August 6th, 2013
01:30 PM ET
Share this on:

Editor's note: Video by Jeremy Harlan, CNN photojournalist; text by Sarah LeTrent, Eatocracy editor.

Some residents of Grand Isle, Vermont, don’t want to talk about what happened in that blue building on Pearl Street. Others have an awful lot to say on the matter.

A cattle trailer, spray-painted in red with the Animal Liberation Front’s acronym “ALF,” still sits out front of the complex now shrouded in overgrown weeds.

It’s an eerie reminder of the events just four years ago that thrust this tiny town of fewer than 2,000 people into the national spotlight.

In October 2009, the now-deserted structure – which once housed the veal processing plant Bushway Packing Inc. - was permanently shut down by the U.S. Department of Agriculture after an animal protection organization, the Humane Society of the United States, revealed an undercover video showing plant workers kicking, dragging, stunning and skinning live calves that were less than a month old.

It was yet another blow to the U.S. veal industry, which has long been mired in conflict with animal welfare groups because of its use of crates to restrain the calves’ movement.

According to the American Veterinary Medical Association, consumers seldom cite animal welfare as a concerning food issue but express it as “a matter of high concern” for veal.

But just 40 miles from where that horrifying video was filmed in Grand Isle, in the small town of Fairfield, Vermont, the folks behind Stony Pond Farm are among a number of smaller-scale dairy farmers trying to persuade consumers and fellow farmers alike to think outside the pen when it comes to veal – and they’re aiming to make more humane rearing and slaughtering practices an industry standard.

By definition, veal is the flesh of young cattle. It stems from the Latin word vitellus, meaning small calf. Veal has always been viewed as a high-end product; in Roman times, the ability to slaughter an animal before it reached its full potential was a sign of wealth. It’s a staple in Italian and French cuisines, but over the course of the past three decades, it’s become almost taboo in the United States.

“I don’t even know how many folks knew why they didn’t eat veal,” Stony Pond’s Tyler Webb said of his first trip to the Burlington Farmers' Market to sell his veal cuts. “They just knew you weren’t supposed to.”

tyler webb veal calf

The answer isn’t hard to come by: The crating system of commercial veal production has become a major point of contention for American consumers.

“When veal became popular at the end of World War II and as consumers became interested in what was a very popular food in Europe, farmers began to adopt new technologies to expand food production,” said Beth Anne Mumford, spokeswoman for the American Veal Association.

“The individual stalls were designed to provide for individual care and would also limit the potential for disease transfer from one young calf to the next.”

According to the American Veterinary Medical Association, individual pens for veal calves are the norm (the typical dimensions are 22 inches wide by 54 inches long). The cows are removed from their mothers within a few hours to a few days after birth and placed on a milk replacer of 40 essential vitamins and nutrients.

Calves are often tethered to prevent mobility for cross-sucking - when calves suck at each other’s bodies or heads - an abnormal behavior that calves can develop when they’re weaned off milk and need oral stimulation.

Because they are not typically fed mother’s milk and don’t graze, crate-raised calves lack iron and therefore produce a much paler, almost white meat when they’re slaughtered between 18 and 20 weeks (PDF).

“Stalls that greatly restrict the behavior of calves are not an adequate housing system,” wrote animal scientist Pierre Le Neindre in the Journal of Animal Science (PDF). “If the crates are small enough to prevent calves from lying in a comfortable position, they also impair the welfare of calves and lower their growth rate and disease resistance.”

Such veal crates have been banned in England since 1990 and the European Union since 2007. Several U.S. states have also banned their use, including Rhode Island, California, Arizona, Michigan, Maine, Ohio and Colorado.

“Clearly, the veal crate has become the paradigm of factory farming and animal abuse for many decades,” said Paul Shapiro, the vice president of farm animal protection for the Humane Society of the United States.

The Food Safety and Inspection Service rebuts that assertion, saying that individual stalls provide individual care so long as the calves can stand, stretch, lie down and groom themselves, but there are no federal regulations in place to dictate the size of the individual pens.

Veal’s bad rap didn’t stop Webb from entering the fray, but he’s preaching a model of production that he contends is more humane.

Webb has operated Stony Pond with his wife, Melanie, since 2002. In 2004, he resigned from his job with the Natural Resources Conservation Service to focus full-time on the family-owned, certified organic farm. Organic certification means Webb’s farm complies with USDA organic regulations and allows him to sell and label his products as organic.

When the economy turned sour at the height of the recession, organic milk sales suffered. Families looked to save money on groceries and opted out of organic products, while operating costs for producers continued to rise.

Webb’s cooperative, Organic Valley, decided to send less of its milk into the consumer supply instead of lowering the price or culling the herd.

“One of the ways that we thought we could contribute to the benefit of the co-op as a whole was to figure out how to divert some of the milk of the fluid sales market and add some value to it,” Webb said.

For Webb, the answer was to pasture-raise veal calves on a whole-milk diet, supplemented with a little organic grain. He raised 15 calves that first year to rave reviews and has been doing it ever since. This year, he has 15 more, ranging from 2 to 4 months old.

“Some chefs and farm partners really stepped up and said that ‘if you guys are going to do it, we’re going to buy it,’ ” Webb said. “There wasn’t a lot of risk for us. Now, we’re guaranteed to sell everything that we’re going to raise.”

For dairy farmers like Webb, pasture-raising veal is a two-fold solution: The method adds value to the male calf, typically perceived by the industry as a byproduct; and as a sustainable farmer, he can allow his calves to express their natural tendencies by freely grazing in the sun.

“It took an education on our part and an open invitation for folks to come see what we were doing and come see the animals running around,” Webb said.

On dairy farms, female calves are typically preferred and groomed to join the milking herd, while male calves are either auctioned to veal houses or killed at birth; only a small number are reared as beef.

Nowadays, dairy farmers can even sort the X- from the Y-bearing sperm to guarantee a heifer. On farms that use sexed semen, 80% of calves born are female, said Diane Bothfeld, the deputy secretary of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture. The ratio used to be 50-50.

“We often say we’re managing this ecological, ethical and economic balance,” Webb said. “And we recognize that the veal calves are part of that and honor them by giving them the best life that we can for that four-month period that they’re with us.”

While optimistic about change, Webb understands consumer reluctance – not because of the age of the animals (noting that chickens, pigs and lamb are roughly the same age at slaughtering) but because of the way many veal calves are raised.

Things are only further complicated for the consumer because the USDA offers no clear definition of veal. The Food Safety and Inspection Service says “veal” can mean (PDF):

  • Calf: A calf is a young bovine of either sex that has not reached puberty (up to about 9 months of age) and has a maximum live weight of 750 pounds.
  • “Bob” veal: About 15% of veal calves are marketed up to 3 weeks of age or at a weight of 150 pounds. These are called bob calves.
  • “Special-fed” Veal: Special, milk-fed and formula fed veal calves usually are fed nutritionally balanced milk or soy based diets. These specially controlled diets contain iron and 40 other essential nutrients, including amino acids, carbohydrates, fats, minerals and vitamins. The majority of veal calves are special-fed.

Now, there are pasture-raised veal producers like Webb to add to the bullpen.

“We often use the tagline ‘this isn’t your grandmother’s veal’ as we’re marketing the product,” Webb said. “It’s not fair for anything to be locked up in a dark space, unable to turn around. ... Food without a conscience is a sad, sad reality.”

For the Humane Society’s Shapiro, pastured veal is certainly moving in the right direction when it comes to animal welfare, but he wants to see the bar continue to rise. Another big concern, he says, is how soon the calves are taken from their dairy cow mothers.

According to the standards set by Humane Farm Animal Care, a nonprofit certification organization, a “humanely raised” calf must receive colostrum - nutrient-dense first milk - from its mother, a replacement heifer or a frozen source within six hours of birth.

Webb raises both his veal and the replacement heifers on bottles filled with whole raw milk, but they do get the colostrum from their own mothers right after birth.

Consumers have long been paying attention to controversial practices in the wider industry: Both production and consumption of veal have been rapidly dropping for nearly four decades, according to the USDA.

U.S. production of veal totaled 126 million pounds in 2012; compare that with a staggering 911 million pounds in 1975.

In 1944, veal consumption was at an all-time high of 8.6 pounds per person, but 1988 was the last year consumption was more than one pound per person. By 2008, Americans were consuming only about 0.3 pounds of veal per person yearly, according to the USDA’s Economic Research Service.

Lisa Weeks is one of those meat eaters who has excluded veal from her diet. The 33-year-old New Yorker grew up with a European mother who did not agree with how commercial veal was raised.

“It stuck with me,” she said.

“While I would not be against trying humanely raised veal, I think there are plenty of other options to cook and eat instead.”

Unsurprisingly, the veal industry has started to recognize it has an image problem.

Jurian Bartelse, president of the American Veal Association, also processes about 3,000 veal calves each year at Provitello Farms in Elba, New York.

The board of the American Veal Association adopted a resolution in 2007 recommending that all veal producers in the United States convert to group housing by 2017. In group housing, the calves are still kept indoors but are allowed to interact with each other and roam freely within the pen. Bartelse says the association recommends about 20 square feet per calf.

In 2012, the association said that 70% of calves raised by its members had made the transition. The association represents four of the five leading packers/processors and three of the five leading producers, according to Mumford.

Small, independent farms might find making the changes cost-prohibitive, Mumford wrote in an e-mail.

The association also adopted a statement of ethical principles and code of conduct in 2010 to “confirm an industry commitment to ‘veal raised right,’ ” according to an American Veal Association press release.

Bartelse says that despite popular perception, the mobility of the calf has no real influence on the tenderness of the meat. So why isn't every dairy farmer following the pasture-raised approach?

“I think that would change the whole product that we’re producing,” Bartelse said.

For smaller dairy farms, he said, it’s easier to sell the male calves to an auction barn, which will in turn send them to a commercial veal operation, than to invest in them.

Bartelse considers Webb’s veal “more of a niche product.” According to USDA Market News, in May 2013, 750 non-formula-fed veal calves were slaughtered under federal inspection; this is compared with 27,323 bob calves and 26,233 formula-fed calves. And in 2012, 118 million pounds of commercial veal were in the supply, compared with 8 million pounds of farm veal.

Webb agrees. “We’re lucky, but I think it’s a challenging proposition,” he said. “It’s really going to take more awareness and more consumer demand to attract the entrepreneur who might be able to unite farms together into producing more sustainable humanely-treated veal.”

Natural rearing methods can translate into a better product. Webb's veal is pinker in color than the commercial variety; pasture-raised veal is often referred to as rose veal for this very reason. The cuts are usually smaller and have a more delicate taste.

According to a study by the Center for Agricultural Development and Entrepreneurship (PDF), a New York nonprofit, pasture-raising livestock isn’t free from its own challenges, like a 20% to 100% increase in the time it takes to raise an animal to market weight, fewer established distribution channels, increased pasture rotation, more fencing and fewer veterinarians who specialize in grass-based nutrition.

John Delpha, chef and owner of the Belted Cow Bistro in nearby Essex Junction, Vermont, said he became interested in humane veal during his travels in northern Italy, where he encountered a rosier-colored veal with a delicate flavor and creaminess.

Delpha met Webb at the Burlington Farmers Market and noticed the veal meat in a small cooler behind Webb’s stand. Delpha took it back to his restaurant and cooked it; he’s been hooked ever since.

“This veal is as tender as any veal you’re ever going to know,” Delpha said. “And this veal walks in fields; they kick at each other; they jump. They have a good time.”

Delpha is having a hard time keeping up with demand, but for Webb, remaining small is a conscious decision.

“We want our farm to remain the size that we have, so that the level of integrity of what I’m putting on my family’s plate is the same quality to hopefully get to your family’s plate,” Webb said.

Both men say they’re optimistic that as more consumers get a taste for pasture-raised veal, more dairy farmers will be convinced to join the herd.

How do you feel about veal? Would you eat it if it was pasture-raised? Share your thoughts in the comments below, or weigh in on Facebook or Twitter with @Eatocracy using the hashtag #vealgood or #vealbad.



soundoff (407 Responses)
  1. Cues who

    Quit whining about calves taken from their mothers and killed while there are thousands of babies slaughtered in this country every day. Anyone who says " I can't eat veal but support abortion" has mental issues.

    August 7, 2013 at 12:34 pm |
    • Bill

      I think someone linking food issues to abortion has mental issues as well.

      August 7, 2013 at 12:41 pm |
      • lilyq

        I think anyone who refuses to acknowledge the point has mental issues.

        August 7, 2013 at 12:47 pm |
        • Bill

          No...you're saying that someone who does not support abortion is somehow a bad person for liking the occasional osso bucco. That's crazy. Morality is too complex for anybody to consistently apply it across the board. It's fine if you don't like someone because of their abortion stance (I think it's narrow minded but whatever). It's fine if you don't like someone because they like veal. But to link the two is crazy. You're not going to have any friends if you try and find some consistency in morality. We are all immoral in some ways and it doesn't always make sense.

          August 7, 2013 at 1:19 pm |
  2. Bill

    I love veal. I have no problem eating veal. I may make a veal steak this weekend. That being said, if presented with a choice between cage-reared veal and free-range, I would be willing to pay a little extra (either in the form of a higher price, or maybe slightly lower quality for the same price) for the free-range veal. We should respect the animals that give their lives in order to provide us with food.

    August 7, 2013 at 12:29 pm |
    • Provoked

      Here's a huge wake up call Bill... Sorry to burst your bubble but these calves didn't "give" their lives to you. Anthropomorphised dissonance much?

      August 7, 2013 at 12:54 pm |
      • Bill

        Here's news for you...animals do give their lives and they do it all the time. Not willingly, but they do. It's no different to me if they are killed by a human, or a lion out in the wilderness someplace. But since we are in the unique position of being able to mass produce our food, we should respect the animals that will have to die.

        August 7, 2013 at 1:05 pm |
        • Provoked

          I'm sorry but again Bill you seem to have a problem with language and the meaning of words. The animals we eat don't "die" they are killed, snuffed, pinched from life, stolen from their rightful time on earth. Why? We say it's for nutrition... But more science tells us that flesh consumption isn't necessary for optimum health. It's not sustainability either as our system of meat production wastes water and harms the environment in countless ways. We also claim its so more humans can be fed... Yet a billion people go without grain as we fatten livestock with the food they could eat.

          Finally, we are not lions, alligators or sharks. They MUST eat flesh to survive. And considering that 93% of all species coexist in harmony and mutual cooperation why would we want to fashion ourselves after the 7% that are the most violent and destructive? No rational or ethical reason could be found except the excuse that we like how their flesh tastes. That just doesn't move us up the rung of civilization one bit.

          August 7, 2013 at 1:47 pm |
        • Bill

          Mr. Provoked: I have no issues with language. "Die" is the verb for the end of life. "Kill" is a synonym implying a death from a cause other than old age. When an animal is killed, it does, in fact die. I've never heard of anything being killed and yet they continued to live. So no, my language is fine. And what is an animal's natural time on earth? Does that include being killed by a non-human predator? As far as mother nature is concerned, it's a natural death. You know, you've strayed so far from my original point which was that we should be treating the animals we eat humanely. Animals are a part of the natural human diet although some people choose to not eat meat for a variety of reasons, including dietary, religious/cultural, morality, or simply because it doesn't taste good to them. You seem to think meat eaters are immoral or inferior to yourself. I disagree. Eating meat isn't a moral issue, but how we treat those animals before their date with the slaughterhouse is.

          August 7, 2013 at 2:02 pm |
        • Provoked

          Fair enough. Back on track to your original comment. You want to treat "food animals" more humane.
          From Webster’s New World Dictionary
          Hu·mane / hyoomáyn / adj. 1. having what are considered the best qualities of human beings; kind, tender, merciful, sympathetic, compassionate.

          So where does the orchestrated, for-profit-killing of healthy, sentient beings fit into the "kind" or merciful act of slaughter for a food that is not necessary to human health? I suggest you really don't want to treat these animals in a "humane" way but rather in a "less cruel" fashion. If we were truly humane: compassionate – We would not breed them just to eat them. Animal consumption in developed nations is simply not necessary any more. That's good news. We no longer have to wring our hands on how to slit their throats "nicely".

          When you start with a necessary evil, and then over time the necessity passes away, what's left?”
          ― Matthew Scully, Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy

          August 7, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
        • Bill

          Mr. Provoked: Eating meat is necessary for my health. I would like the animals that die to not have to do so in a sadistic manner. If that's going to cost me a little more at the supermarket, that's fine. But I WILL enjoy that slice of prime rib I'm going to eat tonight, just as a Great White would enjoy munching on me if I were ever to get in its way. And while I would fight tooth and nail to avoid being eaten by a shark, I wouldn't bear it any ill will.

          August 7, 2013 at 4:06 pm |
        • Provoked

          The Great White is not a moral agent... He also MUST consume flesh to live. That simply isn't so with man. Oh there is a small group of humans who physically do "need" flesh to survive. I believe they are .008% of the entire human population. It's a very rare disease... I forget it's name – Perhaps you can tell me? Other than that – No. You don't need meat for your health. A well balanced plant based whole foods diet is appropriate for anyone at any age. At least that's what more and more physicians are telling us these days. Have you seen Bill Clinton lately? He looks 20 years younger while living on plants! ;)

          I believe you're confusing what you think you need for health and what you desire for gustatory delight. One is very different than the other... I still contend that without the NECESSITY to take life, there is indeed senseless (sadistic) gratification from inflicting pain or abuse on others. Humane has a specific meaning... It is contrary to the methodical blood-letting that occurs in meat production. Sorry. :/

          August 7, 2013 at 7:23 pm |
        • Bill

          Killing is not sadistic in and of itself, unless one is doing it for fun. And quite frankley, the fish I've killed in my life..I did not take any pleasure in the act of cleaning the fish (reeling in the fish is a different story). But my friends and family would eat well from the fish I, and my friends, caught. Treat the animal well while it is alive and then kill it quickly. Don't make it suffer. You seriously need to get over yourself. You are clearly vegatarian and I have no problem with that. But don't forget that everything you consume means you have denied life to something...whether it's a plant or the seed or fruit of a plant wherein you are denying life to something that might have lived. Life feeds on life.

          August 8, 2013 at 12:37 pm |
        • Provoked

          But really the fishes in was fun – right? I know... I used to go deep sea fishing and can remember the thrill of the fight. Who ever was on the end of my line was putting up such a magnificant struggle for his/her life! But in the end if the steel hook was set just right either on his lip, in his gill or if he swallowed it line and all s/he was doomed! I remember watching them in the cooler of ice too... They'd flop and croak loudly... I guess they were gasping for their last breath. Not unlike we humans would do if we were drowning or had breathing issues. Ah yes, I remember those times well! I also remember using "life bait" and hooking those little "worthless" guys through the tail or through their eyes... Of course I always reassured myself that 1) They didn't feel pain and 2) I was king-predator and had a "right" to any life I could "catch", and 3) That all this was quite necessary because... Well – I had to eat right?

          There were a few things that didn't jive though... When I factored in the time and expense of gas, supplies, bait and equipment – Turns out I could have fed myself over again several times on plants! It was obvious too that a whole lot of life was "wasted" when I'd throw back a good portion of "sh*t fish"... The ones that weren't edible. And then there was the most dreaded realization of all! Fish indeed do feel pain. They suffer just like any other creature. It's amazing what science will reveal to us when we just look. But I really didn't want to know that part... That brought to surface a contradiction for me as a compassionate person. I'd never want anyone to suffer needlessly... But here I was causing it ... For fun.

          Once I realized that all animals suffer, that none of animal flesh was necessary to consume then I understood that eating fishes, or land mammals was indeed killing for pleasure: "We all agree that inflicting unnecessary suffering and death on sentient beings is morally wrong. We can argue about what "necessity" means, but if it means anything at all, it must mean that we cannot inflict suffering and death for reasons of pleasure, amusement, or convenience. But those are the only arguments that exist in favor of consuming animal products. No one maintains that eating animal products is necessary for human health (quite the contrary) and animal agriculture is still a significant ecological problem. The only justification that we have for inflicting pain, suffering, and death on 56 billion animals (not counting fish) is that they taste good and we enjoy eating them." – Prof. Gary L. Francione
          Simon the Sadist: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/media/links/p90/simon-the.pdf

          Finally I believe you need to clarify exactly what you mean by saying that eating tomatoes denies life to another. How so? If we did not breed billions of nonhumans just to eat... How would eating plants instead deny life to anyone? Indeed because of the wasted resources in fattening these animals we could actually feed about a billion more humans. If I choose not to eat animals that doesn't increase the starvation of anyone...

          August 8, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
        • Jdizzle McHammerpants ♫♫

          Jesus ate meat. Good enough for me.

          August 8, 2013 at 12:51 pm |
        • Provoked

          Oh I win! I win! I win! I had a bet on with a friend that sooner or later someone would reduce the subject to "gOd said we could" or "jesus ate meat". Hooray! I'm $5 bucks to the better!
          Seriously... You do realize that whatever was written in ancient texts were written by men – right? No one really knows for sure what was said or done... There's lots of versions of different bibles that promote human slavery, genocide, incest, and infanticide – But we don't base our ethical code on those teachings...

          Furthermore – Just a thought... There are also some who believe that Christ traveled with the Desert Fathers and they lived on flour cakes, olives and dates... The Essenes: http://www.essene.org/Ancient_Essenes.htm

          Some believe that the rage at the Temple stairs was because of the blood lust in selling animals to kill... Not in commerce itself.

          There are also those who believe that such a gentle man would never endorse the killing of the innocent beings that were created out of love.

          There are those who question if a merciful "gOd" wanted man to live from the flesh of other animals... Why would they have been created so much like us? And to suffer in the same way.

          And then there are those who like me, think it's possible that once there was a group of men who came upon a great idea to seize property and to make a profit from "herding" animals. They would go to the ruling king with this plan that involved "High Priests" to receive messages from "the" deity that sheep, lambs, rams, goats, fattened bulls or calves would have to be sacrificed and/or eaten on certain "holy" days. What a great way to insure personal wealth! The King would receive his taxes, the priests would maintain control over the populace and the compliant people would be assured that eating animals was all in "god's divine plan". Some of us have a difficult time believing in a god... But all of us can understand what motivates greed and gluttony.

          Forgive me for saying... But to use "Jesus" or God" as an excuse to kill innocent beings is almost blasphemous. And in the end – No one will betray their faith if they chose to be kind.

          August 8, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
  3. S-Man

    Yum!!!!!! Dead baby calf.

    August 7, 2013 at 11:15 am |
  4. Leslie

    I just watched the undercover video of the calves being cut up while ALIVE and started crying. It's a poor innocent little baby and it's scared. No animal should have to suffer like that :(

    August 7, 2013 at 8:19 am |
    • Thomas

      An that is my issue. I think many of us understand that humans will kill animals to eat. All I ask is that the animal not have to suffer while being killed. Animals used for food need to be killed as humanly as possible.

      That's all I am asking, and I don't think that is unreasonable.

      August 8, 2013 at 8:35 am |
  5. Provoked

    I dislike "veal" so much that I won't go anywhere near a dairy product. If you dislike the concept of veal... Of stealing babies from their mothers... Of killing barely weaned infants... Than you certainly don't want to support the dairy industry. Without the snuffing of millions of these beautiful, doe-eyed innocent beings the dairy industry wouldn't be profitable. I won't support this kind of industry that feeds of death. Not to mention that there's nothing nutritional in "veal" or in dairy that I can't find in an equally satisfying, healthy plant based alternative. Has anyone a clue where rennet in cheese comes from? http://blog.fooducate.com/2011/04/05/10-things-to-know-about-rennet-its-in-your-cheese/

    August 7, 2013 at 2:28 am |
    • sam stone

      it's the stomach lining of a cow

      August 7, 2013 at 4:35 am |
    • SixDegrees

      Anthropomophize much?

      August 7, 2013 at 8:13 am |
      • Provoked

        Actually since we in developed nations can thrive on plants, I'd have to ask you... Are you making a bunch of irrational, emotion based excuses in order to continue an unhealthy, destructive, violent, and unnecessary practice? If the only reason you have for eating calves or cows or other animals is "taste" then I'm afraid that's so.

        August 7, 2013 at 9:10 am |
        • SixDegrees

          We're omnivores. Deal with it.

          August 7, 2013 at 10:18 am |
        • Thomas

          Yes, we're omnivores. Ever think about why we are? There was a time in human history when food was scarce, and there were periods of severe scarcity. Eating both plants and meat was a survival tool. The animals we ate back then lived normal, natural lives. We now live in an era of abundance - but we cling to this diet that no longer makes sense for our health, the environment, and the well being of the creatures we so unnaturally mass-produce and eat.

          August 7, 2013 at 12:22 pm |
        • Jim

          So, you wish to reverse evolution and try to force "Darwin's hand" and make omnivores into vegans?

          August 7, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
        • Provoked

          I believe that once flesh consumption was a matter of survival. Indeed we lived off of carrion and insects... Not "veal" or "broiler chickens". My contention is that flesh consumption is no longer necessary in developed worlds. We are discovering that human health does not depend on animal based foods. Livestock is detrimental to the environment and wasteful on resources. It's not a matter of "if" we'll ever adapt to a plant based diet, or to "in vitro" meat, it's a matter of when. Fattening billions of farting, pooping, water/land/feed consuming creatures just to eat them is not sustainable.
          Darwin: Survival goes to he who adapts best. Humans ought to learn how to do so before we sink the whole earth-ship with our meat-lust.

          August 7, 2013 at 1:52 pm |
        • Thomas

          Omnivores don't need to be "made" into vegans - they can simply choose to be in this era of plenty. But I don't expect that to happen overnight. What could happen, and should happen, is to dramatically reduce the amount of meat consumption. And the meat consumed should be as naturally produced as possible, and in a way that is sustainable to our air, water and soil. That means it will be more expensive. But eaten less frequently, the extra cost doesn't matter. You would see a reduction in illness and disease, and thus health care costs. You would see dead zones in our waterways disappearing. You would see a reduced carbon footprint. You would see animals living something closer to the life they were meant to have. It's a world worth imagining and reaching for.

          August 7, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
        • Provoked

          Hi Thomas – That scenario is about as idealistic as envisioning a vegan world. I don't think the majority of people will ever opt for "humane" or "happy" meat if something cheaper is around. As long as people still eat animals there will always be a business that will provide such en mass, and it will be a continued race to the bottom. But this scenario would never be able to satisfy the growing/flesh-hungry population. It's not even sustainable at present. It's far too land, water and fossil fuel intensive. And even in the "ideal" situation a life that desperately wanted to live will be stolen. That's not the way to an evolved culture.

          But we are probably both wrong, you and I. The world won't recognize the value of life and leave animals off their plates. They also won't be generous with their dollars and opt for more expensive "cuts" of "less cruel" meat.I believe we will out-populate ourselves and consume so much of our resources that the only option for us will be the occasional fix of flesh via cultured meat. Perhaps it's better this way – There surely will be less death... Till then I shall continue to enjoy my kale and quinoa in a modest bowl. ;)

          August 7, 2013 at 7:04 pm |
        • Thomas

          And by the way - no, it would not be a reversal of evolution - but quite the opposite. It would be the next stage of our evolution.

          August 7, 2013 at 4:01 pm |
        • Provoked

          The next stage of our evolution is to acknowledge that we are all Earthlings. Each of us matters as much as the next. We all desire health and safety from harm. "We are all equal. The one counts as one; But not more than one." P Singer

          August 7, 2013 at 7:12 pm |
    • mattk

      You watch too many Disney movies

      August 7, 2013 at 8:21 am |
      • Provoked

        Disney has nothing to do with being reasonable or kind: And since we in developed nations can thrive on plants, I'd have to ask you... Are you making a bunch of irrational, emotion based excuses in order to continue an unhealthy, destructive, violent, and unnecessary practice? If the only reason you have for eating calves or cows or other animals is "taste" then I'm afraid that's so.

        August 7, 2013 at 9:11 am |
        • SixDegrees

          You're obviously overwrought.

          Probably due to a nutritional deficiency.

          August 7, 2013 at 10:35 am |
        • Provoked

          Or are you making a bunch of irrational, emotion based excuses in order to continue an unhealthy, destructive, violent, and unnecessary practice?

          August 7, 2013 at 11:21 am |
        • Lisa

          Vegetarians have to realize if the world went vegan, cattle, sheep, goat, chickens, pigs would more than likely all go extinct. They can't survive off a farm and who else is going to keep these animals. They aren't really pets.

          August 7, 2013 at 12:23 pm |
        • Provoked

          Chickens, goats, sheep and pigs (boars) live fine as "wild animals". In a few generations their genetics would revert to what they once were. Same with "domestic" bovines. Even *if* they went "extinct" think of all the other wildlife we'd no longer have to kill in order to "protect" livestock... And since the only farmed animal that is procreating naturally is the chicken... I doubt we'd have any overpopulation issues. 99% of all "meat animals" are artificially inseminated anyway. In no time we wouldn't have to worry about what's to become of them if we simply stopped breeding them.

          August 7, 2013 at 1:00 pm |
        • sylgui

          Genes do not just revert back to some original state, whatever that may mean. Specific genes are bred into livestock populations, regulating anything from growth/development to hide color to reproductive and social behaviors. If these populations were released into the wild they could very well survive, depending on the species. But to say genes can simply change back to what they once were is udderly (had to do it) scientifically inaccurate. The only way those types of genes from a wild ancestor could pop up again is if they were reintroduced into that population. Of course this is predicated on the notion that wild ancestors of various species of livestock (or similar species that can successfully reproduce) still exist.

          August 11, 2013 at 3:56 am |
        • Provoked

          That's true. For the sake of brevity I condenses the scenario that genetically modified species would mate and breed with their counterparts and the man-made, altered offspring would eventually take on the traits of the original species. For example a Duroc sow who who escaped domestication could mate with a boar and the original dominant traits would eventually surface. The model made through "husbandry" would not. Same goes for chickens... If "broiler" hens were to mate with a "mixed breed" roosters... Eventually all the chicks would no longer be "Cornish Crosses". That is just two examples of animals that could still probably exist without human intervention.

          August 11, 2013 at 10:23 am |
        • Provoked

          Sorry, should be "condensed".

          August 11, 2013 at 10:24 am |
  6. fitz

    Good article, plenty of other meats available in the world, besides baby animals!

    August 6, 2013 at 8:43 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Uh – did you actually bother to read it? The article spends the bulk of its content promoting different ways to produce veal in a manner more acceptable to consumers.

      August 7, 2013 at 8:14 am |
    • JonnVonn

      Uh.. baby animals grow up into adult animals, which are slaughtered for sale. If you eat beef, then why wouldn't you eat (pasture-raised) veal - because it's not old enough to kill?

      August 7, 2013 at 9:17 am |
    • Martin Nelson

      ever try lamb?

      August 7, 2013 at 11:15 am |
  7. heroicslugtest

    I don't mind veal at all, but unfortunately its usually paired with marinara sauce for some gods awful reason. It's been a while since I've had it though, so thanks for the dinner suggestion.

    August 6, 2013 at 7:52 pm |
    • ORChuck

      Do a simple brown butter sauce with a few capers, some thyme. It'll be great.

      August 6, 2013 at 8:19 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Veal, like tenderloin, is pretty bland. Tender, but not much in the way of taste. Hence the sauce, although you're certainly not limited to marinara.

      August 7, 2013 at 10:20 am |
  8. bigfanx

    From the article: We often use the tagline ‘this isn’t your grandmother’s veal’ as we’re marketing the product,” Webb said. “It’s not fair for anything to be locked up in a dark space, unable to turn around. ... Food without a conscience is a sad, sad reality."

    About time the veal story got more air time.

    Anybody want to talk about chickens, particularly laying hens? Do you know how the bird is housed that lays the eggs you buy? Know what happens to to the male chicks?

    The issues humans create when raising food animals are important, animals should not suffer, should not be deliberately denied food or water, should be provided safe structures to accomodate animals comfortable, deliberate over-crowding to 'save expenses' should be prosecuted.

    Be the most humane consumer you can be, be a vegetarian.

    August 6, 2013 at 7:42 pm |
  9. ORChuck

    The only problem I have with veal is its high cost. It's very expensive.

    August 6, 2013 at 7:38 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      That's always been true, as noted in the article. You're harvesting long before the animal reaches full yield, and the cost reflects that.

      August 7, 2013 at 8:16 am |
  10. Thinking things through

    I will occasionally eat veal... but only if I KNOW the farm it was raised on.

    August 6, 2013 at 7:30 pm |
  11. J. Jay

    "The more innocent the victim, the greater the crime."

    August 6, 2013 at 7:08 pm |
  12. Ann

    It appears to me that a lot of people are not very well informed about the factory farming industry. What humans have been doing is enslaving these innocent animals just for our taste buds. I have been first a vegetarian and now vegan and couldn't be happier. I have no need for meat, eggs or dairy in my life. When I was eating animal products, I constantly visited the doctors, now I have no reason to visit a clinic. If people can see what is being done to these innocent beings that feel pain, fear and sorrow, and understand the effects of eating animal products on the human body, maybe, then maybe they will stop. What about the effects on the environment? Each person should do their own research and leave selfishness behind and believe it or not, anyone can survive on fruits, vegetables and grains. US suffers with so much obesity, cancers, diabetes....why? because we love eating MEAT! Just like humans deserve to live free, free from pain and suffering, so do the animals. We are all animals!

    August 6, 2013 at 7:05 pm |
    • ORChuck

      There can be no doubt that the human body is physically, metabolically, and physiologically adapted to be omnivorous and to include meat in its diet. It's only very recently that a vegan diet is even possible in much of the world.

      August 6, 2013 at 7:42 pm |
      • Avi

        It is not about being capable of digesting a omnivorous diet. If you can survive on plant based food and are intelligent enough, why not avoid the suffering to other animals ?

        August 7, 2013 at 12:03 pm |
    • Thinking things through

      I am very much informed about the factory farm industry. I also know that I am an omnivore. So, I eat responsibly farmed veggies and meats. Especially lots of veggies, but the responsible members of the other food groups, too.

      August 6, 2013 at 9:14 pm |
    • BeerBrewerDan

      I'll match your anecdotal evidence with mine: I am an omnivore; I eat all sorts of cheeses, pasteurized or not; I eat all sorts of meats, sometimes cooked medium rare; I eat fish and shellfish by the bucketload; I eats eggs and drink lots of milk.

      My last visit to the doctor, in the summer of 2012, was to get a health checkpoint thing done for my employer (to reduce costs) and my next visit will be in 3 weeks to do the same thing for this year. Prior to the previous visit the last time I went was for a checkup on a bunion.

      August 7, 2013 at 12:03 pm |
  13. snowboarder

    animals raised for slaughter should not suffer unnecessarily. other than that, have at it.

    August 6, 2013 at 6:45 pm |
  14. Lila

    Skinning baby animals alive? I'm not a big meat eater anyway. Baby animals have the least appeal.

    August 6, 2013 at 6:42 pm |
    • George

      If it makes you feel any better they are clinically braindead from the bolt being shot into their head.

      September 28, 2013 at 8:23 pm |
  15. cody

    This seems like an utterly pointless article. It seems straight forward to understand why people would object to eating a child of any species over a developed adult. If i punched a man my age in the face I might get in a little bit trouble but no would realy care. If i was seen punching a baby in the face I'd be an utter pariah. Obviously the treatment of children and babies in our country is extremely different than the acceptible treatment of adults.

    August 6, 2013 at 6:37 pm |
    • Avi

      Your country ??? There is a world outside your country too

      August 7, 2013 at 12:06 pm |
  16. Bob

    What I fail to see mentioned here is the fact that cattle,ALL cattle, are domesticated animals that would not exist in the wild . they would not exist at all except for the genetic breeding programs that humans have subjected them to. They were domesticated from wild bovines that are now extinct. If all cattle died off from some mysterious disease we would not be able to reproduce them again because the original stock is gone. So...to put it bluntly, cattle have been bred to be nothing other than meat or milk. can we treat them better before eating them? of course...should we? ........why if they are raised solely to be killed anyway.... you decide.

    August 6, 2013 at 5:51 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Because, if for no other reason, treating them cruelly reflects poorly on us. Inflicting pointless suffering on animals – especially those who, as you note, exist entirely for our own sake, and are completely dependent on us for all of their needs – bespeaks a deformed humanity, or a complete lack of it.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:56 pm |
      • Another thought

        Well said!

        August 6, 2013 at 6:33 pm |
      • Beth

        Exactly!

        August 6, 2013 at 7:02 pm |
      • righton

        Spot on.

        August 6, 2013 at 7:19 pm |
      • Kansas Farmer

        Probably the most brilliantly written and perfectly reasonable online comment I've ever read.

        August 6, 2013 at 7:21 pm |
    • Mae

      Bob,
      Treating animal with cruelty is one of the major indicators of sociopathy and psychopathy. So for you to say what you said tells me a lot about YOU !!!
      Cows are very intelligent and social animals. You just haven't seen them being free. I have and they are very family oriented and travel with their family just like elephants. Regardless, if all the cows ceased to exist, it is not a big deal for the cows. Not being born is not the worst thing in the world....being born and suffering horrible cruelty and isolation daily and then being murdered IS one of the worst things in the world.

      August 6, 2013 at 9:14 pm |
    • M3NTA7

      I decide – YES – We should have great respect of that which we kill to eat.

      August 7, 2013 at 12:57 pm |
  17. Maureen

    Went to my first livestock/agricultural fair over 45 years ago. Due to the trauma of seeing first hand how the animals are treated. I have never even tasted veal. I also no longer eat hooved animals of any kind..I am in insanely great health for my age...not just the cruelty, read up on what they are pumping into the animals now...there is a reason Bush just needed to get a stent...

    August 6, 2013 at 5:44 pm |
  18. Ricky

    I grew up in Argentina and my parents were farmers/ranchers. We never raise calves in crates and our meat was always excellent. Factory farming might be more profitable, but it is a horrible way to treat animals, and the meat does not taste as good as when the animals are raised using traditional methods.

    I'm always willing to pay more for grass fed meat.

    August 6, 2013 at 5:41 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Were you raising veal? If so, how?

      I also prefer grass-fed beef, which is becoming easier to find nowadays.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:45 pm |
  19. Ed

    I used to make fun of vegans/vegetarians until I saw the abuse videos. I can't bring myself to say goodbye to meat but I don't make fun of vegans/vegetarians anymore.

    I haven't have veal since seeing those videos. I don't miss it, not even a little bit.

    August 6, 2013 at 5:30 pm |
    • Mae

      Ed,
      Thank you for the vegan comment. It is hard. I grew up veg but ate milk and eggs till I saw the videos. I admit, I have weak moments for cheese shamefully. With eggs, I don't touch them unless I go to a farm where chickens are free and not gonna be slaughtered,,,then I buy those eggs.

      Hope you get the strength to go vegan....actually you might try looking in to eating raw foods...I find when I eat whole raw vegan foods, I don't crave junk....

      August 6, 2013 at 9:18 pm |
  20. Mich

    These beautiful creatures, no matter how they are raised or killed, are not for us to eat. They feel pain and fear. So much else to eat on the earth.

    August 6, 2013 at 5:19 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      They most certainly are for us to eat. We're omnivores, and meat has played an important role in our diet for millions of years.

      You may choose NOT to eat them, but that's your choice – not a fact of nature.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:21 pm |
      • My10Cents

        Hey Bob, Being an "omnivore" doesn't mean that you have to eat veal. However, since your consumption habits are probably like very much like another common omnivore, the Pig, I won't waste my words trying to convince you that raising veal is cruel, especially when done using factory farming techniques. So, I'll just let you go on your piggy ways and hope that the there will enough enlightened people out there to turn the tide on this cruel industry.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:53 pm |
    • ORChuck

      If they're not for us to eat, then what else are they for? Left to their own devices in the wild, they will be extinct very quickly because they are no longer adapted to wild living.

      August 6, 2013 at 7:45 pm |
      • clonmac

        The whole "they would be extict otherwise" argument is such a tired one. People give that excuse just to help them sleep at night. Even if they would become extinct, what justifies us enslaving and torturing them instead? I suggest you youtube some factory farming videos to see some of the cruelty for your own eyes and then come back and say that a natural life, even if into extinction, isn't the better option for these poor animals.

        August 6, 2013 at 7:51 pm |
        • ORChuck

          Wow, you refute my argument not based on fact but because you consider it "tired."

          Well, I'm tired of gravity too.

          August 6, 2013 at 8:23 pm |
        • clonmac

          How is your argument (that they'd become extict) any more or less based on fact than me saying they wouldn't become extinct. On top of that, I presented a more philosophical approach that you blatantly ignored. One that pressed you to actually see the facts for your own eyes (watch the videos freely available on the internet) and then let us know which end is better. It was a moral question proposed to you based on the facts today that you ignored. I'm sorry you're tired of gravity.

          August 6, 2013 at 8:29 pm |
      • Mae

        Or Chuck,
        THey SHOULD go extinct. They were unnatural to begin with...just like pets. All animals need to be in their natural setting WITH THEIR FAMILIES doing what nature designed them to do....Cows, pigs, chickens, turkeys, goats, sheep,etc are all designed by MAN and as such SHOULD end their existence.

        Man needs to do what Man was designed to do...eat a plant based diet....

        ORChuck, not being born may be the best thing for many existences on this earth...vs suffering horribly on a daily basis and then killed....

        August 6, 2013 at 9:24 pm |
        • That Bald Dude

          Man was not meant to eat a plant based diet. Primates evolved as they did to be opportunistic feeders, eating plants or meat as they could catch them. Watch what primates do in the wild and you'll see they don't eat plants all the time. You're projecting your own views and wishes on a history that doesn't support them.

          August 7, 2013 at 12:34 pm |
  21. Animal

    When I hunt deer I don't take fawns or does with a fawn. That's just the way it's done. I don't need to eat calves.

    August 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      It may be the way it's done in your area, but around here you can get doe permits without any problem. We have an over-abundance of deer – too many for the land to support during winters with heavy snowfall – and culling the herd by removing does is an excellent management technique.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:19 pm |
      • Mae

        Hmmmm " there is an over-abundance of deer" ?? Don't you mean an over-abundance of MAN on that territory.

        Cracks me up when an invading element calls the indigenous element 'terrorist" and 'over-abundant' and such words like THEY are in the wrong.... MAN is in the wrong.

        August 6, 2013 at 9:30 pm |
        • SixDegrees

          No; I mean exactly what I said: there's an over-abundance of deer. Around here, the deer herd has been managed to surplus by the DNR for decades, because deer hunting is a huge economic driver in the state. Without hunting, huge numbers of deer would simply starve during the winter – although that particular problem would correct itself within a couple of years. But the fact is that there are, deliberately, more deer than the environment here would ever support naturally.

          August 7, 2013 at 10:25 am |
        • Provoked

          There are a multitude of nonlethal deer management strategies. I'm also quite skeptical of any system that would deliberately create problems so that profitable killing is made a viable solution. I'm referring to the more than 7,800 deer farms that operate in the U.S. The fact of the matter is that either deer are not "overpopulated" and therefore we should stop snuffing them out. OR indeed there is a "surplus" and we ought to stop breeding them. Map of breeding farms from the North American Deer Farming Association (page 7): http://www.afpc.tamu.edu/pubs/2/480/rr-2007-04.pdf

          It is unnecessary violence and killing – Perhaps you can justify these atrocities in the name of financial gain – But many of us find that rationalization depraved.

          August 7, 2013 at 11:32 am |
        • Ann

          Well, Mae, they don't give out hunting permits to get rid of all those excess humans. Sorry to disappoint you.

          There are most certainly an overabundance of deer in many areas, simply because there are so few of the large carnivores left. That, yes, is due to human influence, but it doesn't change the problem. Without predators, the balance is thrown off. Deer then come closer in toward human residential areas, to eat our gardens (lost all my peas recently – they got through my fence) and to get hit by cars.

          I'm not a hunter myself (don't much care for venison) but I have no problem with people hunting for food.

          August 9, 2013 at 11:55 am |
        • Provoked

          There are a multitude of nonlethal deer management strategies. I'm also quite

          skeptical of any system that would deliberately create problems so that profitable

          killing is made a viable solution. I'm referring to the more than 7,800 deer farms

          that operate in the U.S. The fact of the matter is that either deer are not

          "overpopulated" and therefore we should stop snuffing them out. OR indeed

          there is a "surplus" and we ought to stop breeding them. Map of breeding farms

          from the North American Deer Farming Association (page 7):

          http://www.afpc.tamu.edu/pubs/2/480/rr-2007-04.pdf

          It is unnecessary violence and killing – Perhaps you can justify these atrocities in

          the name of financial gain – But many of us find that rationalization depraved.

          August 9, 2013 at 6:32 pm |
    • Snow

      .. but would as quickly shoot the fawn's mother right beside it. Doesn't make you much better at this morality thing, bo!

      August 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm |
      • SixDegrees

        Uh – no. Around here, fawn are born between mid-May to mid-June, and are weaned by the time they are 10 weeks old, by mid-September at the latest. At that point, there are completely independent. Hunting season doesn't open until mid-November.

        If you're going to oppose something, it's best to understand it first.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:30 pm |
  22. Steve

    I grew up around veal producers in Iowa and I won't touch veal now. On a hot summer day when the temps reach 100 degrees, it can be 120 in those veal crates. You can be charged with animal abuse if you leave a dog in a hot car. It's no less cruel to calves. If someone orders veal in my presence, I feel compelled to say "I haven't had veal in over 20 years. I used to love it until I realized how it was raised." I'm proud to have turned dozens of people against veal.

    August 6, 2013 at 5:06 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Quite honestly, humiliating public antagonism like that does far more harm than good if your goal is to reduce veal consumption. My guess is, for every person you've "turned", if any, you've probably driven three or four others into a position where they simply decide you're an a hole and dig in their heels. That sort of bullying is not an effective way to promote anything other than to stroke your own self-righteousness.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
      • Steve

        I don't humiliate them and I don't judge them. I just explain why I no longer eat veal. Works like a charm.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm |
        • SixDegrees

          Yes, you humiliate them. Not recognizing or acknowledging that's what you're doing certainly doesn't help, either.

          August 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm |
        • a

          By going up and making your proclamations, you are judging by default

          August 6, 2013 at 5:25 pm |
        • uh..

          neither humiliating nor judgement.. merely stating the facts.. if you feel the facts make you feel humiliated, that means the problem is YOU.

          August 6, 2013 at 5:28 pm |
        • fyre

          I agree with you about veal, but going up to someone and giving your opinion unasked is completely rude and offputting.

          August 7, 2013 at 10:09 pm |
      • Mich

        All people have to do is see the video.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:20 pm |
  23. Cynthia

    I'm too hedonistic to eat meat – I like being a size 4 and having people mistake me for early 40's when I'm turning 55 in a few days. :) Besides, when I did eat it, I liked it barely cooked. That's too dangerous nowadays.

    August 6, 2013 at 4:55 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      The only danger you're likely to encounter with meat is surface contamination, and the direct heat the exterior of a steak or roast is exposed to will make short work of any bacteria residing there.

      The problem arises much more so with ground meat, which is pretty much ALL surface area. Although the outside of a burger will be sterilized by the heat, a rare interior won't be, and there's a chance that what was once part of the outside is now inside, where heat can't reach.

      As for aging, your anecdotal example of size one isn't compelling, and offers no control for comparison.

      August 6, 2013 at 4:59 pm |
    • Sahari

      Does hedonistic include prideful and vain? No matter. I have to agree with your post. You are very hedonistic.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
      • True Dat

        I think the word you are looking for is "Narcissistic"...

        August 6, 2013 at 5:31 pm |
    • ORChuck

      Cynthia,

      I doubt that you're a hedonist. According to dictionary.com, hedonism is: Pursuit of or devotion to pleasure, especially to the pleasures of the senses. A hedonist, in fact, is someone who would say that the sensual enjoyment he/she derives from eating veal - or any other food - is all that matters and there is no need to be at all concerned about how or where the food came from.

      What you are - someone who denies themselves the hedonistic pleasure of eating in deference to one's cosmetic appearance and body-image - is what is called vain.

      August 6, 2013 at 7:51 pm |
  24. cbtx67

    I don't think anybody should eat meat unless they go and kill it themselves. If you got the b a lls to kill and eat something, then you deserve it. It's easy to say yum its tasty etc when you arn't involved in the process. I have had a farm, I had chickens, no didn't eat them, ate the eggs, which obviously were not fertilized. Cows were for milk and to get the tax break. I may not like Zuckerberg, but he has the right idea on meat.

    August 6, 2013 at 4:54 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      A silly argument. A cow can yield around 500 pounds of usable meat – enough to feed dozens, even hundreds, of people. It only takes one person to slaughter it. Are you seriously suggesting that a huge crowd take part in each slaughter? What are you proposing – a trampling session?

      It may be educational to kill at least a few animals you intend to eat, but insisting that you kill everything you eat, personally, is simply ridiculous.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:03 pm |
      • clonmac

        People are starving around the world because of America's love of meat. It takes 10lbs of food to produce 1lb of meat. we could feed millions of starving people around the world with the food that gets fed to livestock. It is an inefficient food system that is unsustainable.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:09 pm |
        • SixDegrees

          You have entirely missed the point. Read my post again, slowly this time. Maybe get an adult to help you out with the bigger words if you need it.

          August 6, 2013 at 5:13 pm |
        • Animal

          Livestock aren't feed the same as food for human consumption. Horses and cattle eat straw, grass and hay with some feed corn thrown in. Chickens are fed a version of bird food. None of these are considered suitable for human consumption. That's why it's fed to animals.

          August 6, 2013 at 5:17 pm |
        • clonmac

          @SixDegrees – I totally understood your point. But your point was based on the falsity that raising cattle for beef feeds many. The truth is that raising beef starves many and is a negative output system for creating food.

          @Animal – You are missing the point that all that food still had to have been farmed. Therefore instead of all that farm land, labor, etc going toward creating food to be used for raising a little bit of animal meat, it instead could go straight to millions of starving humans for consumption. Our desire to eat meat, thus starves many. Secondly, bovine are not designed to digest corn and other grains that they're fed today and is the root of where e-coli comes from. They need to eat grass and when fed a grass diet they shed e-coli from their systems.

          August 6, 2013 at 5:42 pm |
        • Snow

          @six.. he may have "missed the point" about your post.. but his point is more valid than your drivel and love for meat

          August 6, 2013 at 5:19 pm |
        • Me

          That has to be the worst argument so far, guess what, the 10lb of food that the animal eats for every 1lb of meat is NOT food that a human can eat. You know like grass..... LOL

          August 6, 2013 at 6:27 pm |
        • Me

          Also what are your sources? I find that hard to believe because grass and straw is pretty easy to grow and does not require much man power!!! In fact many ranchers does even have to feed their animals in the summer they are put on public land to run free and eat what is growing naturally, at least that is what they do here where I live. I think your numbers are bias and not accurate!

          August 6, 2013 at 6:34 pm |
        • clonmac

          @Me – The vast majority of cattle in our food system (which are on factory farms) are not fed grass. They're fed corn and grains that come from our own agriculture industry. The figures come from the agriculture industry itself. Beefusa.org

          August 6, 2013 at 8:00 pm |
    • Me

      I have killed many animals myself and eaten them, I also eat meat that I do not kill from the grocery store. Didn't change a thing meat is meat, no difference! Oh and I had to clean the animals myself, still didn't change a thing.

      August 6, 2013 at 6:24 pm |
    • ORChuck

      And I don't think that anyone should use a computer that they didn't design, build, and program themselves... or drive a car that they didn't design and build themselves... or live in a house they didn't design and build themselves. Ridiculous? Of course. We all use our time and talents and energies to do the things we do best and then we meet in a market place to exchange our products to mutual benefit. Some make computers. Some build houses. Some produce food. We all do what we do best. And, together, we make a nice society.

      August 6, 2013 at 7:55 pm |
      • clonmac

        You missed his point. His point wasn't that people wouldn't be capable of raising animals for meat due lack of skill set. His argument was that most people would morally object to what is necessary to raise animals on a scale large enough to feed today's society. If people were forced to make those moral decisions (to use gestation crates, to slit the throat of a living conscious animal, etc) many people would simply choose to eat a plant. Your analogy to other specialized careers today lacks the moral dilemma that is present is killing animals for food.

        August 6, 2013 at 8:23 pm |
        • Mae

          Clonmac,

          Yay to you for being so composed and lucid in your replies....GREAT MINDS ENCOUNTER VIOLENT OPPOSITION FROM MEDIOCRE MINDS -- ALbert Einstein (a vegetarian also)

          August 6, 2013 at 9:34 pm |
        • Mae

          Clonmac,

          Keep it up !!! xxxx

          August 6, 2013 at 9:35 pm |
    • Vladt

      And we can safely assume you do all of your farming, right? None of your fruits and vegetables were taken from other farms or sources, right? If not, then your point is moot. Plants are alive, I am pretty sure, but you are paying a farmer to bring you those sources of life.

      August 7, 2013 at 6:02 am |
      • Provoked

        No credible scientist, biologist, naturalist or horticulturalist will vouch for plant sentience. They have no central nervous systems. No pain receptors. They cannot "suffer" or we'd be in tears of guilt when we trimmed our bushes or cut the grass. Never saw a label that read "humane" carrots. The conflict is not in how we consume plants for critical survival but rather how we frivolously kill sentient animal life merely for gluttony.

        “There is nothing so likely to evoke a sudden passionate concern for plants than a proposal that someone not eat animal products or a desire to return to eating them. Nothing.” – Gary Francione

        August 7, 2013 at 9:53 am |
  25. ForHealthandFuture

    Simple solution: Go Vegan :)

    August 6, 2013 at 4:47 pm |
    • EuphoriCrest

      Exactly. An intelligent, humane and healthy solution.

      August 6, 2013 at 4:59 pm |
    • clonmac

      America needs more vegans. I went vegan 2 years ago and I'll never go back to eating meat. Although, I must say I am a strong believer in small changes on a grand scale yielding amazing results. Therefore there is no reason why everyone can't take part in a "Meatless Monday" diet. If that happened, then it would be like suddenly 1/7 of America is 100% vegan.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:03 pm |
      • SixDegrees

        More evidence that it doesn't take much in the way of brains to hunt grass.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:04 pm |
        • EuphoriCrest

          More evidence it doesn't brains to leave you double wide to go to the corner and pick up 3 pounds of plastic wrapped ground chuck.

          August 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm |
        • ForHealthandFuture

          @Six, why so hostile towards veganism?

          August 6, 2013 at 5:35 pm |
    • Mich

      I wish everyone would realize the health issues going vegan. Although my reason is humane.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:23 pm |
    • True Dat

      If you really wish to save the planet, why not just kill yourself and be done with it all?

      August 6, 2013 at 5:34 pm |
  26. El Flaco

    If there is a God, people who eat veal will surely go to hell.

    August 6, 2013 at 4:43 pm |
    • Brenda

      Not according to the Bible.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:02 pm |
    • Everette Little

      I pray they will go to Hell !

      August 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
    • EuphoriCrest

      I hope god is a cow.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
      • Mae

        Ohh hehehehehehe !!! SO DO I !!!!! Funny that the ten commandments movie showed as blasphemy the jews worshipping the big GOLD COW !!! That's the image that came to my mind when you said that !!! hehehehehehe !!!

        August 6, 2013 at 9:38 pm |
  27. Meat is Yummy

    For meats I will eat chicken, pig, cow and fish, and their babies too. However that doesn't mean they need to be treated cruely before the slaughter, and the slaughter should be real quick.

    August 6, 2013 at 4:22 pm |
    • Marie

      Actually, I tend to agree with out. While I do not give a hoot about animal rights in general and think that PETA needs to go away and worry about real problems....no need to ski the animal alive.

      That being said, if I am honest, I do not check on where my meat comes from or how it is slaughtered. It is not something that I care enough about to make it one of the fights I am going to pick.

      Beside, I love fois gras. It is FANTASTIC. And no one can say that is humane. So why be hypocritical?

      August 6, 2013 at 4:48 pm |
      • SixDegrees

        Agree that foie gras is delicious. As far as being inhumane – not so much. People go by appearances, and visualize what would happen if someone stuck a funnel down their throat, but this isn't an accurate perception because fowl don't have a gag reflex. I really don't have any problems with the practice.

        August 6, 2013 at 4:56 pm |
      • cbtx67

        Regular eggs are from chickens that are confined in small cages, beaks are removed so they don't harm their fellow cell/cage mates. Eggs are often laid on the corpses of the dead cell mates. All that cortisol running through them from stress...wonders what that does to our body, why we have an increase in cancer....I only buy cage free eggs now that I don't have my farm anymore. I don't understand the obsession with meat...sure eat it, but why have a cow when a vegetarian day is offered? Germany is having fits over a proposed vegetarian day......must be like c r ack or something.

        August 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm |
      • Mich

        You're a sad one.

        August 6, 2013 at 5:24 pm |
    • Snow

      how does it matter when you kill it anyway.. aka forcibly, willfully stopping the living organism's continued existence for your pleasure?

      August 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm |
  28. jagl

    Why is it such a big deal to eat veal (baby cow) but have never heard people carry on about eating lamb (baby sheep)?

    August 6, 2013 at 3:59 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      It's largely the treatment, not the age. Lamb aren't separated from their mothers at birth and aren't confined the way calves are in traditional veal production. Lamb is also slaughtered at a considerably older age; sheep up to 12 months old are considered lamb, and are typically left until close to that age to maximize yield, while calves, as noted in the article, are typically slaughtered at 8 to 12 weeks.

      But mainly it's the treatment that is the differentiator.

      August 6, 2013 at 4:04 pm |
    • Ann

      Good question, and good answer.

      August 9, 2013 at 11:45 am |
  29. Boo

    Look at that face...won't eat it....would rather have it as a pet.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Go ahead. You get to clean up after it.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
      • Marie

        LOL!!!

        August 6, 2013 at 4:44 pm |
  30. cj

    While I don't at all agree with skinning animals alive or any other unnecessary form of abuse...I also eat and enjoy meat...veal included. Maybe if the gov spend more time monitoring business than monitoring our phones this would not be an issue.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:49 pm |
  31. Dude

    I'm not interested in eating veal because it's a BABY ANIMAL. God, at least let the animal live to adulthood before you slaughter it.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:47 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      How do you feel about lamb?

      Or eggs?

      August 6, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
      • cj

        Eggs must be the cruelest...taking away the chickens hope of a baby!...or are they just animals?

        August 6, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
        • RealVoiceOfReason

          Oh and baby Corn!

          August 6, 2013 at 4:07 pm |
        • Galumbits

          I don't eat veal or lamb and eggs...uh, please tell me you're kidding about that. Eggs are produced whether they're fertilized or not. Chickens who produce eggs are not impregnated and then their offspring killed before they mature, they just make eggs. If you're trying to replicate chickens, you get a rooster and through the magic of nature little chickens are made. If you don't want to make more chickens, you can just not get a rooster but you'd still get eggs.

          August 6, 2013 at 4:11 pm |
        • Rl

          What do the Pro-Lifers say about not allowing a chicken egg to be born (hatched) We know they don't care about humans after birth, so why should they care about cows, sheep, pigs. But what about the poor unborn egg? Yes this is scaracistic and cynical.

          August 6, 2013 at 7:00 pm |
      • Jason

        I heard a lot of supermarket eggs are unfertilized though you can find fertilized ones occasionally.

        August 6, 2013 at 4:42 pm |
        • Chicken Spice

          That's true. Typically, egg-packing companies will "candle" eggs by holding a bright light up to them. I have done this myself, and let me tell you, it is wonderful to see the tiny beating heart of a baby chicken in the egg. Try that the next time you find a fertilized egg.

          September 24, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
    • Ann

      I don't eat veal either, but I think that's a ridiculous argument. Calves don't have any hopes and aspirations for what they'd like to accomplish in life. They have no sense of age at all. Therefore I don't think their age matters.

      It's the way they're treated. Morally, I don't have any problem with eating animals, though I respect those who disagree. However, they should be raised and killed in the most humane way possible.

      August 9, 2013 at 11:44 am |
  32. Clown

    Cow.... eat mor chiken.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:46 pm |
    • RC

      Clowns taste funny.....sorry-couldn't resist.

      August 6, 2013 at 7:19 pm |
  33. Simba

    Lions eat veal. Remember the circle of life? It is normal for animals to eat smaller animals and they dont discriminate on the basis of age

    We are just big animals

    August 6, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Also, calves are slow.

      So are elderly cows. Which are also flavorful. Unlike veal, which is tender but bland.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:53 pm |
    • clonmac

      Lions don't crate animals, raise them only to slaughtered by the billions, torture them their own lives, starve them, and rob them of their ability to take part in all their natural habits. Making a claim at a lion's means of survival by eating another animal doesn't justify the things we do to farmed animals. Period. No excuse for it.

      August 6, 2013 at 4:59 pm |
  34. Cinman

    Veal hot dogs are great too! Yum.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:40 pm |
  35. ed dugan

    I used to have a cattle farm and think most of these comments are slightly less than stupid. Meat is meat and, in a world where children starve and are mistreated every day I can't get over these bleeding hearts crying over animals.If you don't want to eat anyhting that lives I couldn't care less, just shut up about it or join those crazies at peta.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
    • Jeff

      While I agree with you that it is indeed horrific that children are starved and mistreated all over the world every day, I fail to see your argument that because of that we shouldn't do what can to insure the meat we eat is treated humanely before it is slaughtered. Yes, "meat is meat," but that kind of mentality does nothing but show the detached heart of someone who clearly doesn't mind if an animal is skinned alive or otherwise unnecessarily suffers for no reason, which, in my opinion, if we could get rid of that sort of mentality about human life (or any other lives in general), maybe we wouldn't live in such a horrible world where children and animals are mistreated. In your words, "meat is meat," but guess what? Compassion is compassion. Regardless of who or what it is directed to.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • Marie

      Amen

      If you are willing to eat a cow or a chicken then what is the difference? Either way they are raised to be our dinner. Besides, I cannot care about animal rights when there are so many human problems.

      I do not care if you are a vegetarian. – just do not preach to me about it.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
      • brad

        Just because there are "other" problems is not a license to look the other way. You can be a meat eater all you want – but if you are clueless as to how it arrives at your table – then I guess I'm wasting my time.

        August 6, 2013 at 4:24 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      That's fine, up to a point. There's no need, however, for cruelty such as confinement or other mistreatment. The animals we eat should be given the respect they deserve for giving their lives up for us. Treating them humanely is being a good steward.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
    • MashaSobaka

      Oh, pull your head out of your rectum. There is a big difference between meat that is tortured and mistreated before it is slaughtered and meat that is given a good life before ending up on my plate, and I am not going to give my money to farmers who can't even manage to pasture their stock or make sure it's dead before skinning and gutting it. If your methods are that pathetic then I'm not funding your operation. And unless you're actually doing something to help those children who are being mistreated, keep them the f*** out of your argument. Few things anger me than someone who harps about humans who are mistreated in an attempt to get people to stop advocating against other abuses and then does NOTHING to solve humans' problems either. Your inability to view the world in anything but black and white is your business. I will continue to take a more nuanced approach to a very nuanced reality. Don't like it? I could not care less, and I am not sorry.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:04 pm |
      • Everette Little

        Go kill yourself ,please !

        August 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm |
    • Mich

      Ed - Look at the video and tell me you don't care.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:26 pm |
  36. doughnuts

    “I think using animals for food is an ethical thing to do, but we've got to do it right. We've got to give those animals a decent life and we've got to give them a painless death. We owe the animal respect.” - Temple Grandin

    In the case of veal or lamb, that life may be short, but it doesn't have to be unpleasant or painful.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:36 pm |
    • Veal Oppositionista

      Meat is MOOder!

      August 6, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
    • P. Floyd

      How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?

      August 6, 2013 at 4:20 pm |
  37. Madi L.

    Agree with the anti veal comments above, but most of all, to deliberately deprive a baby animal of it's mother, and the mother it's baby is inhumane! In 6 months the cattle are grown enough for weaning, can't we wait that long for it to live just a bit? Seems ridiculous just for perceived food value, tenderness and pale meat. We are mammals and we should understand just how wrong that is, to break that intense mothering bond just for pale meat and to free the cow up for insemination and milk production. They should show the constant calling once separated, the displacement behaviors or the baby cattle trying to be nurtured by suckling on other calves, horrific! Or worse, isolation and deprivation in a tiny crate or corral. Saw a show on eating fetal animals (goats and sheep) as a prized tenderness food and traditional meal in Asia, is that next? Fetus must be much tenderer and pale then calf meat? That is the argument for the gourmets.....fetal parmesan anyone?

    August 6, 2013 at 3:27 pm |
    • jagl

      It's not perceived paleness and tenderness – it totally makes a difference in the tenderness and flavor of the meat whether the calf is killed at a few months or almost a year. Animals are not people, they don't get the idea of tender time spent with their mother – and they don't know they are missing it if they are removed from their mother w/in a week of birth.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
      • really...

        How do you know that animals "don't get the idea of tender time spent with their mother", or "don't know they are missing it if they are removed from their mother w/in a week of birth?" Have you personally done research into animal sentience? Have you interviewed animals in our food chain to find out how they feel about it? Or are you just speculating with an assumption based upon your perception that humans are the dominante life force on the planet?

        August 6, 2013 at 4:03 pm |
      • Beam

        I think any farmer that raises cows would disagree with you on that. I tell you what...do a search on youtube showing them seperate a new born calf from its mother...and compare it to one where they aren't separated. Both cry for each other when the calf is separated.

        August 6, 2013 at 4:03 pm |
  38. mary

    My Mom used to eat it when we were growing up but I stoped once I knew it was a baby and the way they treated them it just sick. I eat meat but I know where it comes from and which herd it was in and when it was humanely put down. I don't eat baby lamb or chicken eggs but a good steak call me. Animals give us there life the least we could do is make it a good one for as long as it lives.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:20 pm |
    • John

      Eggs???? Really? you do realize that the eggs you buy from the store are not baby chicks right? They are not fertilized no chick will ever be born from them.... wow

      August 6, 2013 at 3:52 pm |
      • SixDegrees

        Depends what store you buy them at. Fertilized eggs are actually quite easy to come by these days.

        August 6, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
        • Rl

          Do you eat fertilized rotten eggs?

          August 6, 2013 at 7:04 pm |
    • EuphoriCrest

      Animals don't "give us there [sic] lives." We rob them of their lives.

      August 6, 2013 at 5:05 pm |
  39. Jennifer

    Not interested in Veal.

    August 6, 2013 at 3:12 pm |
  40. carnivore

    i myself am not a vegetarian or vegan by any means. but it has recently come to my attention the methods by which animal meat( beef, pork, chicken) is produced. My question is, "Is there really a nice way to kill an animal?" i think the answer is no. if you don't care enough to spare its life in the end, how can you differentiate between killing a baby animal and an adult one? if you raised an animal with the intention of killing it, does it really matter when you choose to do it?

    I would also like to point out that if we are going to talk about inhumanity, we should mention the treatment of dairy cows and egg-laying chickens. How would you feel if you were the dairy cow that was going through artificial insemination and birthing routinely just so that you will not stop lactating?

    August 6, 2013 at 3:09 pm |
    • Larisa

      Carnivore, I could not agree with you more. Is there even a differentiation? Cruelty is cruelty, no matter the age.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:21 pm |
    • Animalsci89

      Do you even know the process of Artifical Insemination?

      August 6, 2013 at 3:23 pm |
    • Observer

      Speaking of artificial insemination (or just insemination, I guess): I have found that rubbing a fresh piece of raw veal against my engorged member is a very close approximation to anal sechs.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:42 pm |
    • Peter T.

      That is were the vegans/vegetarians/PETA get you. The anthropomorphize the animals (Blame Disney) and make you feel guilty for every eating anything that once had a brain (or cute big eyes per Disney). We must not forget that ,though animals should be treated (Slaughtered) ethically, they should never be viewed the same as humans. Cows, pig, chickens, whatever, are not people (only Soylent Green is). In the end we get down to it, no matter what we eat we ultimately have to kill and even if we eat it live it will be killed hopefully (never sallow live octopus whole, it will climb out)

      August 6, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
      • cbtx67

        If that is the case, why not put Fluffy on the table? I bet poodle tastes great with a side of swiss chard. How bout that service dog that helps the local blind person? Good with barbeque sauce?Did Disney make that those movies so we would feel bad eating fluffy? Meat is meat right?

        August 6, 2013 at 4:49 pm |
        • Peter T.

          In times of Famine many pets (and vermin) are consumed, as well as in areas were food is limited. I am sure the blind person would rather eat their pet than starve to death. Now I am not too sure about the Swiss chard but the BBQ does sound good. Tell me, if I were to put a hamburger on the table in front of you could you tell me for sure that it is from a cow.

          When it comes to animals there are those that we use for food, those that we use as pets, those that we use for work, and those that we avoid. But there is no clear line dividing them. We can try justify reason for eating and/or not eating an animal but in the end meat is meat (even Human in times of crisis)

          August 7, 2013 at 12:54 pm |
        • Hannibal Lecter

          Human meat is a delicacy. You should all try it, at least once.

          August 7, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
  41. Laura

    Why choose meat, when there are so many other options? I've been living just fine without meat for many years now, and feel great. I think the slaughter houses and abuse that go on give this world bad karma. I'm looking forward to a time when there will be no more slaughter houses – people will be buying meat that was grown from stem cells in 10 to 20 years – yeah!

    August 6, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
    • mc

      I eat less meat than ever before in my life but I will not cut it out completely. Cavemen ate meat. Humans have always eaten meat. All civilizations, all cultures. Slaughterhouses and farms should be more humane, but in my opinion, meat is a part of our existence... and besides that, I like it! Nothing beats a juicy burger or steak!

      August 6, 2013 at 3:00 pm |
      • Jim

        Just because we are "adapted" to eat meat, and humans have always done so, does not mean that it is healthy, humane, or in our best interest to continue to do so. The Science is pretty clear. Consuming meat\dairy is a less healthy alternative than not consuming it (it significantly raises risk of a variety of our most prominent diseases including heart disease, cancers, and type II diabetes). All essential nutrients in meat\dairy can be obtained in sufficient quantities through plants without the negative side effects of consuming meat\dairy. Not only is meat unhealthy (contributing to disease and higher health care costs), but the production of meat puts an unnecessary strain on some of our most vital resources (like water), contributes, in part, to climate change and ecosystem destruction (farm runoff), and needlessly causes animals to suffer.

        August 6, 2013 at 3:20 pm |
        • Nannalow

          And eggs are bad for you, no they are good for your, no they are bad for you, no they are good for you ... and the same could be said for many different foods – Tuna, Red Meat, Chicken, Carbs.... What is best for you is to eat as few processed foods as possible and try to balance the food groups, minimizing sugar, salt and fat. That is the healthiest you can eat. – Eliminating one type of food or food group generally results is deficiencies of one kind or another.

          August 6, 2013 at 4:01 pm |
      • SunnyD

        All civilizations, all cultures? So ignorant of you. So may people in the world survive on grains and fruits. I no saint. But past 3 years I have quit everything including eggs. I feel great without putting dead meat in my body.

        August 6, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
      • Rl

        A filly cheese steak is great.

        August 6, 2013 at 7:05 pm |
        • Cow Tipper

          A philly cheese steak is great, too. Very filling.

          August 9, 2013 at 3:41 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      I eat meat because I like the way it tastes. It isn't the only thing I eat – I like the way a lot of fruits, vegetables and grains taste, too.

      A wide-ranging palate comes along with being an omnivore.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
      • Observer

        I eat meat too, but probably not the kind you're referring to. I'll give you a hint: it comes from man...

        August 6, 2013 at 3:36 pm |
  42. MerpMerp

    I can't eat veal! It's a baby cow :( That makes me sad...

    August 6, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • mc

      Most people don't want to kill a baby cow, including me. I actually recently ordered veal by accident. I did not listen very clearly to the waiter and thought the dish was adult cow. It was awesome! I found out is was beef when I asked my friend to try it and she would not, saying she does not eat veal. Oooops!

      August 6, 2013 at 3:03 pm |
      • Kevin H

        I got veal by mistake at a wedding reception recently. Since I never had veal...at least that I am aware of....I figured I would give a try. It was pretty good. Turns out my date was horrified that I accepted the veal and on the drive home kept scolding me. And she kept bringing it up for weeks afterwards. So thank you veal. You were one of things that helped me realize early that I had no future with her. Haven't eaten veal since, but I am glad I did once.

        August 6, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      How do you feel about lamb?

      August 6, 2013 at 3:05 pm |
      • doughnuts

        I think it's delicious.

        August 6, 2013 at 3:31 pm |
        • SixDegrees

          Me, too.

          Mutton, not so much.

          August 6, 2013 at 3:58 pm |
      • Beam

        I don't eat lamb either.

        August 6, 2013 at 4:00 pm |
      • RC

        Hamlambramsheepormutton. Depends on what's she's wearing.

        August 6, 2013 at 6:58 pm |
  43. davejjj

    New laws make it illegal for anyone to make videos of animal abuse because this creates an "image problem" for the industry. When it comes to animal abuse or "pink slime" your congressman is already bought and sold.

    August 6, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • LOL

      Learn the laws before you try and bad mouth them!!!! It is now illegal to go on private property and film but if you are in a public place like a street you are free to do what you want!! Ignorance to the highest degree!

      August 6, 2013 at 5:34 pm |
  44. Beam

    No I don't eat dead baby calves. I know what veal is...have always known. It grosses me out over the thought of them slaughtering baby calves and this story made it worse. Why in the world would anyone abuse and skin any animal alive except that they like torturing the animal? Sickening...I hope those people that did this got jail time but I bet they didn't. :( Likely they went on to do the same thing to people's pets! There is a connection between torturing animals and serial killers...they all started with torturing animals first before moving on to people..

    August 6, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • brad

      Don't worry, Karma will take care of it.

      August 6, 2013 at 4:28 pm |
  45. Guest

    "lacking iron" means "anemic".

    If you are what you eat, why eat sick animals?

    August 6, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • Animalsci89

      You missed the part in the article that talked about the special milk didn't ya? It has iron in it as supplement.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:25 pm |
    • basketcase

      Maybe because that saying isn't meant to be taken so literally, otherwise it would suggest that we should all be cannibals.

      August 6, 2013 at 4:55 pm |
  46. Jane

    Death for these animals should be instant. Anyone caught skinning anything alive should be subjected to the same torture.

    August 6, 2013 at 2:15 pm |
    • Animalsci89

      Death in most cases is instant. The voluntary twitches and kicks that occur while skinning have nothing to do with life. This is what a lot of the videos that show an animal being skinned "alive" are actually videoing. The animal is dead and has been for a little while. Its neck is slit after it has been either shot or had a captive bolt inserted through its head to basically sever the spinal cord so the animal is dead then.

      August 6, 2013 at 3:28 pm |
      • Thomas

        And you know this occurs in all cases because of what evidence?

        August 8, 2013 at 8:36 am |
    • david

      thats funny, be humane or I will skin you

      August 6, 2013 at 4:20 pm |
  47. Jake

    I love veal and it eat every time I see it on the menu.

    August 6, 2013 at 2:01 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      It's OK. It's kinda bland.

      August 6, 2013 at 2:45 pm |
    • Don K

      Wow... my hero... Jerk.

      August 6, 2013 at 2:46 pm |
1 2 3
 
| Part of