Pathetic rightwing/corporate crap—YET hailed by millions of fools [VIDEO]

By Patrice Greanville

The United States has long been a highly manipulated nation, as it has one of the most class-conscious, well organized, ruling classes in the world (in contrast to the masses, who remain among the most benighted and politically confused in the world).  With trillions in assets, these plutocrats have innumerable tools at their disposal to brainwash the people around the clock–and they succeed.

The product of this horrendous chauvinist brainwash, besides laying waste to entire largely defenseless nations under false pretenses, a vile exercise in which the American mainstream media plays a critical enabling role, is an endless stream of policies supporting such wars and the gradual impoverishment of the ordinary citizen, these days a frontal assault on the American middle class, and their hard–won safety net, as more and more of the nation’s wealth is shoveled up–with impunity–not to the “1%” but to the 0.001%–where the real power lies.

Considering these rather self-evident facts, after a lifetime in America it continues to amaze me how many recalcitrant fools this country still has.  Here’s an example of transparent corporate propaganda fueled by the usual lies and distortions about the wonders of the free market, this time going so far as criminalizing environmentalism itself. Yet more than 2 million “liberty addicts” are there essentially saluting and cheering it on!

Under such circumstances can we escape a civil war in America? The right-wing mind cannot be reached as long as the system retains practically all the cards in the mass communications game. No one could have imagined in the 18th century that this nation would be literally poisoned by its “love of  freedom” –a value so twisted and cynically exploited today by precisely those who trample upon everything, starting with the lives and destiny of these fools, and, sweet irony, their freedoms.

But perhaps the unkindest cut is that many of these people are motivated by their hatred for Obama, who amply deserves scorn for his betrayals and hypocrisy, but these people–operating in an upside down reality system hate him for all the wrong reasons–thinking he’s a leftist, a revolutionary, a crusader for the people, the scourge of Wall Street, and so on. I wish that were true, for a change.

If you have a moment, go to YouTube and post a reaction. 

WARNING: Watching this packet of slick crap may make you puke. In fact I almost guarantee it.–PG
WATCH VIDEO BELOW

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

ADVERT PRO NOBIS

IF YOU CAN’T SEND A DONATION, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, AND YOU THINK THIS PUBLICATION IS WORTH SUPPORTING, AT LEAST HELP THE GREANVILLE POST EXPAND ITS INFLUENCE BY MENTIONING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS VIA TWEET OR OTHER SOCIAL NETWORKS! We are in a battle of communications with entrenched enemies that won’t stop until this world is destroyed and our remaining democratic rights stamped out. Only mass education and mobilization can stop this process.

It’s really up to you. Do your part while you can. •••

Donating? Use PayPal via the button below.

THANK YOU.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



In the Middle of a Food Fight

May 5, 2012

The factory farm model of "food" production is particularly riddled with disregard for the value of animal lives.

Fact is, leaving all the self-serving rationales aside, we choose to eat them. We choose to raise them by the billions in conditions that can only be described as Dantesque. And we get away with it because we have might, not right on our side.  Can anyone in good faith argue that an animal will graciously consent to be killed so that someone else may enjoy a transitory meal? Their instinctive response—were they asked, or were we to consider their situation—would be a resounding no. As would be ours, of course, for as animals we all share the instinctive reaction of living organisms to untimely death. Yet every day, without nary a thought, we force zillions of viable animals into needless death. Out of minimal decency, if nothing else, we should honestly consider their horrendous plight and stop looking for excuses to defend the indefensible. Make it a nonviolent meal the next time you sit at the dinner table.—PG

PS/ The addendum carries a piece, Factory Farming – A New Disease Model, by nutritionist Jami.  By now there are hundreds if not thousands of articulate denunciations of meat eating and animal enslavement. Thompson’s piece, reflecting the views of a person who’s clearly NOT an animal rights activist (albeit one that may, some day, become one)  is highly accessible and that’s one of the reasons for its inclusion here. I personally do not subscribe to some of Thompson’s thinking, since he does believe it’s alright to go on eating meat as long as it’s “humanely” produced, a very slippery proposition that again puts traditional “practicality” over ethics, but, as previously mentioned, his appeal may sound less of a rant to those who are just beginning to examine this issue. His blog is perfectbodyrx.com.

Topic contributed by Gloria Stevenson.
________________________________

By 

COUNT on The New York Times to take a basic topic and vault it into the stratosphere of esoteric, philosophic discussion. Food, for instance.

Other daily newspapers and Web sites tell you about restaurants, recipes and diet. The Times does that, of course. But it also tells you about the ethics of eating. Whether you like it or not.

In the Sunday magazine today, The Times completes an essay-writing contest initiated a few weeks back by Ariel Kaminer, who writes the column “The Ethicist.” Today’s column announces the winner from among 3,000 essayists who responded to Ms. Kaminer’s request to “tell us why it’s ethical to eat meat.”

The contest stirred a fuss even before it was over, as bloggers, commenters and e-mailers lodged objections on every conceivable side of the question, while others jumped in as participants. In addition to the 3,000 people who took the time to write an essay of up to 600 words, almost 17,000 people submitted votes for their favorite essay among the six finalists selected by a panel of judges.

I asked Ms. Kaminer about the origins of the contest — was this a topic that bubbled up from readers or something of interest to her personally?

“I got to thinking about how vegetarians and vegans frequently explain their position in terms of ethics,” she told me in an e-mail, “but meat-eaters favor other kinds of arguments, like whether meat is good for you, whether we were built to eat it, whether we should have the right to eat what we want without feeling judged or how delicious a Shake Shack burger is. Lots to say, but not about ethics per se.”

She added, “Food and animals are two subjects that our readers have shown they care about deeply, so I figured it’d be fun to invite them to make the case their fellow omnivores had so far largely ignored.”

It was fun, unless you were a meat-eater who just wanted to dine in peace. The setup of the contest virtually ensured that no unapologetic ode to meat would win. That’s because the six judges were, in Ms. Kaminer’s words, “some of the most influential thinkers to question or condemn the eating of meat.”

The winning entry, as selected by the panel, argued that eating meat was ethical only under certain conditions — so many conditions that I am just going to have to refer you to the essay in the magazine, because it’s awfully complicated.

There was a different winner in the popular vote by readers. That essay, written by Ingrid Newkirk, a founder of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, argued that the only meat that can be ethically consumed is in vitro meat.

According to Ms. Newkirk, this form of laboratory-grown meat will be available later this year and is “real meat, grown from real cow, chicken, pig and fish cells, all grown in culture without the mess and misery.”

I think you get the picture. The case for eating meat, as presented in The Times, is a pretty narrow one. If you can crawl through the eye of the needle with your in vitro burger in hand, you may feel free to chow down in good conscience.

A range of objections emerged to all this. Linda C. Cork, a professor emeritus of comparative medicine at Stanford University, wrote me to say she thought Ms. Kaminer’s approach lacked balance, citing the columnist’s statement that omnivores had yet to answer the “powerful ethical critiques laid down by vegetarians and vegans.”

“Why are vegetarians’ and vegans’ critiques either ‘ethical’ or ‘powerful’?” Ms. Cork wrote in an e-mail. “They may be to her, but they aren’t to me and many other readers.”

She added: “An Alaskan Inuit near Barrow Point would have a hard time being a vegan. Nomads living in arid climates survive because they follow their flocks of small ruminants (goats and sheep) which can convert the indigestible cellulose in brush and grasses into products humans can digest. Are these individuals ‘unethical’? I think not.”

Closer to home, Lisa Henderson, a sophomore at Kansas State University writing on the Pork Network Web site, objected that the judges’ predisposition made the contest a sham.

“Does anyone really think this collection of judges could pick a winning essay that says anything positive about the eating of meat?” Ms. Henderson wrote. “Not likely.”

(To this criticism, Ms. Kaminer said that having meat skeptics as judges made the competition more interesting: “If you can get someone who’s not already in your corner to take your argument seriously, then you’ve really got something.”)

Elsewhere in her article on the pork producers’ Web site, Ms. Henderson wondered why The Times didn’t just send out some reporters to find out what meat-eaters thought. So I called Ms. Henderson, who is studying agricultural economics and communication, and asked her what she thought.

She said: “I believe that humans are omnivores and that meat provides protein and other things that are essential for health. Animals utilize the grass. Animals help us utilize more of the earth. I am not anti-vegetarian, but they seem to be anti-meat, and they seem to want to take that choice away from me.”

On a roll, I called up another meat-eater. Calvin Trillin, a product of Kansas City’s barbecue-centric culture and the author of books on the pleasures of food, wondered if the arguments on behalf of in vitro meat might indicate that “our species has advanced too far.”

Mr. Trillin, a New Yorker magazine reporter and what he calls a “deadline poet” for The Nation, agreed to try his own hand at an essay on why it’s O.K. to eat animals. I gave him 600 words, but he used only nine: “If they had a chance, they would eat us.”

To which I would add: if only to silence us.

Disclosure: The public editor ate a lot of barbecue during his years in Kansas City, but he quit eating meat a while back and is unwilling to explain himself on the subject.
__________________________________________________________________________________
ADDENDUM

Factory Farming – A New Disease Model

Originally posted May 31, 2011 by  

Disclaimer: This is one of my longer posts, but I believe this is probably the most important blog post I’ve ever written.

The information discussed could directly impact yours as well as your family’s health for years to come. So please, read and study it carefully!

There aren’t very many things that irritate me, and I’m not really a political guy…but there are some issues that I just can’t let slip through the cracks.

Factory Farming is definitely on the list.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely not a tree hugger, dog lover, whale saver, or hardcore environmentalist, etc. by any means, but I do believe that as humans, we have a civic duty to preserve and protect our environment and habitat…as well as the animals that exist in it along with us.

You see, I believe that as humans we have a moral responsibility to protect other living creatures who aren’t as high as we are on the food chain…and there is NO excuse for us not to honor that duty.

When we abuse that power, terrible consequences can and WILL happen. For every action there is an equal an opposite reaction. This holds true in just about any aspect of life.

Before we get into the meat of this post I just want to make one small point…

I know that people place dogs on a pedestal here in the states, and that’s fine I guess, other countries have their own celebrated animals as well. For example, the cow is holy in India. That’s also perfectly fine by me.

But wrap your mind around this for a minute. What if there were dog farms here in the United States…where dogs were tortured beyond belief, fed a bunch of drugs to keep them alive in unbearable, filthy conditions…and then were sent off to slaughter to be our dinners. You’d probably be outraged right?

Ok…now if you’re still with me…wrap your mind around this point as well. All animals, from snakes and lizards, bears, dogs, cows, birds, rats, whatever…are all God’s creatures and they all feel pain. So you can’t just “kill a rat and let a dog sleep in your bed” so to speak. Don’t go out there and rescue a dog and then turn a blind eye to the cows, pigs, chickens, etc that are being slaughtered and tortured in your own neighborhoods.

That’s not being fair, just, righteous, or responsible. If you care for animals…CARE FOR ALL ANIMALS. Don’t play favorites. (For example, I have a friend with a pet rat and it’s a cool ass rat. Probably cooler than your dog. Just saying.) Don’t go hunting/fishing and then crucify Michael Vick because he killed dogs. Get a clue. All of those animals feel pain…and probably want to stay alive. We should protect ALL animals.

Now that I got that off my chest…let’s continue :D

FACTORY FARMING IN THE UNITED STATES

Factory farming is a term referring to the process of raising livestock in confinement at high stocking density, where a farm operates as a factory — a practice typical in industrial farming by agribusinesses. The main product of this industry is meat, milk and eggs for human consumption.

The official name for a factory farm (according to the United States government) is a Concentrated (or Confined) Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines a CAFO as “new and existing operations which stable or confine and feed or maintain for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period more than the number of animals specified”.

A large CAFO includes 1000 cattle (other than dairy, which is 700), 2500 hogs over 55 pounds, or 125,000 chickens (as long as a liquid manure system isn’t used). You can see all of the CAFO numbers listed for each animal category on the EPA website.

In addition, “there is no grass or other vegetation in the confinement area during the normal growing season.”

The main problem with factory farms is that there are unnaturally large numbers of animals are confined closely together. If you ever go visit one of these farms you’ll see thousands of cattle feeding in one small area…you’ll could also probably see a chicken coop/house with hundreds of thousands of chickens inside. And this practice doesn’t just stop at the “popular meats”…similar practices are also applied to various other types of poultry, as well as rabbits, sheep, goats, etc. These types of conditions are the perfect breeding ground for disease…

The numbers below will give you a glimpse of how large this operation is nationally:

Number of chickens slaughtered every minute in the US: 14,000

Number of cows and calves slaughtered every 24 hours in the US: 90,000

Food animals (not counting fish and other aquatic creatures) slaughtered per year in the US: 10 billion

But I digress…

If you’ve been a reader of mine for a while, you’ll probably already know my stance on factory farmed animal meats. Frankly, I find them disgusting and socially irresponsible…and don’t entirely believe they are sustainable or ethical.

Many of today’s farms are actually large industrial facilities, not the nice pleasant farms we all imagined as kids with green pastures, red barns, and smiling cows. Farming is now a mass scale operation…which allows these farms the ability to produce cheaper food (which we all demand) in high volume. The problem is that food safety, animal welfare, and the environment have taken a back seat to profits. So if you’re eating meat from these farms, your health is most likely in serious jeopardy.

The fact is, factory farms pose a major health threat to us all…and in case you aren’t aware of the factory farming health issue, let me quickly get you up to speed. In the past 20 years or so, food production has consolidated so to speak…which has contributed to the growing issue of socially irresponsible corporate ownership.

For example:

Under this new vertical integration structure, one corporation typically controls every single aspect of the production process…and they leverage this tremendous consolidation of power against small farmers. From raising the animals to feed production…to slaughter, packaging, etc…the entire process is controlled by ONE corporation.

Due to the lack of free market economies in the industry, corporations are more likely to to act irresponsibly and be far less accountable than if they were operating under a perfect competition type of situation.

There is also cost externalization at play here. The small farmers are pretty much forced to do contract work for these corporations…and the corporation dictates all aspects of animal rearing, while the farmer is left out in the cold to assume all of the risk. The farmer also has to pay his or her own dime on overhead, waste management, and the disposal of any animals that don’t survive until slaughter. Also, we as consumers are directly impacted because of the environmental and health issues at play.

Now you may ask yourself…how the heck is a small farmer going to help ensure the majority of his animals make it to slaughter despite all odds being against that animal…so that the farmer can get paid? Simple…pump the animals full of antibiotics!

Here are some startling statistics:

-Antibiotics administered to people in the US annually to treat diseases: 3 million pounds.
-Antibiotics administered to livestock in the US annually for purposes other than treating disease: 24.6 million pounds.
-Antibiotics allowed in cow’s milk: 80
-Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in 1960: 13%
-Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in 1988: 91%
-Reason: Breeding of antibiotic resistant bacteria in factory farms due to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock.
-Response by entire European Economic Community to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: Complete ban.
-Response by American meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: Full and complete support.

Confinement at high stocking density requires high doses of antibiotics and sometimes even pesticides to mitigate the spread of disease and pestilence exacerbated by the crowded living conditions on these farms…and roughly 70% of all antibiotics in the United States are currently being unnecessarily used on healthy chickens, cows, and pigs for growth production.


Of course you may have already known that our meat supply was chock full of antibiotics, growth hormone, as well as a variety of other toxins and diseases, but I am assuming you were unaware of magnitude and scale of the issue.

Now you may want to pause and ask yourself…

Why the heck are these animals being force-fed antibiotics on such a large scale?

or…

How is it even legal to pump farm animals full of antibiotics when the stats clearly show that the percentage of drug resistant bugs is steadily increasing each year?

or…

Why aren’t those drugs being saved for use by the humans who so desperately need them?

These stats are disturbing to say the least…but are you beginning to see why these small farmers would be a little bit more inclined to use high doses of antibiotics on their animals? They have to if they want to make any money and survive as a farmer!

Don’t get me wrong here. I’m not trying to bash farmers, many of whom became farmers because they love animals and had a strong desire to work on the land and be close to nature. Trust me, most farmers don’t like what’s happened to the industry any more than you and I do.

But the dark reality is that more animals than ever are being subjected to brutal conditions on these farms than ever before, and the potential human health hazard from consuming these factory farmed animal meats is huge.

Here’s the scary part: I believe this unnecessary force feeding of antibiotics to the meats we all eat is dramatically increasing the risk of creating new drug resistant superbugs that could potentially open a pandora’s box for the next “black plague” in the near future.

Many pundits may argue that factory farming is health & nutrition issue, which is fine. I can totally see their point. But that’s not really “the point”…and that argument won’t put a DENT in the real issue at hand. You can’t just tell the government to “just outlaw” factory farming because of  “potential” health risks and expect them to spring into action. It’s just not that simple. The problem is much deeper than that. There are issues that must be examined on levels beneath the “obvious” surface issues. You see, this isn’t actually a health issue at all. Well at least not directly. Allow me to explain…

In my opinion, this is an economic issue, and an issue we all must be aware of and be more vigilant about.

PROFITS OVER HEALTH

The entire food industry in the United States runs on a for profit model. This typically means that they operate using the same financial rules as most major corporations. ROI.

This means that most “health concerns” take a back seat to the bottom line, which is money and profits. From what I’ve seen, it almost appears as if America doesn’t care. Most of us still go out and gorge at fast food restaurants…and buy pre-packaged and processed foods which are cheaper to make…but heavily laden with artificial colorings, chemical additives, fillers, MSG, artificial sweeteners, toxins, etc.

And every time we “buy cheap” we encourage large companies to produce new “more efficient” methods of providing us food that are less expensive to us…even though these innovations typically make our food less and less healthy than the previous “innovation” did.

I don’t want to get off topic and make this an animal rights issue because I feel strongly that it is more of a human rights issue. However, we should not just bury our heads in the sand and turn a blind eye at how livestock is being treated. Especially if there is a direct impact of how factory farmed animals can impact our health and environment.

Transcript of New York Times full page ad published June 22, 2001 detailing the horrors of our modern-day slaughterhouses. With 309-330 cows per hour coming by on the “disassembly” line, there are many who are still fully conscious with eyes wide open when skinned and cut apart. They die literally piece by piece.

People are getting sick from contaminated meat at a rate never seen before in world history. Have we forgotten that whatever toxins, medicines, hormones, etc that’s in the animals we eat is passed onto us directly? Think about it. Our kids are developing faster. 12 year old girls have the fully developed bodies of 20 year old women. 8 and 9 year olds are sexually active. Growth Hormone perhaps?

Hey, perhaps a contributing factor to our “obesity issue” is the high level of growth hormone in our meat supply. Who knows? It’s at least worth looking into I think.

AN ECONOMIC ISSUE

Confinement at high stocking density is a major component of a systematic effort to produce the highest output at the lowest cost by relying on economies of scale.

If your economics is a little rusty, economies of scale is a term used in microeconomics, which refers to the cost advantages that a business obtains due to expansion.

Typically, a company that achieves economies of scale lowers the average cost per unit through increased production since fixed costs are shared over an increased number of goods. So as output increases, the average cost per unit decreases. Economies of scale gives big companies (large farm corporations in this case) access to a larger market by allowing them to operate with greater geographical reach.

This basically means that as these large farm corporations grow and produce more units, they have a better chance of decreasing costs, and therefore improving ROI and/or profits.

Here are a couple important stats…(for those of you who know me personally you know I’m a stats kinda guy :D )

1. Almost 30% of agricultural subsidies go to the top two percent of farms and over four-fifths to the top 30%.

2. In 1970, there were approximately 900,000 farms in the United States; by 1997, there were only 139,000.

3. Between 1969 and 1992, the number of producers selling 1000 hogs annually or less declined 73%. Producers selling more than 1000 annually increased 320%, according to the US Census of Agriculture.

4. Estimated inputs to produce a pound of: Pork: 6.9 pounds of grain, .44 gallons of gasoline, 430 gallons of water Beef: 4.8 pounds of grain, .25 gallons of gasoline, 390 gallons of water.

5. Meat production has grown worldwide from 44 million tons in 1950 to 211 million tons in 1997.

6. The price of meat would double or triple if full ecological costs – including fossil fuel use, groundwater depletion and agricultural-chemical
pollution – were factored in.

7. 90% of the nation’s poultry production is controlled by 10 companies.

8. In my home state of Maryland, chickens outnumber people 59 to 1.

9. American farm animals are fed roughly 80 percent of the domestically grown corn crops, 95 percent of the oats, and 98 percent of the soybeans. That’s a food quantity that would be equal or greater than the entire caloric needs of everyone in the world. Over 6 billion people!

There are billions of farm animals being raised within the factory farming system in North America. For those of you who have worked in a supply chain, you will understand the significance of the sheer volume of this issue.

Here is how the current factory farming system works in America: This is an intricate system which allows farmers to squeeze as many animals as possible into a specified space. Typically, these spaces are small, dark, and nasty. This practice makes efficient use of space, animal feed, labor and other resources. It also requires less land and makes animals easier to handle and maintain. So it is relatively efficient when it comes to costs.

The animals are then fed a bunch of antibiotics to prevent disease and keep them alive in crowded, unlivable, factory farm conditions. They are also given growth hormone, which helps the animals grow faster so they can go through the system and onto the market quicker. This is also very cost efficient for the farmers.

(In my opinion the system is flawed because most small farmers lack the resources to care for the large volume of animals that come through their facilities…so many animals end up dying slow painful deaths.)

The factory farming process is very disturbing…BUT… the farms are forced to do this because we as consumers demand cheap prices for chicken, eggs, pork, and beef when we go grocery shopping. So this is a basic supply and demand issue, and not directly a health and nutrition issue. The health and nutrition aspect is just a secondary spin-off of our demand for cheaper meat.

From my understanding, the antibiotics play a significant role in the system. The entire model appears to be geared towards maximizing production at the lowest cost by placing the maximum number of animals into any one space, feeding them inexpensive government subsidized grain, and pumping them full of drugs to keep them healthy enough for our consumption. The antibiotics are simply used to help the animals deal with the sicknesses associated with overcrowding and a poor diet.

So until our demand for meat goes down, factory farming will continue to operate on the same, if not greater, scale. People may hate the cold hard truth, but economically speaking, it will be very tough to get this antibiotic/hormone situation to ever go away because small scale farming can in no way support the ten billion or so farmed animals that go to slaughter each year. So if we got rid of the antibiotics, large scale farming would cease to exist. As a result, there would be a limited supply of meat…which would drive up the price. Meat could go up to $30 per pound or more!

BUT…perhaps price DOES need to increase so it can reflect the ACTUAL cost of eating meat. For example, if price were to go up, consumption would definitely decrease. Portion sizes would decrease, and I bet people would end up being much slimmer.

THE NEXT PLAGUE

First a few environmental and waste pollution stats…

1. The USDA reports that animals in the US meat industry produce 61 million tons of waste each year, which is 130 times the volume of human waste – or five tons for every US citizen.

2. North Carolina’s 7,000,000 factory-raised hogs create four times as much waste – stored in reeking, open cesspools – as the state’s 6.5 million people. The Delmarva Peninsula’s 600 million chickens produce 400,000 tons of manure a year.

3. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, hog, chicken and cattle waste has polluted 35,000 miles of rivers in 22 states and contaminated groundwater in 17 states.

4. Pfiesteria, a microscopic organism that feeds off the phosphorus and nitrogen found in manure, is a lethal toxin harmful to both humans and fish. In 1991 alone, 1,000,000,000,000 (one billion) fish were killed by pfiesteria in the Neuse River in North Carolina.

5. Since 1995, an additional one billion fish have been killed from manure runoff in estuaries and coastal areas in North Carolina, and the Maryland and Virginia tributaries leading into the Chesapeake Bay. These deaths can be directly related to the 10 million hogs currently being raised in North Carolina and the 620 million chickens on the Eastern Shore of the Chesapeake Bay.

6. The pollution from animal waste causes respiratory problems, skin infections, nausea, depression and even death for people who live near factory farms. Livestock waste has been linked to six miscarriages in women living near a hog factory in Indiana.

7. In Virginia, state guidelines indicate that a safe level of fecal coliform bacteria is 200 colonies per 100 milliliters of water. In 1997, some streams had levels as high as 424,000 per 100 milliliters.

8. A report by the USDA estimates that 89% of US beef patties contain traces of the deadly E. coli strain. Reuters News Service 8/10/00

9. US pigs raised in total confinement factories where they never see the light of day until being trucked to slaughter: 65 million (total confinement factories are banned in Britain)

10. US pigs who have pneumonia at time of slaughter: 70%

11. 90% of US chickens are infected with leukosis (chicken cancer) at the time of slaughter.

12. Average lifespan of a dairy cow – 25 years; average lifespan when on a factory dairy farm – 4 years

The issue of humane treatment of farm animals is important, but it goes beyond the scope of this article. A far more important issue is the fact that we are exhausting limited resources. We don’t currently spend enough money on new antibiotic development; and most of the antibiotics we use are, more often than not, are the same ones our grandparents used.

Of course, in America, profits usually take precedence over health…but you would think that since most of the major worldwide disease epidemics arise from diseases which cross over from animals into humans…that we would be more vigilant about researching and developing new drugs.

I am by no means an expert, but any reasonable person can assume that this antibiotic misuse in farm animals, combined with the continued increase in the human population as well as meat consumption will only make the risk of a superbug epidemic that much greater…and on a much larger scale than we have ever seen before.

Of course our society will continue to grow, and new innovations in medical science keep people alive longer, but if we behave irresponsibly when it comes to drug usage, we could be paving the way for our own demise.

And we do this for what reason? Cheaper bacon? Ground beef that’s 99 cents cheaper per pound? $2.99 per pound cheap ground turkey? Do the risks balance out the potential reward? I think not.

Just so you can understand the seriousness of this issue…The Natural Resources Defense Council, Union of Concerned Scientists, and other health and science groups filed suit against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last week for allowing factory farms to waste our precious antibiotics on healthy livestock, just to help them grow fatter faster.

I’m not sure what will come of this suit but I think it may be a major step in the right direction.

FINAL THOUGHTS

This factory farming issue isn’t about health & nutrition really. It’s more about finance and economics, supply and demand, as well as self interest and greed. Frankly I think it is all our fault as consumers. We demand cheap prices…the system sort of just gave us what we wanted and now we’ve created a monster.

But regardless of who is at fault here…there are toxic medicines/chemicals/substances that are getting into our food and water supply and most Americans unknowingly eat/drink/breathe them on a daily basis. This practice must come to an end sooner rather than later.

The potential health threat is enormous, and don’t think that just because you don’t eat meat that you’re safe. We all still drink water and are subject to various other throwbacks as well. So the vegan/vegetarian argument is null and void here. If you live in this society, regardless of the type of diet you follow, you are still subject to the various trickle down effects that our environment places upon you.

In case you think I’m full of it, see the bullet points below…

1. Concentrating large numbers of animals in factory farms is a major contribution to global environmental degradation, through the need to grow feed (often by intensive methods using excessive fertilizer and pesticides), pollution of water, soil and air by agrochemicals and manure waste, and use of limited resources (water, energy,etc).

2. Man made lagoons on industrial farms hold millions of gallons of liquid waste, from which contaminants can leach into groundwater. The manure is normally sprayed on crops (yes yours too my vegetarian/vegan friends), but often excessively, leading it to run off into surface waters (yes we drink it).

3. Excessive waste created by large concentrations of factory farmed animals is handled in ways that can pollute air and water.

As nasty as it sounds…US livestock in confinement operations produces about 1 billion tons of waste which is not recycled. This waste often ends up in our water supply.

Check out this crazy stat…

The Exxon-Valdez oil spill amounted to 12 million gallons of oil…BUT…there were 25 MILLION gallons of putrefying hog urine and feces spilled into the New River in North Carolina on June 21, 1995, when a “lagoon” holding 8 acres of hog excrement burst. Gross. And it could happen in your town as well.

The bottom line is that the Agriculture business needs to clean itself up. It needs to be come more transparent and more accountable.

The problem is that the industry (backed by the U.S. Government) appears to be writing it’s own rules…and anything that gets in the way of profit margins or ROI is immediately neutralized.

But who can blame them? A single dairy cow contributes roughly $1,300 to a local rural economy each year, each beef cow over $800, and so on. As Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Dennis Wolff stated, “Research estimates that the annual economic impact per cow is $13,737. In addition, each $1 million increase in Pennsylvania milk sales creates 23 new jobs. This tells us that dairy farms are good for the state’s economy.”

The solution isn’t as simple as telling people to “just don’t eat meat” or “go vegan” because there are larger economic issues at stake than just reducing consumption. What happens to all of the pigs, cows, chickens, etc that aren’t eaten? Do we just put them on a farm to live out their lives? Who pays for that? Do we kill them to keep population numbers down? Who pays for that? What’s the REAL solution?

What happens to the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of jobs, just in the United States alone, that will be lost due to farms shutting down? How will that impact the economy? Can our current system produce enough fruits and vegetables to feed our Nation of roughly 300 million people if everyone suddenly became vegetarian/vegan?

There are a ton of variables in play here…human health, animal health, the environmental issue, the animal welfare issue, labor problems, economics, food safety issues, pollution, ethics, disease, the list goes on and on.

You see…the solution is not as simple as some may lead you to believe. The current system, despite it’s flaws, may be the best option out of the bunch who knows.

POTENTIAL OPTIONS

1. Do your research. It’s hard to be a true voice on an issue when you don’t have a clue what’s really going on.
2. Stop eating factory farmed meat, eggs, and dairy. [If you must] eat grass fed beef, free range chicken, and cage free eggs.
3. Follow a plant based diet. You’ll be much healthier as a result.
4. Buy locally from small farmers, they can definitely use the support.
5. Raise your own livestock (sic) in a way that does not cause unnecessary suffering to animals, our planet, and/or our health.

I want to hear what you think about this issue. Your opinion matters…and I want to hear it so please don’t be shy, voice your opinion in a comment below!

As always, thanks for reading. Stay healthy :)

JAMIN THOMPSON is a model, actor and fitness expert. 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

ADVERT PRO NOBIS

IF YOU CAN’T SEND A DONATION, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, AND YOU THINK THIS PUBLICATION IS WORTH SUPPORTING, AT LEAST HELP THE GREANVILLE POST EXPAND ITS INFLUENCE BY MENTIONING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS VIA TWEET OR OTHER SOCIAL NETWORKS! We are in a battle of communications with entrenched enemies that won’t stop until this world is destroyed and our remaining democratic rights stamped out. Only mass education and mobilization can stop this process.

It’s really up to you. Do your part while you can. •••

Donating? Use PayPal via the button below.

THANK YOU.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



ANIMAL EXPLOITATION NEVER ENDS: Big Purses, Sore Horses, and Death

April 30, 2012 / Reprinted under editorial comment provisions
[Suggested by Gloria Stevenson]
Jockeys and mounts: Just trading cards for people’s greed

Luck—which put the issue of equine exploitation right on the front burner—the public would still be largely ignorant about this shameful situation. Now, considering the abysmal attention span of most Americans, where we go from here is anyone’s guess. —PG
 

Large payouts to owners make it profitable for owners to field thoroughbreds that are past their prime, sometimes with fatal results.

>

By JOE DRAPE, WALT BOGDANICH, REBECCA R. RUIZ and GRIFFIN PALMER
The New York Times
For all the preparation, that first race, on March 3, turned out to be his last. As he approached the first turn, Wes Vegas broke a leg and had to be euthanized.
 
A week earlier, another horse, the 4-year-old Coronado Heights, who records show had “early degenerative joint disease,” suffered a fatal breakdown at Aqueduct after receiving 13 injections for pain and cartilage damage in the month before his race.
 
Since a casino opened at Aqueduct late last year, offering vastly richer prizes, 30 horses have died racing there, a 100 percent increase in the fatality rate over the same period the previous year. Like Wes Vegas and Coronado Heights, many had been injected repeatedly with pain medication in the weeks before their breakdowns, according to a review of veterinary records by The New York Times.
 
Pain medication during training is legal as long as it does not exceed certain levels on race day. But the prevalence of drugs is a graphic illustration of how the flood of casino cash has created powerful and dangerous incentives to run sore, tired or otherwise unfit horses in pursuit of that big score.
 
“If the public knew how many medications these horses were administered after entry time, I don’t think they would tolerate it,” said Dr. Rick Arthur, equine medical director of the California Horse Racing Board.
 
Amid the uproar over the Aqueduct death toll, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York ordered an investigation to “ensure against needless injuries to horses and to riders.” Experts are examining various factors — not just drugs, but issues like track conditions and pre-race inspections.  But what is indisputable is that casinos opening at Aqueduct and a growing number of racetracks have recalibrated the age-old economic equations of the horse-racing game.
 
To survive amid a riot of new, technologically advanced gambling options, track owners have increasingly succumbed to the gambling industry’s offer to sweeten racing purses with slot machine revenue. But if casinos promise to prop up a struggling sport, they can also erode the loyalty that owners and trainers feel toward their horses, turning them, in the words of Maggi Moss, a leading owner, into “trading cards for people’s greed.”
 
“It’s strictly self-centered greed of not thinking about the horse but thinking about maybe I can get one more race out of him and get a piece of the game,” said Dr. Tom David, until recently the chief veterinarian for the Louisiana Racing Commission.
 
To better protect the horses, some industry experts say, purses should be limited so the potential winnings in any race do not exceed the value of the horses running in it. That way, the incentive for the owner is to care for the horse over the long haul, rather than risking it for a single payday. A prominent veterinarians group, the American Association of Equine Practitioners, recommends that no purse exceed a horse’s value by more than 50 percent.
 
Yet that recommendation is widely ignored, The Times found.
 
At Aqueduct, horses worth $7,500 — at the lowest level of competition — recently raced for a $40,000 purse, nearly four times the recommended maximum. Two of them broke down and had to be euthanized. Both had been given pain medication in the days leading up to the race. In all, 19 of the 30 Aqueduct deaths occurred in races where the veterinarians’ standard was violated.
 
Nationwide, 57 percent of thoroughbred claiming races at casino tracks exceeded that 50 percent standard, and horses broke down or showed signs of injury at a 29 percent higher rate in those races, according to a Times analysis.
 
In a statement, the New York Racing Association said “it would be inappropriate and irresponsible of The New York Times to speculate on the reasons for breakdowns and injuries” before the governor’s task force has finished its inquiry.
 
Big purses have destabilized the racetrack economy in another way. Every claiming race is essentially a marketplace, with all horses for sale at a fixed price. But the casino money has set off a frenzy of horse trading at Aqueduct, with owners eager to buy and also to sell to slake the surging demand. Since the casino opened late last fall, nearly 500 horses and $10.7 million have changed hands, more than double the previous year, records show.
 
Again, the incentive is to push horses, fit or not, out onto the track.
 
“If horses don’t win, people just get rid of them,” Ms. Moss said.
 
The turmoil at Aqueduct over the last six months caught many in the industry by surprise. But a cautionary tale played out two years before at Penn National, where nine horses belonging to a single owner died while racing, prompting a boycott by jockeys. State investigators discovered evidence of serious problems in the owner’s operation: trainers and other employees injecting horses with illegal drugs and administering other illicit treatments at an off-track training center.
 
When the Hollywood Casino arrived in 2008, Penn National became part of a casino expansion that now encompasses more than a third of the nation’s thoroughbred racetracks. Gambling companies, state budgets and some horse owners have benefited, but the spread of casinos has left many people wondering if in the long run, casino gambling is hurting racing and the horses themselves.
 
“In spite of what they say, and they are my friends whom I love dearly, they do not care about horse racing,” William Koester, of the Ohio State Racing Commission, said recently of the casino industry. “They care about gaming. That is their mission.”
 
Lame and Still Racing
Melodeeman, a 10-year-old thoroughbred, had earned a rest.
 
He raced gallantly for six owners. He set a track record at Aqueduct for the fastest five and a half furlongs and earned more than $250,000 in his career. He raced even after a broken leg was put back together with three stainless-steel screws.
 
But by the evening of Jan. 21, 2010, Melodeeman had hit the bottom of the racing world. As the temperature hovered near freezing at Penn National, he prepared to compete among the lowest quality thoroughbreds.
 
In a different time, Melodeeman might have skipped this race, or retired altogether. Not now. Not here. Profits from the track’s casino had fattened the purse to $18,000, far more than the $4,000 for which each horse could be purchased, or claimed — precisely the kind of cost disparity that prominent veterinarians had warned against.
 
Eager to get in on the action, three people filed claims to buy three horses in the race.
No one tried to buy Melodeeman.
 
According to one exercise rider who saw the horse well before the race, Melodeeman was clearly lame. But Melodeeman raced anyhow that evening.
 
Turning for home, his front legs buckled, sending his jockey, Angel Quinones, flying. Melodeeman had snapped his right cannon bone and was euthanized at the track, almost four years to the day after he set his Aqueduct record.
 
State regulators were suspicious. Other horses belonging to the same owner, Michael Gill, had been breaking down in large numbers, and jockeys were complaining.
 
A subsequent necropsy revealed that Melodeeman not only had degenerative joint disease in the lower part of his two front legs, but that his fatal fracture occurred next to the earlier break mended with three screws. The examiners were concerned enough to have snapped a color photograph of the screws.
 
A prohibited sedative, fluphenazine, was also found in Melodeeman’s brain, according to records obtained by The Times. Fluphenazine can calm a horse that becomes agitated because of discomfort or injury, according to two veterinarians.
 
Melodeeman’s fatal breakdown was not quickly forgotten by jockeys on the backside at Penn National. A revolt was brewing.
 
Jockeys Fight Back
Mr. Gill made his fortune in the mortgage brokerage business before becoming one of the nation’s most successful — and controversial — thoroughbred owners. He was a winner of the Eclipse Award as the nation’s outstanding owner, but tracks in several states denied him stable space because of brushes with regulators over his treatment of horses. He set up a training center in Chester County, Pa., giving him easy access to three casino tracks, among them Penn National.
 
Although the casino there does a steady business, the track itself seems almost an afterthought. It sits behind the parking garage, barely visible from the gambling floor. On many nights, the few racing fans who show up outside buy programs from a vending machine and beer at a single counter.
 
But there was no secret why Mr. Gill had made Penn National the hub of his operation: the hefty purses.
 
Now, Melodeeman’s death threatened to upend it all.
 
The next morning, Thomas Clifton, a veteran jockey, complained to the state racing commission’s office at Penn National that Mr. Gill’s horses were unsafe. He had been making similar complaints for a month.
“The horses go perfectly sound right up to the second they snap their leg off,” Mr. Clifton said. The following day he came back with a warning: “If we have one more horse break down, we are going to have a major problem on our hands.”
 
That night, riding in the fifth race, Mr. Clifton heard a bone snap and saw another jockey, Ricky Frazier, vaulting off a horse named Laughing Moon. Mr. Clifton yanked his own mount, but they still went soaring over Laughing Moon.
 
Within minutes, Mr. Frazier was in an ambulance and a veterinarian was administering a lethal injection to Laughing Moon, the ninth Gill horse to die racing in 10 months.
 
That is when the jockeys decided to take a stand: They would not ride in any race with a Gill-owned horse.
Their boycott cast a harsh light on the Pennsylvania Racing Commission and Penn National Gaming, which owns the track.
 
“It wasn’t the commission or the racetrack or anyone with any responsibility for horses and riders who took action,” said George Strawbridge, a prominent breeder and owner. “It was the jockeys who feared for their life. That’s not a shame. That’s a disgrace.”
 
Track officials and regulators had ample reason to question the integrity of Mr. Gill’s operation well before the boycott.
 
Regulators did not have the authority to monitor the treatment of horses on Mr. Gill’s ranch, but three months before the boycott, the commission and track security officers searched a van delivering Mr. Gill’s Lion’s Pride, who was scheduled to race that day. They found four syringes, and Lion’s Pride tested positive for a corticosteroid used to treat joint inflammation.
 
Lion’s Pride was not allowed to race that night. But on Dec. 18, 2009, after running barely a quarter of a mile, he suffered a fatal breakdown.
 
By then, an employee of Mr. Gill’s ranch had already told state police investigators that horses were being injected with drugs on race day, which is illegal. Investigators later heard accounts of snake venom injections and other performance enhancing treatments on race day, according to records obtained by The Times.
 
Dr. Jerry Pack, a former veterinarian for the racing commission who now works for Penn National, told the police that he suspected Mr. Gill’s horses received an illegal performance enhancing substance. He also said trainers were using shock wave therapy, which can mask injury. “This is also dangerous to the welfare of the horse,” he told investigators.
 
Suspicions were heightened by the backgrounds of some employees of Mr. Gill, including two trainers, Cole Norman and Darrel Delahoussaye.
 
Mr. Norman had been fined or suspended 30 times in four states for drugging horses. The authorities had accused him three times of administering an illegal “milkshake” — a concoction of baking soda, sugar and electrolytes delivered through a tube down a horse’s throat to combat fatigue by breaking up lactic acid. Mr. Norman was also incarcerated for killing a driver in a head-on collision while under the influence of prescription painkillers.
 
In 1984, Mr. Delahoussaye lost his Louisiana training license after a conviction for check fraud, and Ohio later suspended him for possessing syringes and drugs and for using a makeshift electric cattle prod on a horse. Mr. Gill himself had once been suspended from racing after syringes and needles were found in his barn at a New Hampshire racetrack.
 
A grand jury in Dauphin County, Pa., investigated reports of horse doping and other corrupt acts. But Mr. Delahoussaye was the only one charged, with doping. A plea agreement kept him out of jail — and out of racing in Pennsylvania.
 
In the face of the boycott, the racing commission ejected Mr. Gill and his racing manager, Anthony Adamo, from Penn National. They filed a federal lawsuit, saying that they were expelled for no valid reason and without a hearing. A trial took place last week and a decision is expected soon.
 
Alan Pincus, a lawyer for the men, said that they have been unfairly tainted with “all kinds of innuendo and lies for over two years,” and that the testimony showed that their ejection “was not based on any culpable wrongdoing.”
 
Mr. Gill said that he rarely visited Elk Creek Ranch, his Pennsylvania training center, and that he never instructed anyone to break racing rules.
 
Chris McErlean, vice president of racing at Penn National, said the investigation of Mr. Gill and the enforcement of racing rules was the responsibility of the state racing commission, which declined repeated requests for an interview.
 
Since the jockey boycott, change has come slowly at Penn National. The track began doing pre-race inspections of horses — routine at most racetracks in North America — only last October.
 
The track’s owner has declined to seek accreditation or to contribute to a fund for jockey benefits.
In September, an injured filly had to wait more than an hour to be euthanized because Penn National had no licensed veterinarian on duty during morning training. The company said it was not the track’s responsibility, though it is a requirement of accreditation.
 
“There’s cost issues and there’s problems we have with the process,” Mr. McErlean said of accreditation. “They are making racetracks solely responsible, presenting it as a racetrack-only issue. They don’t accredit horsemen, or breeders.”
 
Bought and Sold
Aqueduct has never been the most glamorous track. The sound of pounding hooves is often drowned out by the roar of jets at nearby Kennedy International Airport. The bulk of its racing is conducted in the winter, when top owners move their horses to Florida to race.
 
Aqueduct is a neighborhood track for working-class horsemen, where low-level horses are bought and sold in claiming races, which account for nearly 70 percent of American racing.
 
In claiming races, horses are grouped by ability and price. In a $10,000 claiming race, for example, any horse can be “claimed” or bought for that price. The goal is to lure a group of evenly matched horses to attract bettors but also to ensure a level playing field. The deterrent to entering a high-caliber horse in a low-level claiming race is the risk of losing it for a pittance.
 
Aqueduct is a case study of how casinos have altered the economics of claiming races. Purses there have jumped by about $130,000 a day compared with the previous year. At the same time, crops of thoroughbreds nationwide have declined and, many experts say, so has their overall quality. The result, at Aqueduct and other casino tracks, is daily cards of low-level claiming races being run for higher purses and a spike in the claiming of horses by owners seeking a quick profit.
 
Among them was Bojan, a valuable commodity, but a disposable one, too.
 
Bojan possessed enough good looks and pedigree to fetch $107,000 at a yearling sale in Kentucky in 2008. Now it was April 6, 2012 — Good Friday — and just as Bojan was about to run in the first race at Aqueduct, a trainer named Juan Serey dropped a slip of paper into a box in the racing office, agreeing to pay $10,000 for him on behalf of an owner who employed him. But the horse would not be his until after the race.
Mr. Serey, who has been the leading trainer at Aqueduct, knew the horse had a fragile tendon and puffy ankles. It was why Bojan kept coming up for sale at the bottom of the claiming ladder, why he had changed hands twice in two months.
 
Even so, Bojan had continued to prove a sound investment. He had earned more than $19,000 for one owner and trainer, Linda Rice, in the span of 16 days, and his current co-owner and trainer, David Jacobson, had owned Bojan for a single race — a victory worth $17,400.
 
Mr. Serey decided to roll the dice.
 
“Everybody just wants a horse, and they want him now to race in 10 days,” he said. “I want a horse today and I don’t want it tomorrow. I’m a businessman.”
 
Turning for home, Bojan led the field and it looked like Mr. Serey had chosen well. Suddenly, however, the horse faltered and his jockey stood up in the saddle. They hobbled home, finishing fourth. Moments later Bojan was boarding a horse ambulance.
 
“They tried to roll him and win the race and get the money,” Mr. Serey said of Bojan’s owners.
Indeed, the owners walked away with the $1,150 fourth-place check.
 
Mr. Serey had no regrets. “You’ve got to take the good ones and the bad ones,” he said, adding, “If somebody takes my bad horses, it’s good.”
 
Since the casino opened at the end of October, Aqueduct has seen a sharp rise in the number of horses injured and killed. Horses have broken down or shown signs of injury at Aqueduct at a rate of 10.2 per thousand starts, or more than double the national rate of 5.0 per thousand starts for thoroughbred racing, according to a Times analysis.
 
Similar trends are evident at some tracks around the country. The five casino tracks in New Mexico have rates for thoroughbred breakdowns that are double the national average, with Ruidoso Downs and Zia Park topping the list with 12.5 and 12.1, respectively, per thousand starts.
 
Coleman Lloyd, the racing secretary at Evangeline Downs Racetrack and Casino in Louisiana, told the state racing commission that the only conclusion that can be drawn from Evangeline’s high fatality rate was it “runs more races and cheaper horses,” according to the minutes of an Aug. 30, 2010, meeting.
 
Joe Gorajec, executive director of the Indiana Horse Racing Commission, said his state capped the number of racing days at 75 and mandated that low-level claiming races make up only 30 percent of the program.
“If you had just what I would call obscene money on these lower-level horses, it would affect the judgment of those horsemen,” he said.
 
Beyond the numbers, veterinary records obtained by The Times on Aqueduct’s 30 horse deaths show in raw terms how pain medication is used in racing.
 
In the week leading to a $7,500 claiming race with a $40,000 purse in early March, Big Polk a Dot’s right front ankle was injected with powerful cortisone, his feed was laced with a potent anti-inflammatory and he was shot with a painkiller, records show.
 
One of his rivals, Almighty Silver, got his left and right lower hocks injected with a painkiller and his front ankles with synthetic joint fluid. He also got an injection to dilate his airway, records show.
 
Big Polk a Dot ran barely an eighth of a mile before his right front cannon bone snapped and he was euthanized. Almighty Silver managed to finish third, despite a fractured right front leg.
 
While his effort earned $4,000 for his owner, Almighty Silver was taken by ambulance to Aqueduct’s backside where he, too, was put out of his misery.
 
These horses got little protection from state regulators or the racetrack. Even as the death toll was rising, necropsies were not performed to determine if pre-existing injuries had contributed to the fatal breakdowns. Nor were toxicology exams conducted.
 
In March, days after Governor Cuomo announced he would appoint a task force to investigate the fatalities, New York Racing Association veterinarians became more aggressive in keeping unfit horses out of the starting gate, which Dr. Anthony Verderosa, its chief examining veterinarian, called “a coincidence.”
The State Racing and Wagering Board announced an emergency rule voiding a claim if a horse had to be euthanized on the track. Among the 30 dead horses, 7 had been claimed in the race in which they had broken down.
 
But in the ethic of horse traders — in which you are just as likely to sell a damaged horse as buy one — not everyone believed that prohibiting the claiming of dead horses was a good idea.  “This is a game,” Mr. Serey said, “and we have to know how to play.”
 
A Fight for a Horse
Horses have never been a game to Earle Mack. A real estate developer, philanthropist and former ambassador to Finland, Mr. Mack began breeding and racing thoroughbreds more than 50 years ago. He spent seven years in the 1980s as chairman of the New York State Racing Commission.
 
Over the past nine months, Mr. Mack has had a frustrating, front-row seat for how horses are treated in the casino era of horse racing. In 2008, he brought a beautifully bred horse from Argentina named Star Plus to the United States. Star Plus won one race and took second in another. Although minor injuries sidelined him in 2009, he won a race the following year. But on March 28, 2010, at Gulfstream Park, he suffered a career-ending ankle injury. The veterinarian recommended he never be ridden again.
 
Mr. Mack retired Star Plus to a farm in Florida. But last summer, Mr. Mack said he sold the horse for just $1,000, after the new owners agreed not to race him again.
 
Instead, the new owners, George Iacovacci and Kelly Spanabel, began training Star Plus. Records show that Mr. Iacovacci, an owner-trainer, and Ms. Spanabel, a jockey, eke out a living at casino racetracks, which often pay purse money through last place. Last year, for example, horses Mr. Iacovacci owned made more than $90,000, despite winning only five times.
 
When Mr. Mack found out Star Plus was training, he alerted racing officials and offered to buy him back. The couple refused. Last July, they ran Star Plus in Michigan and, in November, in two races at West Virginia’s Mountaineer Park. He finished last all three times.
 
On Jan. 9, after discovering Star Plus was entered to run two days later at Charles Town, Mr. Mack faxed a letter to the West Virginia Racing Commission.
 
“As you are undoubtedly aware,” he wrote, “with an impaired ankle this horse is a danger to himself, his rider and everyone on any track where he is allowed to work and race.” Darcy Scudera, who cares for Mr. Mack’s horses in Florida, also contacted West Virginia officials, but was told there was nothing they could do.
 
Three weeks later, Mr. Mack wrote to the Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission, but he said he never heard back.
 
On Jan. 28, Star Plus was again outclassed by six other horses, clomping home 43 1/4 lengths behind. Even so, he earned his owners $1,000.
 
“This is clearly abuse, and anyone interested in animals should have stopped it,” Mr. Mack said. “But these tracks need full fields and have got to fill races. That’s why they pay $1,000 for last place.”
 
Last month, after the West Virginia attorney general’s office persuaded state racing officials to hear the case, Mr. Iacovacci and Ms. Spanabel sold the horse back to Mr. Mack for $7,000. Ms. Spanabel said that she and Mr. Iacovacci never agreed to retire Star Plus, and that they decided to sell the horse back when it became clear he was not going to be allowed to compete.
 
Star Plus is now retired in Kentucky.
 
“These horses have fought so hard for us and given us so many great thrills and happiness,” Mr. Mack said. “Don’t they deserve to be cared for? Don’t they deserve better than what we’re giving them?”
–
Dara L. Miles contributed reporting.

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

ADVERT PRO NOBIS

IF YOU CAN’T SEND A DONATION, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, AND YOU THINK THIS PUBLICATION IS WORTH SUPPORTING, AT LEAST HELP THE GREANVILLE POST EXPAND ITS INFLUENCE BY MENTIONING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS VIA TWEET OR OTHER SOCIAL NETWORKS! We are in a battle of communications with entrenched enemies that won’t stop until this world is destroyed and our remaining democratic rights stamped out. Only mass education and mobilization can stop this process.

It’s really up to you. Do your part while you can. •••

Donating? Use PayPal via the button below.

THANK YOU.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Earthlings (Documentary)

 

About Earthlings
(Thank you Jennifer Wheeler.)

Using hidden cameras and never-before-seen footage, EARTHLINGS chronicles the day-to-day practices of the largest industries in the world, all of which rely entirely on animals for profit.

EARTHLINGS is a powerful and informative documentary about society’s treatment of animals, narrated by Joaquin Phoenix (left) with soundtrack by Moby. This multi-award winning film by Nation Earth is a must-see for anyone who cares about animals or wishes to make the world a better place. JOAQUIN PHOENIX was a natural choice to do the voice track as he comes from a family distinguished by its progressive views and values in relation to ecology and animals. Joaquin (he’s a brother of the late actor River Phoenix) is well known for his work as a social activist, and as an advocate for animal rights.
SEE VIDEO BELOW

EARTHLINGS is an award-winning documentary film about the suffering of animals for food, fashion, pets, entertainment and medical research. Considered the most persuasive documentary ever made, EARTHLINGS is nicknamed “the Vegan maker” for its sensitive footage shot at animal shelters, pet stores, puppy mills, factory farms, slaughterhouses, the leather and fur trades, sporting events, circuses and research labs.

Initially ignored by distributors, today EARTHLINGS is considered the definitive animal rights film by organizations around the world. “Of all the films I have ever made, this is the one that gets people talking the most,” said Phoenix. “For every one person who sees EARTHLINGS, they will tell three.”

In 1999, writer/producer/director Shaun Monson began work on a series of PSAs about spaying and neutering pets. The footage he shot at animal shelters around Los Angeles affected him so profoundly that the project soon evolved into EARTHLINGS. The film would take another six years to complete because of the difficulty in obtaining footage within these profitable industries. Though the film was initially ignored by distributors, who told Monson that the film would “never see the light of day and should be swept under the rug,” today EARTHLINGS is considered the definitive animal rights film by organizations around the world.

Nation Earth was established to produce documentary films on socially urgent issues. EARTHLINGS, released in 2005, was the company’s first feature film and is the first of a documentary trilogy. The company is currently at work on the second installment, UNITY, which will explore the unifying force of consciousness found in nature, animals and humankind. UNITY is scheduled to be completed in 2010. For more information please see www.unitythemovie.com or visit the main site at http://www.earthlings.com/.

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

ADVERT PRO NOBIS

IF YOU CAN’T SEND A DONATION, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, AND YOU THINK THIS PUBLICATION IS WORTH SUPPORTING, AT LEAST HELP THE GREANVILLE POST EXPAND ITS INFLUENCE BY MENTIONING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS VIA TWEET OR OTHER SOCIAL NETWORKS! We are in a battle of communications with entrenched enemies that won’t stop until this world is destroyed and our remaining democratic rights stamped out. Only mass education and mobilization can stop this process.

It’s really up to you. Do your part while you can. •••

Donating? Use PayPal via the button below.

THANK YOU.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



Editoriales | Cuaresma: Los peces también sienten [TGP en Español]

Cuaresma: Los peces también sienten
[Fish also feel pain] Use the translate bar to render piece into English

Por Leonora Esquivel Frías, Directora/Fundadora de AnimalNaturalis Internacional

Abril 4
 
Durante la época de cuaresma se fomenta el consumo de peces y se “deja descansar” a los mamíferos y aves. Sin embargo, la pesca industrial es responsable de la extinción de especies marinas. Con sus redes de arrastre capturan no sólo lo considerado comestible, sino que atrapan anualmente a cientos de tortugas, delfines, tiburones y aves marinas como el albatros. Millones de toneladas de peces considerados “sin valor comercial” son devueltos al mar agonizantes o muertos. Estas redes también destruyen el fondo marino y los arrecifes coralinos.

Mucha gente cree que los peces no sienten dolor y que su muerte al sacarlos del agua es instantánea, pero esto no es así. Aunque los peces no manifiesten el dolor de la misma manera que los mamíferos o las aves, tienen receptores nerviosos, como todos los vertebrados, que les permiten sentirlo. Aunque no griten ni emitan sonidos, podemos ver cómo se agitan al ser sacados del agua en un intento por escapar del anzuelo. Es evidente que los peces sienten dolor pues éste es una señal de alerta que les ayuda a sobrevivir evitando aquello que se los produzca. En la mayoría de los barcos pesqueros los peces son troceados y procesados estando todavía vivos. La manera más frecuentes de matar a los ejemplares más grandes son mediante palos o pisoteándolos.

Debido a la gran velocidad con que las redes sacan a los peces del agua, éstos sufren los efectos de la descompresión, lo que les causa estallamiento de las órbitas oculares. Las redes les provocan heridas profundas y fuera del agua pueden agonizar durante 3 minutos estando plenamente concientes.

Culum Brown, un biólogo de la Universidad de Edimburgo que estudia la evolución del aparato cognitivo de los peces dice “los peces son más inteligentes de lo que aparentan. Su memoria puede exceder la de los vertebrados considerados superiores, incluidos los primates no humanos.”

Por otro lado, los peces acumulan muchas sustancias tóxicas tales como plomo, mercurio, arsénico y otros contaminantes que son vertidos a las aguas industrialmente. Los ácidos grasos omega-3 se pueden encontrar en fuentes vegetales como el aceite de linaza y vegetales de hoja verde.

Probemos una dieta basada en vegetales y extendámosla más allá de festejos religiosos. Que nuestro credo sea: “no matarás”.

Para más información  visite www.HazteVegetariano.com

ACERCA DEL AUTOR

Leonora Esquivel Frías es Doctora en Filosofía por la Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. Es fundadora de AnimaNaturalis Internacional. Leonora es probablemente una de las activistas más efectivas en la lucha contra la tauromaquia en México

  http://blogs.eluniversal.com.mx/leonimal

http://www.facebook.com/LeonoraEsquivel

© AnimaNaturalis.org. Permitida su reproducción siempre y cuando se cite la fuente.

Si tienes consultas, contacta a espana@animanaturalis.org


 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

ADVERT PRO NOBIS

IF YOU CAN’T SEND A DONATION, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, AND YOU THINK THIS PUBLICATION IS WORTH SUPPORTING, AT LEAST HELP THE GREANVILLE POST EXPAND ITS INFLUENCE BY MENTIONING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS VIA TWEET OR OTHER SOCIAL NETWORKS! We are in a battle of communications with entrenched enemies that won’t stop until this world is destroyed and our remaining democratic rights stamped out. Only mass education and mobilization can stop this process.

It’s really up to you. Do your part while you can. •••

Donating? Use PayPal via the button below.

THANK YOU.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________