Sharp rise in halal abattoirs slaughtering animals without stunning them first.

Goodness me, death is painful regardless of how an animal dies. The Islamic method ensures that as much blood (which contains pathogens and all sorts of impurities) is drained from the animal and this helps meat to stay fresh for longer when stored. Annoys me how some people, especially those animal welfare supporters, criticize the Islamic method of slaughter. I ain't against animal welfare but it just annoys me how they cant see the true nature of this method. The Islamic method is the most peaceful way to put an animal to death. A question to those people who criticize this method: Is there a method that will kill an animal more quickly and peacefully? Any answers? I don't think so.

There is no "humane" way of taking away life.

However stunning, ironically, causes extreme pain for the animal, some are still left alive to suffer after the torture, and some animals', such as chickens, brains explode because of the current fired through them.

Yes there is - while it is stunned.

Death is painful however an animal dies. Stunning an animal isn't exactly a pleasant for the animal is it. Its gives it more unnecessary pain.

No it doesn't...

Try getting stunned and see how it feels.

On the first of these issues, FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council) concluded that the levelof restraint required to expose the throat, perform an effectivecut and hold the animal still until it had bled out was fargreater than that needed for conventional slaughter.

With regard to the potential for pain and distress, FAWCconsidered the representations it had received, some of whichhad argued that a neck cut is not painful provided it is a rapid,uninterrupted movement carried out with an extremely sharpknife. FAWC came to the view, however, that when a largetransverse incision is made across the neck a number of vitaltissues are transected including: skin, muscle, trachea,oesophagus, carotid arteries, jugular veins, major nervetrunks, plus numerous minor nerves. They concluded thatsuch a drastic cut would inevitably trigger a barrage ofsensory information to the brain in a sensible (conscious)animal. FAWC stated that: “we are persuaded that such amassive injury would result in very significant pain anddistress in the period before insensibility supervenes”.

Recent research undertaken in New Zealand (Gibson et al.,2009) has provided further evidence of the welfare problemsassociated with neck cutting of conscious animals. The workshowed that brain signals in calves indicate that they doappear to feel pain when slaughtered without pre-stunning. Apain signal lasting for up to 2 minutes was detected followingthroat cutting. The researchers also showed that when theanimals are concussed through stunning, brain signalscorresponding to pain disappear.

Perhaps we should just ban all Halal and Kosher meat from the UK? Personally I think it makes no sense to appease and tolerate religious ritual slaughtering methods in a country as humane and advanced as Britain.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11378667/Sharp-rise-in-halal-abattoirs-slaughtering-animals-without-stunning-them-first.html

As far as I know SubWay in the UK is now all Halal. Many UK hospitals now serve only Halal slaughtered meat in their visitors restaurants. How can Britain be so Halal when the vast majority of it's citizens are purportedly non-Muslim? Aggressive bullish campaigning I gather. It appears they don't care a damn for what British non-Muslims prefer to eat, as long as their wants are met. The situation speaks for itself and it's about time British non-Muslims grew a backbone and stuck up for their human rights too. I'm all for soundly reasoned improvement and change but Britain seems to be sliding all too easily into a dystopian alternate reality, becoming increasingly disconnected from itself.

That is a shoddy attempt at an argument. Do you even know what pre stunning is?

RSPCA

Think want you like, all I'm going to say is that all those illogical arguments about stunning an animal before slaughter is good makes no sense as the animal dies in pain anyway.

These aren't thoughts, this is evidence. What you're saying is illogical - it's essentially: 'the animal dies in pain so who cares how much pain it experiences.' Would you rather a family member who is murdered have it done brutally or quickly? Yes it's still murder but with an iota of compassion you'd prefer the latter.

You originally asserted that there is no peaceful or more humane way to slaughter an animal other than halal slaughter and now you're fallaciously backtracking over that assertion because you have no evidence to support it, but evidence on the contrary.

Also, that is tautological to say that 'illogical arguments' make 'no sense.'

So, not sure if you have remotely any experience of slaughtering animals. It's not a nice process non-halal or hallal. To be herded roughly on mass before being electrocuted or banged on the head before having your throat cut is not a good experience. For me the whole debate about what is more humane is a largely academic, funding futile PhDs. If you really cared you would become vegetarian, or indeed vegan. Any of course the whole topics leads to veiled racism and religious prejudice.

There is no evidence that stunning gives less pain. Evidence based just on pure science isn't enough to determine whether the animal does with less pain or not. Scientist don't know much about death and the nature if it. Some scientist are not even sure if a soul exists or not. No one had died and then come back to say how it feels. Its not like the animals dies and comes back alive to say; 'oh that felt less painful than when I died with without stunning'.

No. The evidence is based on using ECG's to monitor the pain signals in animals brains while they are slaughtered. With stunning there are no pain signals, without stunning the signals can be measured for sometimes over two minutes.

There is no evidence that stunning gives less pain. Evidence based just on pure science isn't enough to determine whether the animal does with less pain or not. Scientist don't know much about death and the nature if it. Some scientist are not even sure if a soul exists or not. No one had died and then come back to say how it feels. Its not like the animals dies and comes back alive to say; 'oh that felt less painful than when I died with without stunning'.

An animal can suffer when it loses its soul. It doesn't have to be all about neurones.

An animal can suffer when it loses its soul. It doesn't have to be all about neurones.

Lol

Animals dont have souls

And how do you know?

Pain is a neurological response and we don't need to resort to hocus pocus and superstitious nonsense to understand it.