My thanks as always to MSU students and one of my favorites this time for sharing an article with from the State News. A couple of years ago you could've fooled me into thinking that the State News had some semblance of objectivity, but their position on the highly controversial issue of animal rights the past couple years has made it clear that they care for nothing except propagating their own liberal viewpoints and forcing it on the students at MSU. If I was an alumni subscriber, I'd be pretty disappointed in the impression they're making on the general public; it's even gotten worse than the OSU Lantern.
Well, this latest argument from Mitch is so highly charged with emotion and non-factual statements that I finally lost my cool and started typing up a response:
"Mitch, your uninformed, emotional arguments prove exactly why it's so far taken you 5 years to graduate with a bachelors' degree. Glad to see you learned how to photoshop masculinity into your submission picture. If only people knew you were about 4 feet tall and looked more like an enormous squirrel than a college student..."
Yeah, cross that out. This is when I realized I needed to scratch out and start over:
"Mitch (and friends), you probably don't remember your rude treatment of me a couple of years ago at a PETA2 rally, but it seems the only thing that's changed is finally you found a masculine picture to fool the papers. Your attitude towards animal agriculture is a cover up for the fact that you are shamefully unable to accept the facts in this world. There is life, and there is death. University of Michigan has even found that plants have feelings, so I hope in your quest for preservation of all sensitive beings you finally figure out your only option to avoid the death of living, feeling beings is starvation. Good luck with that."
Scratch out again. Geez this guy has me fired up. Well, that's what they try to do to you. They get you all fired up, ruffle your feathers, and once you're angry you spout off something stuttery, unintelligent, then you look like an angry idiot and give farmers everywhere a bad reputation. That's the idea folks and this provocation works. It gets us to say the wrong things at the wrong times and then they misquote you over and over again until you wish you'd never cared.
So I erased again, and here's where we stand:
"Mitch, and friends,
"The incoherency in your argument shames animal rights groups worldwide. Rather, you obviously can't make up your mind whether you're speaking on vivisection, or if you want to go on a diatribe against animal agriculture and MSU Animal Science students (your more common MO). Most of the animal research you cited in your opening isn't even linked to Anthony Hall or the Animal Science Department. Despite your claims of what is in Anthony Hall, you still seem to have no clue what really happens there at all. The same is true of your ignorant statements about mink and Dr. Bursian but others have already elaborated that in previous comments. What is true is that the mink released by your fellow activists suffered horribly from the "freedom" forced upon them during an illegal mass release. Would you like to comment on that incident at all?
"Citing Carol Adams adds no strength to your argument in the least. She demeans women everywhere by even equating the women's rights movement with animal rights. Capable of their own cognition and responsible for their actions, women bravely campaigned for many decades in a persistent effort to receive equal consideration for jobs, legal rights and representation. The women's rights movement in the US is decades old and while there are still places in the world where women suffer inexplicable discrimination, it is certainly not beneath the gaze of the Euro-American male. Truth is that you used this article as just one more opportunity to agitate people against animal agriculture and the faculty/students who research in this field.
"As a former MSU student, I learned much beyond my own field of study or simple classes; among the life skills further developed in my undergraduate career was critical thinking - something your arguments lack. Open up your "arrogant eyes" a little and step back for the big picture. I think you'll find your "male gaze" has become a little clouded with denial of the truth. Life feeds life and recent reports indicate that plants feel pain and stress, and can detect relatives in the soil around them. You can either eat and survive, accepting that all life can serve a purpose through a well cared for life, or you can starve. The choice is all yours."
Have a nice day, y'all, and check out other great comments on that site as well.
Showing posts with label State News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label State News. Show all posts
Monday, April 25, 2011
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Antibiotics discussion
The State News never supports healthy discussion that disagrees or might sway readers against their own self-proclaimed liberalism. However, in the interest of freedom of speech and thought, I will post mine here for your benefit in response to the latest antibiotic opinion column. All I did below was compile research published in journals. That's not just going to Google and copying the first article you see. Journals are refereed by research peers who don't usually have the same viewpoints as you, but they check to see if you have researched and concluded in a way in which is scientifically justifiable. Enjoy.
"For a picture of how banning antibiotics will play out, I refer you to the case of Denmark which is now standing out some years from when their bans were put in place in the mid-90's. Their bans were pushed for by the media, the consumers and the politicians, yet the ideological benefits of banning the antibiotics are either not present or non-convincing from a statistical standpoint. This is important when you weigh out the fact that the number of hog farms in Denmark are anticipated to dwindle from 25,000 to 5,000 by the year 2015. Not only have the benefits of banning antibiotics not been seen as they were promised, but now the industry has moved on, leaving people without jobs and without a better prospect in life, which far overshadows the fear of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
"What the contributor in the most recent antibiotic opinion column fails to observe is that there are different types of bacteria. Growth-promoting antibiotics counteract gram-positive bacteria while the bulk of the rising number of antibiotic resistant cases are caused by gram-negative bacteria. Banning growth-promoting antibiotics which are fed on a daily basis will have no impact on the resistance of gram-negative bacteria because of how differently the bacteria function. The faulty reasoning contributing to the bans resulted in outbreak infections increasing instead of the consumer anticipated decrease. Even in the case of those bacteria which could increase in resistance, there has been a rise in their infection rates post-ban as well since the growth promoters also contribute to a cleaner kill floor with less GI ruptures, etc., since they are keeping the GI tract healthier.
"In the end, in an antibiotic free Denmark, there has been in increase in infection and no change in resistance. Just because the consumer always gets what they want, that doesn't mean they are always right or that life will get better for them. They are just ignorantly blissful because they have swallowed sugar-coated lies."
"For a picture of how banning antibiotics will play out, I refer you to the case of Denmark which is now standing out some years from when their bans were put in place in the mid-90's. Their bans were pushed for by the media, the consumers and the politicians, yet the ideological benefits of banning the antibiotics are either not present or non-convincing from a statistical standpoint. This is important when you weigh out the fact that the number of hog farms in Denmark are anticipated to dwindle from 25,000 to 5,000 by the year 2015. Not only have the benefits of banning antibiotics not been seen as they were promised, but now the industry has moved on, leaving people without jobs and without a better prospect in life, which far overshadows the fear of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
"What the contributor in the most recent antibiotic opinion column fails to observe is that there are different types of bacteria. Growth-promoting antibiotics counteract gram-positive bacteria while the bulk of the rising number of antibiotic resistant cases are caused by gram-negative bacteria. Banning growth-promoting antibiotics which are fed on a daily basis will have no impact on the resistance of gram-negative bacteria because of how differently the bacteria function. The faulty reasoning contributing to the bans resulted in outbreak infections increasing instead of the consumer anticipated decrease. Even in the case of those bacteria which could increase in resistance, there has been a rise in their infection rates post-ban as well since the growth promoters also contribute to a cleaner kill floor with less GI ruptures, etc., since they are keeping the GI tract healthier.
"In the end, in an antibiotic free Denmark, there has been in increase in infection and no change in resistance. Just because the consumer always gets what they want, that doesn't mean they are always right or that life will get better for them. They are just ignorantly blissful because they have swallowed sugar-coated lies."
Tags:
Animal Welfare,
antibiotics,
Denmark,
feedstuffs,
State News
Friday, December 3, 2010
Feminism and Veganism
Courtesy of Jackie, I have the chance to get just a little bit more vocal and opinionated today. MSU recently had author Carol Adams in to talk about how closely linked feminism and veganism are in the modern world. Of course it would make sense that the same people who are unwilling to accept that they have been more than equals in the US for a long time now (why else would I as a white male be a minority?) would be the same people who might want to align their efforts with another irrational underdog in the way of veganists and their avid animal activism. What they fail to realize is that while veganism and animal rights may be a current topic of debate, focusing on feminism merely degrades women in today's time since most women are functioning as equals in the modern world unless they try to make a big deal about being a woman. It's only once a woman advocates feminism that they actually degrade their value in the public's eyes, because it proves that they can't get out of the past and move on to accept the new status that they've been arguing for for decades.

Adams also talked about the pornography of meat. I would be lying if I told you I was attracted Lady Gaga in her photos of the meat dress (gag). Does that mean I don't like to eat meat? No, I love to eat meat, and have never before linked women and meat together in my life, and I doubt I'm in a minority here. But I can tell you one person who has Lady Gaga as his profile picture right now, for who knows what reason.

And then who better to represent MSU on the subject of Feminism and Veganism that SPAR and their very own Mitch Goldsmith (President of MSU SPAR). Of course, he's not actually a female, despite the fact he's pumped up on estrogen from high soy consumption as a result of his veganism, but since he thought he could get a word in on stopping meat consumption he stuck his face in the news this week and the liberal State News obliged as always.
Now, I had no doubt Mitch would eventually find himself in a leadership role in this radical organization. He's rude, inconsiderate, highly opinionated, unable to exhibit intelligence or debate intelligibly and has a major that could only result in his placement in a sub-standard organization campaigning for something unreasonable (animal rights). (Disclaimer - there is a difference between animal welfare and animal rights, I support greater welfare, but animals rights is a ridiculous concept in terms of economics, philosophy and general practicality).
The last time Mitch and I ran into each other wasn't exactly a positive interaction. I patiently waited for over a half hour as he continuously ignored me in my attempt to ask a question of the PETA VP. His mistake would in turn be costly as it gave me the time to formulate a much more pointed question which ended with the PETA VP Dan Matthews embarrassing himself at his own pep rally.
Veganism (as a form of activism as it was proposed by Carol Adams according to the State News) and feminism only have one thing in common. They are both supported by radicals who make little or nil logical sense in their attempts to propagate viewpoints that do nothing but insult their intelligence. Feminism had a place in this world once, but combining it with veganism only detracts from both causes. Feminism combined with veganism only portrays women as the weaker sex who refuse to accept the ultimate reality that it takes life to support life. Veganism (and animals rights) combined with feminism results in an even less legitimate concept in animal rights by joining forces with an outdated concept which no longer applies to the modern world (the only part of the world where veganism and animal rights can attract favor).

Adams also talked about the pornography of meat. I would be lying if I told you I was attracted Lady Gaga in her photos of the meat dress (gag). Does that mean I don't like to eat meat? No, I love to eat meat, and have never before linked women and meat together in my life, and I doubt I'm in a minority here. But I can tell you one person who has Lady Gaga as his profile picture right now, for who knows what reason.

And then who better to represent MSU on the subject of Feminism and Veganism that SPAR and their very own Mitch Goldsmith (President of MSU SPAR). Of course, he's not actually a female, despite the fact he's pumped up on estrogen from high soy consumption as a result of his veganism, but since he thought he could get a word in on stopping meat consumption he stuck his face in the news this week and the liberal State News obliged as always.
Now, I had no doubt Mitch would eventually find himself in a leadership role in this radical organization. He's rude, inconsiderate, highly opinionated, unable to exhibit intelligence or debate intelligibly and has a major that could only result in his placement in a sub-standard organization campaigning for something unreasonable (animal rights). (Disclaimer - there is a difference between animal welfare and animal rights, I support greater welfare, but animals rights is a ridiculous concept in terms of economics, philosophy and general practicality).
The last time Mitch and I ran into each other wasn't exactly a positive interaction. I patiently waited for over a half hour as he continuously ignored me in my attempt to ask a question of the PETA VP. His mistake would in turn be costly as it gave me the time to formulate a much more pointed question which ended with the PETA VP Dan Matthews embarrassing himself at his own pep rally.
Veganism (as a form of activism as it was proposed by Carol Adams according to the State News) and feminism only have one thing in common. They are both supported by radicals who make little or nil logical sense in their attempts to propagate viewpoints that do nothing but insult their intelligence. Feminism had a place in this world once, but combining it with veganism only detracts from both causes. Feminism combined with veganism only portrays women as the weaker sex who refuse to accept the ultimate reality that it takes life to support life. Veganism (and animals rights) combined with feminism results in an even less legitimate concept in animal rights by joining forces with an outdated concept which no longer applies to the modern world (the only part of the world where veganism and animal rights can attract favor).
Tags:
Carol Adams,
HSUS,
Michigan State University,
SPAR,
State News
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
My challenge to State News
It seems like all of Columbus is in a hurry today to get around and get stuff done. An hour before our own parking lot usually fills up, I already was barely able to get a spot. This busyness includes me today, as I try to catch up on blog ideas I had to postpone yesterday in the stead of a funeral and an awards reception.
I'd like to start off today with a challenge to the State News. I know that basketball season is taking the highlight, including Delvon Roe's double performance yesterday which is remarkable and wonderful, but was it necessary to close comments to specific past articles such as the ongoing animal welfare debate? The closing of comments is just one more example of your unwillingness to allow free speech and expression of the opinions of your readers.
Per the comment of one your readers on the site, I had been searching for documentation from their own opinion leaders to contradict the argument presented. Sure enough, HSUS themselves discuss in their chicken cage welfare paper (28 pages with over a hundred references which I bet they thought nobody would read) the fact that chicken pecking behavior was found to be genetic. Thus, the cannibalism debated on the State News article is in fact present in most flocks, regardless of the housing systems which were suggested superior in discussion. So if you don't take it from me, take it from your own and realize that there is really a reason we call it a "pecking order". Find your place in it and shut your mouth.
Thus stems my challenge to State News. You have a few good writers on your staff who have shown willingness to support the media underdogs. Let them explore the truth and be what you should've been all along since you're supported by all kinds of readers; objectively report and leave subjectivism to the editorial column which should be open to both sides of an argument.
I'd like to start off today with a challenge to the State News. I know that basketball season is taking the highlight, including Delvon Roe's double performance yesterday which is remarkable and wonderful, but was it necessary to close comments to specific past articles such as the ongoing animal welfare debate? The closing of comments is just one more example of your unwillingness to allow free speech and expression of the opinions of your readers.
Per the comment of one your readers on the site, I had been searching for documentation from their own opinion leaders to contradict the argument presented. Sure enough, HSUS themselves discuss in their chicken cage welfare paper (28 pages with over a hundred references which I bet they thought nobody would read) the fact that chicken pecking behavior was found to be genetic. Thus, the cannibalism debated on the State News article is in fact present in most flocks, regardless of the housing systems which were suggested superior in discussion. So if you don't take it from me, take it from your own and realize that there is really a reason we call it a "pecking order". Find your place in it and shut your mouth.
Thus stems my challenge to State News. You have a few good writers on your staff who have shown willingness to support the media underdogs. Let them explore the truth and be what you should've been all along since you're supported by all kinds of readers; objectively report and leave subjectivism to the editorial column which should be open to both sides of an argument.
Tags:
Animal Welfare,
battery cages,
cage-free eggs,
Columbus,
HSUS,
Roe,
Shakespeare,
State News
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
State News
Short blog today regarding my friends at MSU and the frustrations they continue to endure caused by a campus newspaper that absolutely fails to be objective on the issue of animal agriculture. I think nobody would mind that as much if students weren't forced to pay a subscription to the paper that in turn verbally scathes the major studied by some of its mandatory subscribers.
I encourage you to read the article, then to dig up Joel's original column, as well as following the comments below the article I linked.
I sent some brief comments to MSU regarding the news article today and I confess to spending relatively little time editing them but it's a busy day so you'll have to forgive me. Here's my thoughts:
"Phil and associates,
"I can understand your concern about animal suffering. Farmers share this concern which is why it does not in fact happen. Animals are humanely raised, above and beyond government regulations in most cases, and are also humanely slaughtered with researched methods that prevent the feeling of pain prior to death.
"Some parts of a farm animals life can be painful, but again, in accordance with the law, these conditions of painful existence cannot be prolonged into what you would term suffering. Research has shown stress and pain indicators to diminish shortly after painful procedures which you cite such as castration, and tail and teeth clipping. The animal certainly does not remember the experience, nor are they experiencing a continued sensation of pain. Accusing farmers of causing animals to suffer is greatly similar to whining about a doctor being abusive for administering your once in a lifetime vaccinations.
"As was agreed by PETA VP (what was his name?) during his visit last fall, even more personal inflictions of painful surgical procedures are not remembered by humans, nor are they remembered by animals which is made obvious by their ongoing observed interactions with people over their lifetime. We are not talking about animal abuse here, which farmers do not condone or participate in. We are talking about the regulated and required health-related procedures which ensure an animal’s healthy existence in this world as they grow and eventually serve their purpose to provide food for Americans and those in less fortunate countries.
"I am personally involved in the worldwide research to improve the living environment of animals through their housing and social stimulation. However, this research takes time so that we can find effective ways to raise healthy animals for the public while improving the environment they live in. This is to avoid the mistake of building costly, “trendy” systems that truly don’t benefit the animals in the long run. Be patient because you’re not being ignored.
"Joel probably did not mention a necessity to give livestock antibiotics to stay alive because there is rarely a necessity to give animals antibiotics. In fact, there’s rarely a necessity to give humans antibiotics as well. If you would prefer to suffer through a secondary respiratory infection, or worse, accumulating scar tissue that will inhibit your ability to function for the rest of your life then please suggest to your doctor not to prescribe you antibiotics as well. Farmers care about their animals, and so they make sure that they give them what it takes to live healthy lives.
"The reason that farmers give their animals antibiotics is also not because the housing facilities are poorly designed. On the contrary, the ventilation, cleanliness and air quality in most “commercialized” layer barns is far better than in other systems which you imply would be more desirable, such as free-range or cage-free systems. If you don’t believe me, look at some research literature or actually visit some real farms.
"Finally, don’t even get me started on the supposed environmental hazard that animals pose to the world. Animals today represent just a small portion of what the world has to be concerned about in the way of environmental impact. Consider for example the fact that in America we produce over 1.2 billion pounds of garbage every day whereas the livestock industry produces 0.8 million pounds of waste per day. Then further consider that farmers recycle almost all of that waste to reduce the use of fertilizer on your vegetable crops that you consume. After you figure out what happens to the 1.2 billion pounds of human waste, let me know, because I’m pretty sure it is not being recycled and we are stuck with that figure for life. Animal agriculture is not the headline polluter that you claim it is."
I encourage you to read the article, then to dig up Joel's original column, as well as following the comments below the article I linked.
I sent some brief comments to MSU regarding the news article today and I confess to spending relatively little time editing them but it's a busy day so you'll have to forgive me. Here's my thoughts:
"Phil and associates,
"I can understand your concern about animal suffering. Farmers share this concern which is why it does not in fact happen. Animals are humanely raised, above and beyond government regulations in most cases, and are also humanely slaughtered with researched methods that prevent the feeling of pain prior to death.
"Some parts of a farm animals life can be painful, but again, in accordance with the law, these conditions of painful existence cannot be prolonged into what you would term suffering. Research has shown stress and pain indicators to diminish shortly after painful procedures which you cite such as castration, and tail and teeth clipping. The animal certainly does not remember the experience, nor are they experiencing a continued sensation of pain. Accusing farmers of causing animals to suffer is greatly similar to whining about a doctor being abusive for administering your once in a lifetime vaccinations.
"As was agreed by PETA VP (what was his name?) during his visit last fall, even more personal inflictions of painful surgical procedures are not remembered by humans, nor are they remembered by animals which is made obvious by their ongoing observed interactions with people over their lifetime. We are not talking about animal abuse here, which farmers do not condone or participate in. We are talking about the regulated and required health-related procedures which ensure an animal’s healthy existence in this world as they grow and eventually serve their purpose to provide food for Americans and those in less fortunate countries.
"I am personally involved in the worldwide research to improve the living environment of animals through their housing and social stimulation. However, this research takes time so that we can find effective ways to raise healthy animals for the public while improving the environment they live in. This is to avoid the mistake of building costly, “trendy” systems that truly don’t benefit the animals in the long run. Be patient because you’re not being ignored.
"Joel probably did not mention a necessity to give livestock antibiotics to stay alive because there is rarely a necessity to give animals antibiotics. In fact, there’s rarely a necessity to give humans antibiotics as well. If you would prefer to suffer through a secondary respiratory infection, or worse, accumulating scar tissue that will inhibit your ability to function for the rest of your life then please suggest to your doctor not to prescribe you antibiotics as well. Farmers care about their animals, and so they make sure that they give them what it takes to live healthy lives.
"The reason that farmers give their animals antibiotics is also not because the housing facilities are poorly designed. On the contrary, the ventilation, cleanliness and air quality in most “commercialized” layer barns is far better than in other systems which you imply would be more desirable, such as free-range or cage-free systems. If you don’t believe me, look at some research literature or actually visit some real farms.
"Finally, don’t even get me started on the supposed environmental hazard that animals pose to the world. Animals today represent just a small portion of what the world has to be concerned about in the way of environmental impact. Consider for example the fact that in America we produce over 1.2 billion pounds of garbage every day whereas the livestock industry produces 0.8 million pounds of waste per day. Then further consider that farmers recycle almost all of that waste to reduce the use of fertilizer on your vegetable crops that you consume. After you figure out what happens to the 1.2 billion pounds of human waste, let me know, because I’m pretty sure it is not being recycled and we are stuck with that figure for life. Animal agriculture is not the headline polluter that you claim it is."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)