Rationalisation+of+the+Meat+Industry+-+Not+So+Rational


 * Rationalisation of Meat Industry, Not So Rational**
 * Harriet Adsett**
 * n8329567**
 * Jey Rodgers**

The above video was provided by the animal welfare group Animals Australia with intentions to expose and raise awareness of the treatment towards animals in factory farms. The video presents the short life cycle of pigs, just one of the animals subjected to factory farming. It reveals the sufferable short life that animals are forced to endure before ending up on our plates.
 * []**
 * Cultural Artefact**

The reliance on factory farming has posed a great threat to public and environmental health. This is so through contributing to the spread of infections diseases, antibiotic resistant infections, the prevalence of chronic disease and the vast resources used through the mass production of meat (Henning, 2011). Factory farming is also the number one contributor of animal violence and abuse, forcing animals to live in overcrowded confinements where they are force-fed drugs, over-heated, left without water and then prematurely killed (PETA, 2013). Factory farming has sparked much discussion over the welfare of animals in the last year. The fight for animal welfare standards however is not relatively new with animal welfare actions dating back to as early as 1958 with when the United States Humane Methods of Slaughter Act was passed (Animal Welfare Institute, 2008). Over time Australia has developed extensive welfare standards and guidelines covering the vast range of animals used in the industry (Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines, 2013). These guidelines do advocate animal welfare however they do not eradicate all suffering imposed that naturally comes with factory farming. Currently in Australia, and also New Zealand there is strong legislation and consultation procedures that strive to regulate and improve the welfare of all animals however this is significantly lacking in other countries (Rahman, Ricketts & Walker, 2005). Religious and culturally rich developing countries are known to carry out abusive methods (Rahman, Ricketts & Walker, 2005). Animals are often transported in overcrowded trucks or on foot for hundreds of miles to the abattoirs, where they often have limited access to food, water and are repeatedly beaten (Ramasway, 1987).
 * Literature Review**

Recognition of the ethical issues surrounding factory farming has sparked major controversy and ethical debates as to how the animal industry should proceed. Famous philosopher Peter Singer argues that humans should extend to other species the equality that we recognize should be extended to all members of our own species (Regan & Singer 1989). Similarly Tom Regan postulates that animals have rights, which are valid moral claims that must always be respected, overriding any collective interests (Cohen & Regan, 2001). In awarding animals rights, human benefits reaped from consuming or using animal products is considered wrong. Regan believes that all animal experimentation, the fur industry and commercial farming therefore should be eradicated. On the contrary Carl Cohen argues that animals do not have rights and agrees that animal medical experimentation is fully justified. This brings us back to the theory of Speciesm, which is a “prejudice or bias in favour of the interests of one’s own species and against those of members of other species” (Singer, 1989). In particularly it argues that being human is enough reason for human animals to have greater moral rights than non-human animals (BBC, 2013). This allocation of rights to animals is a limitation in itself, as people who do not award rights to animals are not largely influenced to advocate change and cease the consumption of animal products.

Factory farming is an example of Rizer’s Mcdonaldisation (Ritzer, 1993). Where principles of the fast food industry; efficiency, calculability, predictability and control, have been applied to create a more rationalized process (Ritzer, 1993). However this rationalization is not so rationale after all given the immense amount of pain and suffering caused to animals, the increased environmental hazards and the detrimental affects to human health (Henning, 2011). New agrarian movements may help to overcome this factor. It incorporates many strategies but mainly involves returning to more “natural” methods of producing food and raising animals, such as local, organic and free-range animal produce. The eradication of CAFOs in theory would do wonders to the environment, the human population and the earth. By living off agrarian methods, factory farms would be eradicated, reducing the spread of treatment resistant infections due to no longer needing preventative antibiotics. Additionally it would reduce the risk of infectious livestock diseases being spread to humans with removal of farms so close to urban areas. Interestingly meat prices would increase drastically hopefully reducing meat consumption and lowering health conditions associated with meat consumption (Henning, 2011). Most importantly, whilst these methods are largely favoured for their contribution to human life, regardless of intentions it would still improve the lives of many animals (Henning, 2011). Regardless of which method or ethical discussion one believes, there is no denying that the meat industry is currently contributing to major health problems, significantly damaging the environment, and imposing extensive pain and unnecessary suffering to billions of animals.

Many meat eaters will claim that their food choices are a personal choice. Yet is this really a declaration of a free agent or merely one acting in a manner dictated by social structure? Strangely we do not award rights to animals used for food or fashion but are willing to accept a moral obligation towards domestic animals. Why is this so? There are many social constructions that help to sustain the justification of meat eating and the meat industry itself.
 * Cultural and Social Analysis**

History and culture is a major factor, particularly in Australia. Eating meat has been identified as having a major role in the evolution of early humans (Teaford & Ungar, 2002. The first European settlers brought six head of cattle with them in 1788 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2005). They held very high regards for meat and were responsible for the development of Australia agriculture. This cattle industry grew and today is one of Australia’s major agricultural industries contributing to GDP (ABS, 2013). It is the strength of the cattle industry and these cultural and historical influences that have assisted in developing powerful social and cultural connotations that still stand today. The Pound of Flesh Survey in 2010 found that 99% of Australians were against cruelty to animals, yet 98% eat animals that come from cruel, intensive farming practices (Vegetarian Victoria, 2010). These statistics are a clear illustration of how our views and practices do not align. The invisibility of the meat industry allows this to happen as we are rarely forced to question the processes that go on behind farm doors. In addition to philosophers such as Tom Regan and Peter Singer, other strong advocates for the welfare of live stock animals include groups such as People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals (also known as PETA) and Animals Australia. In addition to factory farming being unethical and immoral, it is also not a sustainable, environmentally friendly or healthy industry. The overconsumption of meat and animal products is now a leading cause of obesity, as well as contributing to hypertension, heart disease, some cancers, diabetes, stroke and food-borne illnesses (Henning, 2011). Additional approximately one third of the earths land surface has already been cleared to accommodate for farming and is only going to increase (Henning, 2011). Furthermore the greenhouse gas emissions contribute to up to a third of all green house gases outweighing those produced by power generation and transportation (Henning, 2011). In light of this information public health experts should perhaps review and promote nutritional guidelines and recommendations in regards to the recommended portions and servings of meat, as well as education surrounding how to include more meat free days in ones diet. If consumers were to comply with reviewed recommendations in an attempt to improve their health, demand for the product would go down and the need for factory farming should decrease. This approach would be insignificant without the continued advocacy of animal welfare groups, and improving laws and regulations globally.

The artefact is a clear example of the systematic murder we have become so desensitized to. The worker has become so normalized to the process that he doesn’t even flinch when inflicting pain on the piglet. As a result of this assessment piece I have learnt that our meat industry, factory farming in particularly is highly unnecessary and actually detrimental to our health. As a result of my learning I have definitely reconsidered my consumption patterns and the affects that they have on animals.
 * Analysis of the artefact and learning reflections.**

http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/share/view/64709960
 * REFLECTION**
 * 'I just really love meat' So is Factory Farming and Animal Cruelty Justifiable**

http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/share/view/64710108
 * Behind Closed Doors - The True Cost of Meat Consumption**


 * REFERENCES**

Animal Welfare Institute. (2008). Crimes Without Consequences: The Enforcement of Humane Slaughter Laws in the United States. Retrieved from []

Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines. (2013). Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines. Retrieved from []

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2005). Year Book Australia, 2005. Retrieved from: []=

BBC, (2013). The Ethics of Speciesism. Retrieved from []

Cohen, C. & Regan, T. (2001). The Animal Rights Debate (Book Review); //Journal of Value Inquiry, 36//(4), 579-583

Henning, B. (2011). Standing in Livestock’s ‘Long Shadow’, the ethics of eating meat on a small planet: //Ethics and the Environment, 16//(1), 63-94

PETA. (2013). Factory Farming: Cruelty to Animals. Retrieved from []

Rahman, S., Ricketts, W., & Walker, L. (2005). Global perspectives on animal welfare: Asia, the Far East, and Oceania. //Rev Sci Tech, 24//(2), 597-612

Ramaswamy, N. (1987). – Report of the expert committee on the development of the meat industry (animal products). Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, New Delhi. Regan, T. & Singer, P. (1989). All Animals Are Equal: //Animal Rights and Human Obligations//, 148-162

Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of Society. Sage Publications

Teaford, M. & Ungar, P. (2002). //Human Diet: Its Origin and Evolution.// Westport, CT: Greenwood Press

Vegetarian Victoria. (2010). Statistics on Vegetarianism. Retrieved from []