday life.

      It doesn’t have to be this ‘us vs them’ mentality with animal welfare groups. Lumping all the groups together as ‘radicals’ is the same as lumping all Muslims together as terrorists.

      So yes, I will stick by my statements. There is always a better way than the minimum required standards and regs.

      • Susan Willard says:

        Thank you, Jessica. I’m not a farmer or rancher but I do know some farmers and ranchers like Jessica, who believe in humane treatment for animals. The animal industries have used front groups like Humanewatch to demonize animal welfare organizations. These front groups are well-funded and are supported by corporate interests and farm bureaus. Instead of addressing real-life issues of sustainability and methods of meeting the needs of animals, farmers and ranchers, these front groups have spawned an irrational hatred and fear of any group that works to improve conditions for animals. Dark propaganda from these groups give rise to the statement that animal welfare people want to eliminate all animals. Good grief! Could any belief be sillier?

      • maggie b says:

        Animal rights groups do want to end animal agriculture. Read their own words: http://www.mydogmychoice.com/animalrights.html We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” Wayne Pacelle And: “My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture.” JP Goodwin Go to 20/20 and find the archived scrip from “Cruelty to Owners” so you can see some of the fruit of their labors in action.

  8. Sha says:

    I could not help myself. As an aspiring Dog Trainer the spay comment, triggered me to do this. Extinct? I think what you meant to say, was end the over population of unwanted animals. Not all Dog Breeders are responsible, and breed dogs… that should never be bred. Outside of the US, some Kennel Clubs actually require temperament testing of both bitch and sire. If both don’t pass, or aren’t tested, then the offspring are not registrable. I know, how dare they take away a Breeders rights to breed any dog they see fit to breed. Don’t even get me started on people who just breed, because they love their dog and think it would make great pups.

  9. As an animal advocate, I appreciated Dan Murphy’s suggestions to animal farmers in today’s Drovers CattleNetwork article, Commentary: A Matter of Triage (link below). He takes “the strategic approach” in one of the most sensible articles I’ve seen to date from ’tother side of the debate. He prioritizes a list of animal welfare improvements industry can and ought to make today.

    For example, at the top of his list are veal crates: “Elimination of these confinement stalls is a no-brainer,” he says. Next on his list are gestation stalls: “… the imagery of a pregnant sow appearing to be crammed into a tight space behind iron bars carries a negative impact that far outweighs any production gains. … Farrowing crates can be easily defended,” he says, “gestation stalls not so much.” He then moves on to battery cages: “… even the best-run and most modern layer hen housing look like the worst prison scenes … Yes, switching to alternative systems or even enriched cages will require significant investment on the part of egg producers. Yes, such a change … will definitely raise the price of eggs. Guess what? It’s still worth it to quell the critics demanding such a change.”

    It’s refreshing to see someone in animal agriculture acknowledge the animal welfare problems inherent in factory farming systems, recognize the need to change, and offer viable solutions to address public demand for better treatment of animals. Farming folk here would be wise to consider Dan’s suggestions and take them to heart.

    http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-news/Commentary-A-matter-of-triage-139703123.html?ref=123

  10. Liz says:

    I did not miss read. Animal rights groups want you and your family out of business, so why you support them in beyond me. Groups like HSUS and PETA will stop at nothing to completely end all animal production. Support animal welfare organizations and industry groups. The check off groups, United Egg Producers, etc are the groups to stand behind. They want whats best for industry and animals. They are the ones that producers are aligned with and are more than happy to work with.

  11. Liz says:

    The insinuation that the majority of farmers, ranchers and industry workers treat their animals poorly is appalling

  12. jessica says:

    I did not say or imply the majority of farmers, ranchers and industry workers treat their animals poorly. What I said was that not EVERY farmer treats his/her animals well. Just like not every parent treats their kids well but the overwhelming majority are good parents. That’s my point. And yes, it is appalling that people could treat their animals or their kids poorly.

    And we will have to agree to disagree on the animal rights groups because the groups I have worked with and supported acknowledge meat as an industry and their primary goal is to make the food supply safer and the animals less of a wheel in an industrial cog.

    • maggie b says:

      Then you’re not talking about animal rights. You’re talking about animal welfare and I think everyone agrees “Animal Welfare” is good; “Animal Rights” is wrong. .

    • Liz says:

      An industry person not knowing the difference between animal rights and animal welfare groups is a very scary thing.

      • jessica says:

        Oh no, Maggie b and Liz. I do know the difference. And yes, I did say animal rights. And yes, I am a card carrying member of HSUS. You see, as a sustainable farmer that cares very much for my animals, I have had plenty of ‘animal rights’ folks to my ranch and they have seen how I treat my animals. And I have had no complaints, no protests, no angry letters. Again, it doesn’t need to be an ‘us vs. them’ mentality. If you treat your animals humanely and show a genuine interest in their well being and a sustainable approach to business, you can work together.

        So as Rebecca put it so eloquently earlier in the post ‘Mind YOUR business and be free and leave MY business and Freedom alone.’

  13. Dave says:

    All, please be aware that Janet & Susan troll the internet to support all HSUS driven agendas. They are from from concerned citizens or consumers. They have their directives and format outlined for them and they will focus their attention on areas that HSUS etc are concerned. This panel review is one area of concern as it does not bolster the AR agenda and draws attention to misinformative ccampaigning. The more they post the more central HQ is pleased and the more riled the environment becomes. Slanted views and misinformation is the name of the game, which is why videos are clipped and edited prior to exposure to the public.

    • I do NOT appreciate Dave’s LIBELOUS statements about me and I hereby report him to the MODERATORS OF THIS SITE. Dave is making personal attacks and deliberately false statements that should be removed at once. I do not know Dave and I am quite certain he does not know me, other than through my online presence. He has no right to make malicious, false, and defamatory statements about me, or anyone else, just because he may not agree with the content of my posts.

      MODERATORS, PLEASE REMOVE DAVE’S LIBELOUS COMMENT IMMEDIATELY!

  14. jc boxer says:

    Dave has it wrong, Janet & Susan support the HSUS and are here on this site to disavow the lies most of the “big ag farm crew” spew, not meaning to of course, just not informed on the 21st century attitude and the growing wave against an unsustainable farm system that depends on cruelty, anti-biotics and secrecy. This will in the end turn many away from eating meat and therefore, hurt their own efforts.

    • Dave says:

      Not big ag farm crew, a consumer not willing to pay anymore because someone else’s sensitivities are hurt.
      I fail to see wanton and rampant cruelty in today’s agricultural practices. The antibiotic effects were an accident in discover. However, indiscriminate use of antibiotics is to be avoided in any scenario, including human healthcare.
      And what “secrecy” are you talking about? Is there some masonic plot that we are unaware of in agriculture that you are privy to? Most people don’t know about agriculture because they don’t want to know, it is an endeavor beneath the general population and held in contempt. Retaining people in agriculture has been an issue for decades, so the sudden interest comes from where?
      Demonstrate how agriculture as practiced today is necessarily “unsustainable”.

  15. ATTN: MODERATORS OF THIS SITE–

    I do NOT appreciate Dave’s LIBELOUS statements about me and I hereby report him to the MODERATORS OF THIS SITE. Dave is making personal attacks and deliberately false statements that should be removed at once. I do not know Dave and I am quite certain he does not know me, other than through my online presence. He has no right to make malicious, false, and defamatory statements about me, or anyone else, just because he may not agree with the content of my posts.

    MODERATORS, PLEASE REMOVE DAVE’S LIBELOUS COMMENT IMMEDIATELY!

  16. okiestorm1 says:

    Dave is right! and anyone who supports HSUS supports animal rights not animal welfare. These people think that animals should have the same rights as humans,they put animals in the same catagory as humans.I guess if they get thier way and animals do get the same rights as humans then animals can go where ever they want,breed and reproduce as much as they want. you HSUS and PETA people think that casterating,dehorning,branding is cruel,but you want breeding stoped also and you want a tracking device put in under the animals skin.I raise cattle,goats,horses and some chickens,my chickens do free range they go in the goat barn on thier own at night,I have lost some to skunks and other critters but not many,though I only have less then 10 at the moment.My goats have thier scrapies tags,my cattle and horses are freeze branded I will keep casterating my bull calves,branding and if need be dehorning.HSUS and PETA and all who support them are no better then the animal rights groups that go around blowing up trucks,labs,farms,co-op’s,like ALF and Mercy for animals do,,they are supported by HSUS this has been under investigation by the FBI so if you support HSUS then you support terrorist also!!

  17. Rebecca says:

    I just had a total work up and I’m healthy, thank you! Stress test, cholesterol test, bp and the entire thing. I’m good to go BUT I don’t assume anything…. Nor do I believe that becoming vegetarian will be the magic bullet. When your time is up it’s UP ! No negotiation or power play to it. You do the best you can and you still have absolutely NO CONTROL over when God decides it’s your time. God also gave ME the brain to choose what I feel is the best for ME. And you can’t take that choice away no matter how you try or what you say. It’s NOT up to YOU or the GOVERNMENT to run my life. :)

  18. Rebecca says:

    Neither do I and I DO eat meat.

  19. Rebecca says:

    The facts are clear and upsetting when it comes to HSUS..etc.. I won’t write out all the letters because the list seems to be growing. I personally got a phone call from one of our Senators (from DC, not state) and they verified that the HSUS IS BEING INVESTIGATED for fraud and misappropriation of funds by the IRS.

    The HSUS and PETA and the ASPCA do NOT OWN SHELTERS. Only the SPCA and your local shelters have them and the SPCA has no connection to the ASPCA… THAT is fact.

    less than 1% of the money taken in by HSUS ever reaches an animal. Of the millions they take in the shelters get what amounts to $1.08. That won’t even buy a half a gallon of gasoline to drive to the shelter to give em the money. These are not trumped up amounts they’re fact. Look it up.

    The bottom line is to donate to your local shelter. Then the money gets where it should be … theoretically .. The best suggestion is to take items to them… blankets, food, etc. but keep your money in your pocket and don’t cater to the H$U$ and the like. The money you give them goes into THEIR PENSION FUNDS.. not yours… it goes into making more ignorant and debilitating laws that will only be the demise of our pets. They readily and outwardly ADMIT IT !

    NONE of this is fiction… it’s FACT.

    • Susan Willard says:

      No it is not a fact, Rebecca. It is fiction created by an industry sponsored front group called, rather humerously, the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). CCF uses Humanewatch to spew the lies about the HSUS, PETA, MFA and COK. CCF has also used lies and misdirections against other organizations who are seen as a threat to various industries willing to pay Berman the headd of CCF. CCF has attacked the Center for Disease Control, Mother Against Drunk Driving, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, teacher unions, employee unions and the minimum wage. Reporters and TV stations have been fired and sued for repeating Berman’s “facts”. Educate yourself. Google berman exposed, look at Sourcewatch, search humanewatchinfo.com for information on this corporate shill.

      • Dave says:

        Susan, again false. PETA exterminates animals. Just because a site that reports those facts has support from an organization you oppose does not change the facts.

      • mary cherry says:

        Funny how all this was already around before anyone ever heard of CCF. Pretty sure Humanewatch wasn’t the first “group” to bring up the concern. They just got the ball rolling for farmers/ranchers to start speaking up more!

  20. Rebecca says:

    some facts about PETA since 1998 I hope these colums transfer properly. if not the website URL is at the bottom if anyone has the gumption to read the truth ..

    Year Received† Transferred Adopted Killed
    2011 1,992 34 24 1.21% 1,911 95.9%
    2010 2,345 63 44 1.86% 2,200 93.8%
    2009 2,366 31 8 0.34% 2,301 97.3%
    2008 2,216 34 7 0.32% 2,124 95.8%
    2007 1,997 35 17 0.85% 1,815 90.9%
    2006 3,061 46 12 0.39% 2,981 97.4%
    2005 2,165 69 146 6.74% 1,946 89.9%
    2004 2,655 1 361 13.60% 2,278 85.8%
    2003 2,224 1 312 14.03% 1,911 85.9%
    2002 2,680 2 382 14.25% 2,298 85.7%
    2001 2,685 14 703 26.18% 1,944 72.4%
    2000 2,681 28 624 23.27% 2,029 75.7%
    1999 1,805 91 386 21.39% 1,328 73.6%
    1998* 943 125 133 14.10% 685 72.6%
    Total 31,815 574 3,159 9.93% 27,751 87.23%

    * figures represent the second half of 1998 only
    † Other than spay/neuter animals
    » Skeptical? Click here to see the proof or you can go to PetaKillsAnimals.com and read all about it.

  21. Rebecca says:

    Sorry it didn’t post exactly right but line up the second set of #s with Received… 3rd set with Transferred.. the 4th w % with Adopted and the 5th 2% to KILLED. Bottom line is that PETA has an 87.23% kill rate. OUTRAGEOUS and as of 2011 the rate is 95.9% … now who is helping animals in this organization? only 24 adopted in 2011.. makes me nauceous thinking about them. So those of you who want to bury the truth… keep shoveling your money into the pockets of the HSUS, ASPCA and PETA and keep making the fat cats wealthy and sending our pets into Extinction.

  22. Rebecca says:

    oops that’s the 5th set WITH % not 2% …

  23. Rebecca says:

    You know… I had a husband (divorced him too) who used to just tell me “No it isn’t” and everyone.. almost… believed him. Didn’t matter if the sun was shining and he said No It Isn’t… stupid people believed him and actually looked up.

    That’s what most ARA believe. they don’t see anything wrong with destroying people’s rights but by DARN.. they’re trying to give animals rights. Makes no earthly sense.

  24. For people interested in learning the truth about The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), I suggest they do their own research and not rely on outright lies spread by others with personal, self-serving agendas.

    To do so,I suggest thoroughly acquainting yourselves with HSUS’s outstanding website, starting with “About Us: Overview.”

    http://www.humanesociety.org/about/overview/

    Then, read up on your particular areas of interest or concern. For example, under “Our Policies,” you will find HSUS’s “Statement on Farm Animals and Eating with Conscience.”

    http://www.humanesociety.org/about/policy_statements/our_policies_1.html

    I also highly recommend you sign up for Wayne Pacelle’s excellent daily blog to follow what HSUS is up to on a daily basis. You can subscribe for free here:

    http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2012/02/four-stars-charity-navigator.html

    Also, do not miss Pacelle’s brilliant new book, The Bond: Our Kinship with Animals, Our Call to Defend Them.

    http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2011/03/the-bond-book.html

    I am sure after just a little time spent on research, you will conclude the HSUS is the most powerful, most effective animal advocacy nonprofit there is. Those who would cast aspersions on HSUS’s successful advocacy for animals are those industries and persons who are thoroughly entrenched in exploiting animals for profit. HSUS threatens their bottom dollar. You can read about some of them here:

    http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/opposition/opposition.html

  25. okiestorm1 says:

    Ya know it’s kinda funny that these animal rights people are fighting to give animals the same rights as people,when in fact they are takeing more rights away from the animals, the right to be cared for by people that actualy know how to care for them,the right to be used for what they were put on this earth for to start with and that is food for humans,the right to breed and produce offspring to produce more food for humans,the right to be working animals and do what they were born to do as in cattle horses,rodeo stock,jumpers,race horses,ect.You people will be giveing these animals no reason to be here at all if you keep up this process,do you not understand that!

  26. Wonder how some people seem to “know” that “animals were put on this Earth for human exploitation.” Where on Earth do they come up with these ridiculous, simple-minded, speciesist, self-serving notions?

    Conversation #1
    “The animals were put here for our use.”
    “Who says?”
    “The Bible says.”
    “Who wrote the Bible?”
    “Men.”
    “Ah! Self-serving man.”

    Conversation #2
    “The animals were put here for our use.”
    “Who says?”
    “God says.”
    “Who invented God?”
    “Men.”
    “Ah! Self-serving man.”

    • Dave says:

      The animals are simply here, as are humans. Not all of us follow the arguments you outline. Your presentation does show that you have not been successful at reconciling your wants of reality with reality.
      Your declaration of simple-minded applies to the idea that all animals are the same. That is irrationale.
      You are also exhibiting self-serving nature by your use of a computer to further your personal beliefs.

  27. maggie b says:

    Lack of B12 makes for irrational thinking & mental illness.

  28. Tim says:

    I wounder if these animal rights people are ready to provide jobs for all of the livestock producers they will put out of business, when they get everyone to quit eating meat, eggs, and dairy.

  29. Rebecca says:

    I pray that crap doesn’t happen in my lifetime but without a balance in nature many other things can disappear including plants. Then what do they plan on doing ?? eating each other ?

    A sick group of people. When they are controlling everything and they all start fighting over who they are going to control next… then what ? All chiefs and no indians makes for a volatile situation.

    I’ll be just happy to sit back in my chair, fold my arms and watch the show. It will be quite interesting.

Leave a Comment

Receive emails as this discussion progresses.

eNewsletter

Get our Top Stories in Your Inbox

Recent News