Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
For example, some laws govern methods of killing animals for food, clothing, or other products, and other laws concern the keeping of animals for entertainment, education, research, or pets. There are several conceptual approaches to the issue of cruelty to animals.
In tracking food animal production from the feed through to the dinner table, the inefficiencies of meat, milk, and egg production range from a 4:1 energy input to protein output ratio up to 54:1. [74] The result is that producing animal-based food is typically much less efficient than the harvesting of grains, vegetables, legumes, seeds, and ...
Animal slaughter is the killing of animals, usually referring to killing domestic livestock. It is estimated that each year, 80 billion land animals are slaughtered for food. [ 4 ] Most animals are slaughtered for food ; however, they may also be slaughtered for other reasons such as for harvesting of pelts , being diseased and unsuitable for ...
Killing animals for human needs is indefensible in all cases “The practice of breeding, raising and killing pigs for our purposes is deeply problematic as well. Pigs have consciousness ...
The smallest animal that can kill a human is the Naegleria fowleri amoeba. N. fowleri does this by crawling up the target's nose and eating the targets' brain. Most attacks happen in moist areas like ponds or lakes. [27] [28] In the middle is the blowfish (fugu) that can kill animals with its toxic organs that contain tetrodotoxin. [29]
An animal is considered properly stunned when there is no "righting reflex"; that is, the animal must not try to stand up and right themself. Only then can they be considered fully unconscious. They can then proceed down the line, where workers in slaughterhouses can begin the slaughtering of the specified livestock humanely.
Surplus killing can deplete the overall food supply, waste predator energy and risk their being injured. Nonetheless, researchers say animals surplus-kill whenever they can, in order to procure food for offspring and others, to gain valuable killing experience, and to create the opportunity to eat the carcass later when they are hungry again ...
Animal rights writer Henry S. Salt termed the replaceability argument the "logic of the larder".. In 1789, the utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham endorsed a variant of the argument, contending that painlessly killing a nonhuman animal is beneficial for everyone because it does not harm the animal and the consumers of the meat produced from the animal's body are better off as a result.