{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Animal Welfare Critical Review, 9.24[1]

Animal Welfare Critical Review, 9.24[1] - consciously...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Though clear and direct, the paper does not give the reader any means to gauge relative amounts of pain between stun and non-stunning slaughter. It is written in descriptive terms that let us understand the possible emotion or sensation of pain, and we acknowledge that there is really no way of knowing how much pain the animals endure however the reader must be able to form some kind of comparison in their mind. Yes a razor sharp blade may be unfelt by the animal when the stroke is dealt, but does the animal begin to react as it realizes it’s bleeding? How long does it take a properly slaughtered animal to bleed out of sensibility? More thorough description needs to be made of that in comparison, which is effectively the difference between dying
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: consciously versus unconscious. This is an informative piece but it also makes an argument for animal welfare equality between stunned slaughter and religious slaughter, but tangible evidence is needed to make this bold claim – “religious slaughter…. One should remain open minded to the fact that when done right, it may actually be better in terms of animal welfare than slaughter with stunning.” This quote is taken out of context but with the same implied meaning. Describing the post cut similarities between the two slaughter types may help strengthen the argument by making the comparison more vivid in terms of what we do know instead of what we don’t know....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online