Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

cooking.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 327 posts

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#81

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

bananicorn wrote: post #57
np422 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of us here on hacker news can afford to buy real food such as grass feed beef/lamb, forage egg/chicken, etc Seems like a more natural evolutionary correct way to get our food rather than some kind of franken-meat grown i lab. Every autumn I buy a lamb from the farmer living next to my father, I kind of like it when I can watch my food being happy before I eat it.

I'd really like to understand these statements - You seem to care about the well-being of the animal while it is alive, but then decide to kill it (or let it be killed) for its meat. What's the point? You understand that this animal is happy and thus does not want to be killed, but you value it being happy. Don't these two sentiments exclude each other?

>> Don't these two sentiments exclude each other?

Not the OP, but a meat eater. I think it's obvious for most people that they want to eat meat but they don't want to cause unnecessary suffering. Those two sentiments aren't just not mutually exclusive, they complement each other.

I know people who keep animals for their meat- chickens, ducks, goats, pigs and a cow or two. I've seen them really care for, and about their animals, and I couldn't miss the big, loving smiles on their faces when they're around them, particularly the younger ones. I'd call those smiles almost parental.

The same people have no compunction about killing those same animals, even the younger ones (that have the most tender flesh). I'd even go as far as to say that some part of the love they feel for those animals may actually come from knowing how they taste.

It might sound a bit crazy, but I think it's actually natural to love your food, rather than hate it and wish to hurt it.

I also think other animals have similar feelings. For instance:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/gallery/2017/apr/07/...

[Picture of a lion keeping a zebra fowl alive in the wild]

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#82

Post by oredbored »

mikekchar wrote: post #54
curiousDog wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Particularly going Vegan. What sorts of protein do you usually eat?

Lentils (any kind of beans/peas) and rice will give you complete proteins. When I was vegan (gave it up when I got married, like many things ;-) ) I didn't eat much tofu mainly because it has a huge amount of fat. I actually eat a lot more now that I'm not vegan. Vegan is a bit challenging for nutrition because things like zinc are fairly hard to get. Although the UI is fairly poor, I recommend using nut [0] to help…

cronometer.com is an excellent and complete nutritional calculator. it calculates your individual amino acid requirements so you can get your complete protein for the day. your liver actually stores amino acids to form complete proteins so it doesn't matter if you eat incomplete protein one meal as long as your overall diet is balanced. complete protein is just a term for the amino acid makeup of human tissue, so technically the only complete protein out there would come from cannibalism.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#83

Post by milesrout »

DanBC wrote: post #38
milesrout wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they haven't. Red meat is not dangerous. Cooking red meat the way Americans tend to (disgustingly fried everything) is, but disgustingly frying anything is bad for you.

Red meat is, according to WHO, a probable carcinogen, although the increased risk is quite small.

Literally everything is a fucking carcinogen.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#84

Post by Baeocystin »

ericdykstra wrote: post #63
Baeocystin wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cell expansion already has decades of science behind it. There isn't anything hard about it, either. You or I could expand cultures in our kitchens with minimal difficulty as it is. The hard part of 'fake meat' (which isn't fake, it's real muscle tissue, it's just grown differently) is that muscle alone doesn't taste good, or have a pleasing texture. You need connective tissue, fat, blood vessels... The whole lot, re…

I'm with omginternets on this one. On a spectrum of "herbivore that has roamed relatively freely and eaten a variety of vegetables according to it's nature" to "animals raised in factory farms, fed defect candy, and grown to 3x it's natural size before reaching physical maturity" to "lab grown muscle tissue" I'm sticking as close to the first one as I can, and I'm going vegetarian before making lab grown tissue a par…

I wouldn't want to force anyone to eat anything they don't want to.

I'm personally looking forward to it, though.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#85

Post by mirimir »

andrelaszlo wrote: post #75
mirimir wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there's Tool's "Disgustipated", about the carrot harvest. And some people do think that plants can suffer. Indeed, some Buddhists only eat food that would otherwise be thrown away. But yes, the relevance of suffering seems proportional to relatedness with the sufferer. Or maybe the ability to identify with the sufferer, based on perceived intelligence and self-awareness.

But we do have a lot of reasons to believe that animals can and do suffer, but no, or very few, reasons to believe that carrots can. It's also not so black or white. Does a cow have greater "capacity for suffering" than an oyster? Does this have ethical consequences? I think it does.

Yes, I agree re animals vs plants and suffering.

And yes, maybe oysters are closer to plants than cows, in that regard.

But it's not just about suffering. It's about the morality of killing other lifeforms. Personally, I'm OK with it. I'll be eaten after I die. Indeed, I'm always under attack from bacteria, yeast, molds, etc. But I won't eat anything that I wouldn't kill myself.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#86

Post by kefka »

idiot74 wrote: post #70
pjmlp wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless one is producing their own vegetables, industrial production of them is no different than meat. I know of local farms where getting above average cabbages, from little seed to the nice looking one on the market stands, takes little more than one month, thanks to the chemicals they get. It is nothing more than "I feel good" kind of thing.

> Unless one is producing their own vegetables, industrial production of them is no different than meat. This post lacks common sense. Processing and feeding animals uses far more resources than processing crops (especially since crops are often processed in order to feed animals...). "The efficiency with which various animals convert grain into protein varies widely. With cattle in feedlots, it takes roughly 7 kilog…

As a grain, it is poisonous to me, as I am diabetic.

However, the fish, chicken, pork, or beef are not. I can eat them as I choose.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#87

Post by pjmlp »

idiot74 wrote: post #70
pjmlp wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless one is producing their own vegetables, industrial production of them is no different than meat. I know of local farms where getting above average cabbages, from little seed to the nice looking one on the market stands, takes little more than one month, thanks to the chemicals they get. It is nothing more than "I feel good" kind of thing.

> Unless one is producing their own vegetables, industrial production of them is no different than meat. This post lacks common sense. Processing and feeding animals uses far more resources than processing crops (especially since crops are often processed in order to feed animals...). "The efficiency with which various animals convert grain into protein varies widely. With cattle in feedlots, it takes roughly 7 kilog…

I don't need to feel good about anything.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#88

Post by screwt »

beaconstudios wrote: post #62
pavlov wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. That's the crux of the issue: do chickens' lives and feelings have any value? If so, how should society impose that value system on an enormous industry that optimizes to extract value from chickens' suffering?

I think the move to free-range farming has helped a lot to improve the situation. The majority of shops near me stock primarily free-range eggs and chicken due to consumer demand.

Be aware that 'free range' and ('organic', FWIW) are close to meaningless in terms of animal welfare. Both give a set of definitions for what meets the label, which is then achieved by farmers by the most cost-effective means possible.

E.g. 1 - 'free range' chickens have almost no extra space per chicken compared to battery-farmed chickens, and many die after being trampled by the others. They are at least a breed which can stand on its own legs - battery chickens can't even walk.

E.g. 2 - 'organic' animals must not be fed antibiotics (which means their general conditions must be good enough for not too many to die from disease, which is otherwise avoided by routine antibiotics in feed). This means sick animals are generally left to die rather than be treated, since allowing antibiotics would lose organic status.

E.g. 3 - For eggs: no matter how good the conditions are for the hens, egg-laying chickens are a different breed to chickens-for-meat. Ergo, all male layer chicks are redundant, and are killed immediately on hatching (normal method is to grind the chicks en masse).

Eating animals is not a pleasant thing. Definitely worth reading up on.

(FTR: I eat animals, eggs, and dairy. I'm struggling to find out how to do so ethically, given the current 'ethical' labels are so close to meaningless.)

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#89

Post by idiot74 »

pjmlp wrote: post #87
idiot74 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unless one is producing their own vegetables, industrial production of them is no different than meat. This post lacks common sense. Processing and feeding animals uses far more resources than processing crops (especially since crops are often processed in order to feed animals...). "The efficiency with which various animals convert grain into protein varies widely. With cattle in feedlots, it takes roughly 7 kilog…

I don't need to feel good about anything.

Yet you accused people trying to reduce their impact on the environment as doing it just to 'feel good'; why do you assume they need to feel good about anything?.. I don't think it's constructive to disparage people who are attempting to reduce their impact on the environment.

Re: What is this colored fiber in my chicken?

#90

Post by adaml_623 »

pvaldes wrote: post #71

This is not a problem caused by antibiotics. Is a problem of genetic nature that happens because broilers are inbreed for growing big and fast. The same birds in true range with plenty of food would face exactly the same problem, with or without antibiotics. They are too heavy and often tend to have cardiac diseases, but they live short lives and are delicious so they are the most sucessful bird in the planet. On the…

"the most successful bird on the planet" is an interesting line considering that they are all killed and eaten.

I guess the obvious line of reasoning is to talk about how GDP is less than perfect for measuring economic success, etc. Sometimes large numbers are not a sign of success.

Post reply on HN