[Ed. Note: Unfortunately, the NY Times has not yet chosen to publish this great article about "humane" gassing of billions of chickens prior to their being slaughtered.]
From Karen Davis, United
Poultry Concerns
November 2010
October 22, 2010
Letters to the Editor
The New York Times
Dear Editor:
My letter is a response to “New Way to Help Chickens Cross to Other Side,” by
William Neuman, Oct. 21, 2010: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/business/22chicken.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
I disagree with the view set forth in this article that CO2 (carbon dioxide
gassing) is a humane method of killing chickens. It is most likely less cruel
than the conventional method of dragging conscious birds through
electrically-charged saltwater to paralyze their muscles in order to facilitate
feather removal after they are dead (and to immobilize the birds on the
slaughter line), but anything is likely to be better than being riddled with
electric shocks.
Evidence shows that birds, like mammals, have chemical receptors in their
lungs that are acutely sensitive to CO2, with the result that subjection to this
toxic gas induces pain, panic, suffocation and breathlessness (dyspnea), in
those who inhale it.
By contrast, chickens and other birds do not have the chemical receptors in
their lungs to detect inert gases such as argon and nitrogen, which is why
animal welfare proponents, including scientists like Dr. Mohan Raj, have fought
for decades for poultry slaughter plants to switch from electrical “stunning” to
the stun/kill method of inducing permanent unconsciousness in poultry by means
of nitrogen/argon.
Behavioral evidence supports the biological evidence. Whereas chickens
subjected to CO2 show clear signs of distress, shaking their heads and
stretching their necks to breathe, chickens in the presence of argon or nitrogen
exhibit no comparable signs of suffering.
Poultry companies sincerely wishing to reduce the suffering of their birds to a minimum should bypass CO2 and invest in inert gas systems. Then their proposed “humane” labels will have at least a semblance of truth.
Thank you for your
attention.
Sincerely,
Karen Davis, PhD, President
United Poultry Concerns
| 