Rte presenter Ella Mc Sweeney slaughters her pigs for food.

by Margaret Kenny Fri Aug 20, 2010 15:48

Remember the disguist people felt when the late Gerry Ryan was supposed to have slaughtered a sheep on the so-called survival week in the wilds of the west of Ireland. Publicity hungry (no pun intended) and all though poor old G Ryan was, at least he didn't stoop so low and instead made up the whole story. How sick would a person need to be to do what E McSweeney did. All in the name of generating publicity for herself to further her career as a documentary maker in RTE. Instead of slaughtering defenceless animals in her back garden (and I wonder if Dept of Agriculture guidelines on such horror were even followed here,) maybe she would use her imagination next time and desist from engaging in needless cruelty to pad her cv.

by Steve O Neill Tue Nov 02, 2010 20:02

Although everybody is entitled to their own opinion (and rightly so) I can't help feeling that the guidlines for post were not followed in the comment above. It appears to me it was an attack on Ella McSweeney which sidelined the author from getting her point accross.(I am no great fan of Ms., Sweeney myself).
Nevertheless, again, people are entitled to their opinion and their opinion should be respected. Which I of course do. Indeed, I believe if people are willing to express their opinion in defence of farm animals welfare, more power to them..
However, I fail to see how raising pigs in a garden in the burbs and slaughtering right there is cruel in any way. This is the ideal situation from an animal welfare point of view if you want to eat meat. Animals living outdoors with good shelter when required, and no stressful trip to the abatoir.
The 2 pigs Ella raised in her garden, eating and rooting like pigs should, will save 2 or more commerial pigs being raised intensively (if you want to vent your spleen at someone regarding animal welfare, try those guys).
Anyway, although you are entitled to your opinion, its best to hold your tongue unless you know what you are talking about. Which obviously you don't.

by Mike Wed Nov 03, 2010 20:19

If you want to do some good go after the pig farmers who keep their pigs locked up in stinking pens living in their own shit and eating nothing but feed designed to bulk them up. At least the pigs in this article were well treated and got a better chance than the torture pigs you buy in the supermarket. This happens every day on farms across the country. Catch a grip for crying out loud

by Meat Eater Wed Nov 03, 2010 20:55

There is nothing wrong with raising in a suitable environment your own life stock for food. This is what people did throughout Ireland two or three generations ago. It should be encouraged and so should be fishing and hunting.

by K hathaway Mon Jun 11, 2012 04:17

She never said the pigs were pets. She is a traditional farmer at heart and bought them to return to her core culture and tradition which existed on pigs if they were able to afford the luxury. Pigs when the Irish were lucky enough to have one were nearly part of the family sleeping in their homes. Yes they slaughtered them to feed the family but they weren't treated llike cattle that often ends up on our tables and is abused for their entire lives by living in very confined pens.

Ella should be commended for not wasting a single bit of the animal. She raised it humanely and put it down humanely. I think that the animal rights activists that think eating meat or other animal products is wrong are lunatics. This is a centuries old tradition a fact of life around the world, and the people involed in this should be applauded for not wasting the kill. Worry about abused children or corrupt politicians if you want a worthy cause or how about the folks who abandon their horses!!! Ella raised only what could be consumed and she is living off the land and following her traditions and culture.

Open your minds, grow up and stop being a freak!

by Damien M - PW Mon Jun 11, 2012 08:13

Pro-Choice~
Just for the pigs though.

:8)

by lefty Mon Jun 11, 2012 13:42

Being a vegetarian / vegan does not mean you are a "freak", just that you don't like killing animals for your food if it isn't necessary. If anything, it means you aren't sociopathic like those who have no feelings about killing.

A vegan diet produces far less CO2 per kg of protein. Studies estimate that the earth can only hold 2 billion when the oil runs out, but even then only if the people adhere to a strict vegan diet and compost everything, including the bodies!!

Cows fart out 200litres+ of methane per day and are estimated to be responsible for 14% of greenhouse gases:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/zoo...w.htm
meanwhile Mcdonalds and others chop down rain forest to create cheap pasture for them.

In Effect people like you are happily willing to accelerate global warming and increase your chances of heart disease and other ailments (e.g. google morgan spurlock's "supersize me") so you can eat your unhealthy burgers unlike "freaks" like me?

what an idiot!

Go fuck yourself!

by anotherlamb Mon Jun 11, 2012 14:59

''It should be encouraged and so should be fishing and hunting.''

There are protected species in ireland that are still being hunted by bloodhounds and people with more money than sense coming to ireland for weekend stays..There are waters near us with not even half the amount of fish there used to be as they are overfished.Over fishing is a huge problem around international waters today..People need to excercise common sense and stop overfishing.

by lefty Tue Jun 12, 2012 06:50

perhaps there is a case to be made that people who insist on eating meat should have to bring the animal up, look after it properly, then kill it themselves rather than being able to buy it in a nice little packet from a company who factory farmed the animal in cruel industrial conditions,. At least then the process would not be hidden from view and shrouded in secrecy as it is currently. I think less people would eat meat when faced with the gory brutal reality!

However, this case aside, the fact is, ms mc sweeney is NOT just your average person in need of nutrition. Quite the contrary, she is someone well paid with an RTE programme with many people listening in, and she is encouraging and promoting this kind of action, widely influencing people's behaviour. Who knows how many idiots will end up torturing some poor animal as a result of this publicity.

Ms mc sweeney can well afford to feed herself humanely. She did this not to feed herself but to promote herself. As such it is pretty morally repugnant. Taking the life of another sentient intelligent creature unnecessarily, merely for her own self promotion, when she has lots of alternatives for good nutrition. Ella doesn't have a pressing nutritional need or a problem sourcing/affording protein and B12 for her diet. She just did this for a cheap publicity stunt.

So for misusing your influence as a national broadcaster and probably getting a bunch of pigs tortured by inept and impressionable idiots and for killing a sentient intelligent creature (pigs are smarter than dogs) to promote yourself and not from any pressing nutritional need, you get a big zero on the moral compass from me Ella!

Caption: Video Id: AU7_Ar9C_iI Type: Youtube Video
Embedded video Youtube Video

by Damien M - PW Wed Jun 13, 2012 08:38

"Taking the life of another sentient intelligent creature unnecessarily"

Except the unborn human creatures, eh lefty?

by lefty Wed Jun 13, 2012 18:14

Damien, we all have our opinion on what constitutes "sentient intelligent life". (And let me qualify my post by stating that I don't necessarily consider intelligence the be all and end all criterium for "worthiness". Intellect has arguably caused more destruction and misery than anything.)

In my opinion, a woman's body is her own and matters pertaining to it should be left up to her, not dictated by others. Of course, clearly you're not a woman Damien. I wonder would you feel differently on this matter if you were.

Curiously those banging on about the unborn often seem to have precious little regard for most of the life on this planet once it actually arrives, and often seem to support right wing policies that make life increasingly hard and unpleasant for all

"How about having a neat world to come to?" as bill hicks was oft quoted.

Pro life people often show little awareness of the misery overpopulation is causing on the quality of life and the strain it is putting on the ecosystem, leading ultimately to more unpleasant existence for all life on the planet.

They often support contraception policies on religious grounds which facilitate the spread of disease such as HIV in african nations, causing untold misery.

No doubt many support "justified" wars and invasions by the US in other people's countries too.

I don't see many of them coming out to protest use of shannon airport to transport troops and weapons to afghanistan.

Nor do I see many of the pro life brigade supporting your fight against pharmaceutical companies whose products regularly kill large numbers of people unnecessarily. (google vioxx etc etc)

How pro life is all that?

And they certainly don't seem to give a toss about non human life.

Seems to me that "pro life" is in reality a very narrow view of "life". And in my experience, it's all unhealthily tied up with religion and very anti women stances.

At least for the most part I'm reasonably consistent in my own "pro life" stance by my own definitions of what constitutes life. I generally don't equate "potential life" directly with "actual life". And forgive me if I don't just hypocritically discount the lives of all other species the way "pro lifers" so often do because "the bible said animals were here for our use".

Once you start giving "potential" equal billing with "actual" then your discussions more often than not descend into farce in my experience.

I wonder does Ella, as a woman, have any view on this subject? Maybe something like "abortion is wrong but slaughtering pigs in your back garden is perfectly fine because they're not as smart as us" perhaps??

by Matters Wed Jun 13, 2012 23:04

I think you are completely off mark there lefty. Thinking these sentient beings deserve life more than a non born human is ludicrous. For starters, they are no where near as sentient than a human is. The studies have shown this that animals are largely less sentient than a human due to relative size of their amydala matters. I also think it is sick that anyone can be pro abortion and then feel they have the moral high ground when it comes to talking about animal cruelty. Ella mc sweeney did what was natural to her and how she was brought up. She has actually done better than the waste that would happen otherwise.

by lefty Thu Jun 14, 2012 00:44

Matters said: I think you are completely off mark there lefty. Thinking these sentient beings deserve life more than a non born human is ludicrous. For starters, they are no where near as sentient than a human is. The studies have shown this that animals are largely less sentient than a human due to relative size of their amydala matters.

It's not a matter of one or the other here. Ideally the pig lives and the woman /man uses contraception responsibly.

rights for animals don't come at the expense of human rights. You can actually be in favour of both. I am. I just happen to think the rights of an actual living being, the mother, are very important.

An actual life takes priority over a potential one in my book. The pig was an established being with a life. Granted, not one developing the theory of quantum physics in a university department or anything, but neither was it sitting on a couch watching stupid soccer or soaps, drinking beer and eating chicken mcnuggets either which is a lot more representative of what most so called "sentient beings" seem to do much of the time. Ella slaughtered it to fill a broadcast and promote her career.

smaller amygdala, therefore they have no right to life and we are free to slaughter and eat them?? Hmm...I think we need to be a bit more careful about what decides our basic rights. Ok if it's just relative levels of intellect/sentience that governs whether you have a right not to be slaughtered and eaten to fill a spot on a tv/radio program, then how about downs syndrome humans?? can we slaughter and eat them too?? Will ella be slaughtering one and suggesting tasty recipies on national tv/radio in the near future perhaps? What about people who voted for FG?? Do we get to cook up and eat their livers with a nice chianti too?? because arguably they are pretty severely lacking in the sentience department too! ;-)

(I never heard of amydala matters. I presume you mean Amygdala)
Here's a quote from an internet site on the Amygdala:
" The amygdala is most commonly associated with fear and anxiety. Each of us have a chronic or habitual emotional level that determines the overall well-being or satisfaction. If a threat is perceived, the amygdala tends to hijack the reasoned response process. We have certain triggers-things that cause us to have an emotional reaction and elicit our innate ‘fight of flight’ response. This limits our capacity to think clearly and causes us to move to default behaviors that may not be skillful or effective."

The amygdala is an older part of the brain. Quite obviously, most animals express fear and anger / fight or flight responses etc. Surely it is the presence and size of our newer cerebral cortex that differentiates us from animals no? The bit that we reason with and use to temper the strong emotional responses with reason and empathy etc.

Matters said: I also think it is sick that anyone can be pro abortion and then feel they have the moral high ground when it comes to talking about animal cruelty.

I'm not pro abortion asshole. I'm pro choice. i.e. I believe it's not up to me to decide what a woman does with her own body and whats inside of it or directly attached to it. And in my opinion what is in a womans womb prior to week 12 is not comparable to a walking talking human being. At that point the rights of the mother clearly take priority. Anything else is a slippery slope. Thats not a pro-abortion stance. You make it sound like for a hobby that I go around doing abortions for fun or something. I don't. I'm pro choice. But that said, I don't like the idea of abortion much. Ideally women/men should use contraception responsibly and the issue should not arise.

Matters said: Ella mc sweeney did what was natural to her and how she was brought up. She has actually done better than the waste that would happen otherwise.

Not entirely sure what you mean but in my opinion she killed a pig as part of a show she was doing. Basically for her career, not out of any desperate need for food. She makes enough to eat humanely. She has no excuse and IMHO She has a fucked up moral compass.

Sure factory farming of pigs is worse than rearing them in decent conditions. No argument there. But just because murdering someone is worse than robbing them is not a good argument for robbing them is it? Why not just leave them alone and do neither?

by Damien M - PW Thu Jun 14, 2012 08:54

'Pro life people often show little awareness of the misery overpopulation is causing on the quality of life and the strain it is putting on the ecosystem, leading ultimately to more unpleasant existence for all life on the planet.'

It's extractive and exploitative capitalism that causes said misery, not over population. There's ample food and space to go around, and always has been.

'They often support contraception policies on religious grounds which facilitate the spread of disease such as HIV in african nations, causing untold misery.'

Take this up with the Roman Catholic Church. It's the only 'version' of Christianity that imposes this false doctrine.

'Curiously those banging on about the unborn often seem to have precious little regard for most of the life on this planet once it actually arrives, and often seem to support right wing policies that make life increasingly hard and unpleasant for all'

Possibly your beef here is with the American Right? Jesus did say heal the sick, feed the poor etc.

'Nor do I see many of the pro life brigade supporting your fight against pharmaceutical companies whose products regularly kill large numbers of people unnecessarily. (google vioxx etc etc)'

I don't need to Google Vioxx, I've thousands of documents on it etc etc. As regards who supports my stance against the Pharmaceutical companies, let me tell you it was a ridiculous struggle to convince one left-wing person of how evil these rogues are, and it was only through a good contact that my story was published on here. Other left-wing sites wouldn't touchit. Most left wing people in Ireland are in some perverse way beholden to the synthetic medicine industry-just look at the disgraceful attacks on Dr Wakefield on this site. Try tell a left-winger about how eveil GlaxoSK are, you'll have you're work cut out.

'And forgive me if I don't just hypocritically discount the lives of all other species the way "pro lifers" so often do because "the bible said animals were here for our use'

Or whatever you choose, I advocate and eat Paleo. Which I don't think conflicts with Creation~

The non human pig had a good life, unlike the millions of butchered pre-humans each and every year.

by Matters Thu Jun 14, 2012 09:39

Amygdala is not just fear, it is also emotion. And it is smaller in animals therefore sentience argument is irrelevant. Why you talk about down syndrome foetuses is beyond me, as there amygdala matters are equal in size to any normal person. Asshole (as you say). It is a deeply sick individual that does not care for an unborn human but will get up in arms about an animal. With your views, I don't think you have any right to lecture anyone especially lecture those who care for ALL animals

by Pseudonym Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:01

Damo, cut the Wakefield support. I cant remember what pseudonym I used before to argue with you over this, but if you cast your mind back to a previous argument here, where I referred you to the complete transcript of his hearing, you will remember how deep and dishonest his practice was. If, after reading that you still support him, well, there is something seriously wrong with your moral compass. Pharma does enough murky stuff without you trying to bolster your argument with wakefield support. It weakens any argument.

Oh and sorry to everyone for going off topic!

by Damien M - PW Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:02

Apologies mods for staying off topic however, this warrants a reply.

Why use a pseudonym? Is your moral compass pointing towards cowardice?
Wakefield wasn't and isn't dishonest. The guy has had over 70 peer reviewed studies published.
It was only when he upset the applecart that the slanderous attacks started. Guessing your not familiar with The Lancet's and The BMJ's recently disclosed financial ties to pharmaceutical companies? Glaxo meanwhile have been handed a $3Billion for medical fraud amongs other things, using Argentine baby humans as guinea pigs. Excuse the pun!
Since The Lancet study, at least 28 independent studies from around the world support Dr. Wakefield’s controversial findings; Dr. Wakefield has also published dozens of peer-reviewed papers looking at the mechanism and cause of inflammatory bowel disease, and has extensively investigated the brain-bowel connection in the context of children with developmental disorders such as autism. When yoiu inject mercury, squalene and live viruses into a relatively new newborn human then it would be illogical to think tat this wouldn't cause any damage!

Mercury in adults teeth has been shown to cause neurological disorders, never mind new born humans!

When Ignazemmelweis insisted that Dr wash their hands in hospitals he was fired from his hospital job. This happened 2 more times. Google his story as I doubt your familiar with it.

Studies that support Dr. Wakefield’s controversial findings:

1.The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63
2.The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372
3.Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517
4.Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005
5.Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103
6.Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3
7.Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85
8.The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10
9.Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11
10.Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98
11.Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161
12.Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6
13.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13
14.Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.
15.Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35
16.Lancet. 1972;2:883–884.
17.Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62
18.Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372.
19.Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382.
20.American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605.
21.Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517.
22.Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34.
23.Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477.
24.Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16
25.Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465
26.Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54:987-991
27.Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25.
28.Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303

by lefty Thu Jun 14, 2012 15:01

"It is a deeply sick individual that does not care for an unborn human but will get up in arms about an animal. With your views, I don't think you have any right to lecture anyone especially lecture those who care for ALL animals"

I'm not lecturing. I'm expressing a point of view that's all.

I find it difficult to equate this sentence from you:
"It is a deeply sick individual that does not care for an unborn human but will get up in arms about an animal"
implying animals are unimportant
with this:
" I don't think you have any right to lecture anyone especially lecture those who care for ALL animals"
implying that you care for all animals, or at least that all animals are important.

very inconsistent, very suspect. In fact I don't think you give a shit about animals at all, you're just arguing for the sake of it, so by your own logic I'm free to lecture you at least mr troll!! ;-)

I never said I didn't care for unborn humans. I just said that a womans body is her own. Whether I care or not is Irrelevant. It's not my decision. I did however explicitly say:

"But that said, I don't like the idea of abortion much. Ideally women/men should use contraception responsibly and the issue should not arise."

Does that not clarify my position?

Your choosing to ignore my actual text makes me think you are definitely just a troll. Not even a good one. Transparent and can't hold it together for the duration of one post. C- Must try harder.

Now back to good old Ella the friendly garden pig slaughtering RTE careerist. And no more troll talk of abortion to distract us please.

by lefty Thu Jun 14, 2012 16:44

Damien

We're now both being trolled here.

By the way, I previously went by the pseudonym "saved by ferrets" on this site. Your post that the left "wouldn't touch" was essentially a (good) fleshing out of posts by myself and others on a thread here started by myself. How's that for support for your cause from the left? I also hate GSK and other big pharma criminals. However I dislike speciesists too.

Why did you bring in abortion here?? thread is not about that. Thanks a bunch for trying to turn an animal rights thread into a pro life one and a trollfest.

You say:
"It's extractive and exploitative capitalism that causes said misery, not over population. There's ample food and space to go around, and always has been."

Yes you are partly right, distribution is certainly political and is a major issue in world hunger, no question.

Yes I agree, solve the distribution problem and the earth can hold 7 billion people and feed them all for a time, but NOT sustainably. We are currently putting a huge strain on our ecosystems even without actually feeding them. Witness the collapse of fish stocks and soil erosion / deforestation. It also requires loads of cheap oil to drive the machinery and make the fertiliser and pesticides to pump out crops to feed the maws of our huge ridiculous cities on a monstrous industrial scale. And thats while starving a large portion of the world's population. Granted there's a lot of waste which would feed many more if you solved the distribution / political problems but those are quite thorny indeed.

Meanwhile, dealing with capitalist globalised reality, what happens to the 10 billion plus population mid century when this oil runs out?? chaos, disease and death on a huge scale, Thats what. From that perspective, your free for all "viral reproduction" stance is highly irresponsible. The descent to a sustainable post oil population should be voluntary and fair and it can be if we all co-operate and start doing something about it now. If humanity decides to say "screw that" and selfishly continue to reproduce without thought then the consequences won't be pretty for us. famine, death, cannibalism, pollution, resource exhaustion. Basically A giant easter island scenario. It might even make you wish GSK's bird flu distribution had been successful!! ;-). Surely we're smarter than that??

The only actual proper study shows that without oil, farming traditionally and sustainably, earth can support a maximum of 2 billion if we take on a strict vegan diet and compost everything, (even bodies.)

there's some interesting stuff here:
http://dieoff.org/

Clearly a vegan diet is part of the longer term solution to all this, as it's a more efficient use of land and resources than rearing fat pigs and slaughtering them like Ella did, even if, unlike Ella, you do actually need to do it to survive. "Ella" mentary !

Meanwhile Ella's fashionable food fad programmes are only giving licence to widespread clumsy cruelty by bored people who are already nutritionally well served.

by Pseudonym Fri Jun 15, 2012 01:30

He was and is dishonest. We discussed this before. You aren't an idiot, and thus I have to believe that you wilfully ignored all my points that I made previously as, if you actually read about the nitty gritty of what he got up to, it is shocking, and as far as I recall, he didn't even refute most of the accusations.

I didn't take the time to go through your "references" and neither did you (See ref. number 4 - That is a reference to an entire book/series), you just copied and pasted. Thus, in return I lazily copy and paste my refutal;

You may have been tricked into believing that Andrew Wakefield’s claims had been independently verified in 28 publications from 5 different countries. I’m afraid that is false. For those of you who have swallowed this type of reporting hook line and sinker, the below debunks each of the 28 studies from around the world that have been cited in his support.

1. The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63 =
Horvath K., Papadimitriou J.C., Rabsztyn A., Drachenberg C., Tilden J.T. 1999. Gastrointestinal abnormalities in children with autism. J. Pediatrics 135: 559-563.

This study did not look for measles virus. Instead it looks at gastrointestinal (GI) malabsoption as an underlying mechanism for autism. It does not appear to have controls with autism & without GI symptoms OR controls without autism & with similar GI symptoms. Most children with autism & GI symptoms had upper GI problems such as reflux
This in no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”, which have been shown repeatedly to have been manufactured or the result of laboratory contamination.

2. The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372 =
Furlano RI, Anthony A, Day R, Brown A, McGarvey L, Thomson MA, Davies SE, Berelowitz M, Forbes A, Wakefield AJ, Walker-Smith JA, Murch SH. Colonic CD8 and T cell filtration with epithelial damage in children with autism. J Pediatr 2001;138:366-72.
This paper claims to have "confirm[ed] a distinct lymphocytic colitis in autistic spectrum disorders", which is something that no other research groups find and has been the center of the recent GMC hearings against Wakefield. The extreme "engineering" towards a specific gut pathology has been summarized by Brian Deer.
Note the emergence of a theme: Wakefield is a co-author and no fewer than 7 of this paper's authors are also authors on the retracted paper in The Lancet; this paper cannot be said to independently ”replicate” or “support” Wakefield’s “findings”.

3. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517 =
Ashwood P, Anthony A, Pellicer AA, Torrente F, Wakefield AJ. Intestinal lymphocyte populations in children with regressive autism: evidence for extensive mucosal immunopathology. Journal of Clinical Immunology, 2003;23:504-517.

Again, this paper seeks to further claim "a pan-enteric mucosal immunopathology in children with regressive autism that is apparently distinct from other inflammatory bowel diseases", but we know that Wakefield et al. are the only researchers who have "found" this in the past 15 or so years.
Same theme: Wakefield (and Anthony) is a co-author; cannot be said to support his own work.

4. Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005
A meaningless citation as this would be a whole volume of a journal - this happens if you just copy and paste without any regard to the content. Supports nothing except maybe the notion that the anti-vaccine folk cannot cite biomedical literature properly.
If you go back to whale.to, John was kind enough to link to to the paper, which is
Ashwood P, Wakefield AJ. Immune activation of peripheral blood and mucosal CD3+ lymphocyte cytokine profiles in children with autism and gastrointestinal symptoms. J Neuroimmunol. 2006 Apr;173(1-2):126-34.

doesn't mention MMR, instead, the authors start from their own wrong premise "Gastrointestinal pathology, characterized by lymphoid nodular hyperplasia and entero-colitis, has been demonstrated in a cohort of children with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD)." and continue to find "In both peripheral blood and mucosa, [intracellular] CD3+ TNFalpha+ and CD3+ IFNgamma+ were increased in ASD children" ,
has Wakefield as senior author, therefore no independent replication of his results.

5. Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103 =
Singh VK, Warren RP, Odell JD, Cole WP. Antibodies to myelin basic protein in children with autistic behavior. Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993;7:97-103

Found some but not all children with autism had specific antibodies to myelin basic protein (MBP). Study did not look for measles virus, nor did study look for mumps or rubella virus or administration of the MMR.
It precedes the Lancet paper and in no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s claims.

6. Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3 Citation not found.
According to whale.to, this is
Singh VK, Jensen RL Elevated levels of measles antibodies in children with autism Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 292-294.

To the best of our knowledge, this study has not been replicated, and the findings refuted by several other studies, such as Baird G, Pickles A, Simonoff E, Charman T, Sullivan P, Chandler S, Loucas T, Meldrum D, Afzal M, Thomas B, Jin L, Brown D. Measles vaccination and antibody response in autism spectrum disorders. Arch Dis Child. 2008 Oct;93(10):832-7.
This study does not support Wakefield’s claims.

7. Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85 =
Jyonouchi H, Geng L, Ruby A, Zimmerman-Bier B. Dysregulated Innate Immune Responses in Young Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Their Relationship to Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Dietary Intervention. Neuropsychobiology. 2005;28:51 77-85

This study did not look for measles virus but evaluated inflammatory response to specific dietary proteins.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

8. The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10 =
Jyonouchi H, Geng L, Ruby A, Reddy C, Zimmerman-Bier B. Evaluation of an association between gastrointestinal symptoms and cytokine production against common dietary proteins in children with autism spectrum disorders. J Pediatr.2005;146(5):605-10.

This study did not look for measles virus. Instead, the study evaluated inflammatory response to specific dietary proteins.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

9. Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11 citation not found on PubMed, but this refers to Krigsman, A. , Boris, M., Goldblatt, A., Stott, C. Clinical presentation and histologic findings at ileocolonoscopy in children with autistic spectrum disorder and chronic gastrointestinal symptoms Autism Insights 2010:2 1-11.

Arthur Krigsman was a colleague of Andrew Wakefield at Thoughtful House, Wakefield and Carol Stott (a contributor to this paper) are editors of the vanity press journal Autism Insights (previously discussed on LBRB. Not very likely that this "peer review" was very tough.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

10. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98 =
Galiatsatos P, Gologan A, Lamoureux E, Autistic enterocolitis: Fact or fiction? Can J Gastroenterol. 2009:23:95-98

Case report, featuring two adult patients with gastrointestinal problems and ASD diagnoses. The authors call for “more investigations” in their discussion.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

11. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161 =
Singh VK. Phenotypic expression of autoimmune autistic disorder (AAD): a major subset of autism. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 2009 Jul-Sep;21(3):148-61.

This paper makes assertions that are not supported by the evidence base in the paper. It is mainly a summary of research, with no mention of what children were looked at. Chris found the actual paper (https://www.aacp.com/Pages.asp?AID=7937&issue=&page=C&UID=), and among the data used it included a Wakefield paper = not independent. Also included in the references are papers from questionable journals like Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and Medical Veritas, which all suddenly makes sense if you see that Singh is associated with these folk that tick the "our treatment heals everything" quack box (see one Singh study on PTSD).
This looks like it would support a connection between MMR and autism, but since no-one has independently reproduced this and the author stands to make money off the claims this review has to be viewed with extreme reservations.

12. Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6 =
whale.to provides the pre-print, hence the missing volume and page numbers:
Genuis S.J., Bouchard, T.P. Celiac Disease Presenting as Autism, J Child Neurol January 2010 25(1):114-119

This paper proposes that many children with autism have celiac disease, that this causes micro nutrient deficiencies and that the behaviour of the children improves when you put them on a gluten free diet. No MMR mentioned.
Does not support Wakefield's claims.

13. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13 =
Nikolov RN, Bearss KE, Lettinga J, Erickson C, Rodowski M, Aman MG, McCracken JT, McDougle CJ, Tierney E, Vitiello B, Arnold LE, Shah B, Posey DJ, Ritz L, Scahill L. Gastrointestinal symptoms in a sample of children with pervasive developmental disorders. J Autism Dev Disord. 2009 Mar;39(3):405-13.

This study did not look for measles virus, nor did study look for mumps or rubella virus. Study evaluated children previously diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs) for gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. 22.7% were found to exhibit GI symptoms, but were otherwise no different from subjects without GI problems in demographic characteristics, measures of adaptive functioning, or autism symptom severity.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

14. Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144. =
Bolte, ER Autism and Clostridium tetani Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.
Speculative paper presenting the hypothesis that autism symptoms are caused by a subacute, chronic tetanus infection
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

15. Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35 =
Sandler RH, Finegold SM, Bolte ER, Buchanan CP, Maxwell AP, Väisänen ML, Nelson MN, Wexler HM. Short-term benefit from oral vancomycin treatment of regressive-onset autism. J Child Neurol. 2000;15:429-435

This study did not look for measles virus. Instead, this study evaluated 11 children’s response to a specific antibiotic. Gains faded following cessation of antibiotic.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

16. Lancet. 1972;2:883-884 =
Walker-Smith J, Andrews J. Alpha-1-antitrypsin, autism, and coeliac disease. Lancet. 1972 Oct 21;2(7782):883-4.

This is a "letter to the editor" published decades prior to the Wakefield Lancet paper and can hardly be said to “replicate” the latter. Walker-Smith and Andrews report on the investigation of alpha-1-antitrypsin levels in 8 children with autism vs in children with untreated and treated celiac disease and control children and finds levels in children with autism and celiac disease are similar. This has little to do with Wakefield or the MMR (it also predates the introduction of the MMR), however, Dr. Walker-Smith is a co-author of the retracted study in The Lancet.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

17. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62 =
Goodwin MS, Cowen MA, Goodwin TC Malabsorption and cerebral dysfunction: a multivariate and comparative study of autistic children. J Autism Child Schizophr. 1971 Jan-Mar;1(1):48-62.

A paper published decades previously cannot be said to “replicate” a later paper, the paper predates the introduction of the MMR vaccine in the US, the authors are not concerned with vaccination at all, but is mainly concerned with finding distinguishing features between childhood autism and adult schizophrenia using a number of challenges and physiological measurement. One minor in their discussion is that "malabsorption" would lead to autistic behaviour, so more in the sense of paper 12.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

18. Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372.

Same paper as #2 above. Wakefield and 6 others from the Lancet paper are co-authors; cannot be said to support their own work.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

19. Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382. Torrente F., Machado N., Perez-Machado M., Furlano R., Thomson M., Davies S., Wakefield AJ, Walker-Smith JA, Murch SH. Enteropathy with T cell infiltration and epithelial IgG deposition in autism. Molecular Psychiatry. 2002;7:375-382.

Gosh, we know these guys – it’s Andy Wakefield and his colleagues from that paper in The Lancet, this time claiming IgG deposit in gut samples indicative of an autoimmune gut pathology and call me cynical, but I don't believe any of this, because it has only ever been seen by this group.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

20. American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605.=
Torrente F, Anthony A, Heuschkel RB, Thomson MA, Ashwood P, Murch SH. Focal-enhanced gastritis in regressive autism with features distinct from Crohn’s and Helicobacter pylori gastritis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:598-605

Murch SH, Anthony A, Thompson MA, Torrente F and Ashwood P were previous co-authors with Wakefield A. Again, there are no independent groups reporting similar findings and this does not look at MMR or any vaccine anyway.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

21. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517 =
Ashwood P, Anthony A, Pellicer AA, Torrente F, Walker-Smith JA, Wakefield AJ. Intestinal lymphocyte populations in children with regressive autism: evidence for extensive mucosal immunopathology. J Clin Immunol. 2003 Nov;23(6):504-17.

We totally get it by now – Wakefield and Wakefield’s colleagues confirm their own results.
In no way ”replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

22. Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34 =
Ashwood P, Wakefield AJ. Immune activation of peripheral blood and mucosal CD3+ lymphocyte cytokine profiles in children with autism and gastrointestinal symptoms. J Neuroimmunol. 2006;173(1-2):126-34.

same as number 4.

23. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477 =
Shinohe A, Hashimoto K, Nakamura K, Tsujii M, Iwata Y, Tsuchiyaa KJ, Sekine Y, Suda S, Suzuki K, Sugihara G, Matsuzaki H, Minabe Y, Sugiyama T, Masayoshi Kawai M, Iyo M,Takei N and Mori N Increased serum levels of glutamate in adult patients with autism- Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry Volume 30, Issue 8, 30 December 2006, Pages 1472-1477

Study of adults with autism on blood levels of amino acids, to assess whether altered glutamatergic neurotransmission was likely in autism. Study did not look for measles virus, nor did study look for mumps or rubella virus or anything connected with the gut.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

24. Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16 =
Finegold SM, Molitoris D, Song Y, Liu C, Vaisanen ML, Bolte E, McTeague M, Sandler R, Wexler H, Marlowe EM, Collins MD, Lawson PA, Summanen P, Baysallar M, Tomzynski TJ, Read E, Johnson E, Rolfe R, Nasir P, Shah H, Haake DA, Manning P, Kaul A. Gastrointestinal microflora studies in late-onset autism. Clin Infect Dis. 2002 Sep 1;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16.

Stool samples from children with regressive autism were compared to samples from children without autism; differences in stool flora were found. The study did not look for measles virus, nor did it look for mumps or rubella virus. Study did not evaluate changes in gut structure.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

25. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004
Another of those citation snafus -
Song Y, Liu C, Finegold SM. Real-time PCR quantitation of clostridia in feces of autistic children. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004 Nov;70(11):6459-65.

This study describes how to do PCR for specific bacteria on stool samples of autistic and non autistic children.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

26. Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54:987-991 =
Parracho HM, Bingham MO, Gibson GR, McCartney AL. Differences between the gut microflora of children with autistic spectrum disorders and that of healthy children. J Med Microbiol. 2005 Oct;54(Pt 10):987-91.

More in the same vein: This study compared fecal flora for children with autism with two control groups: siblings without autism and unrelated children without autism. Minor differences were found. The study did not look for measles virus, nor did study look for mumps or rubella virus. Study did not evaluate changes in gut structure.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

27. Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25. = González LG., López K, Navarro DC, Negrón L, Flores LS, Rodríguez R, Martínez M, Sabrá A. Características endoscópicas, histológicas e inmunológicas de la mucosa digestiva en niños autistas con síntomas gastrointestinales [Endoscopic and Histological Characteristics of the Digestive Mucosa in Autistic Children with gastro-Intestinal Symptoms] Archivos Venezolanos de Puericultura y Pediatría Enero-Marzo 2006, Volúmen 69, Número 1 Arch Venez Pueri Pediatr 2006 69(1):19-25. 1.

The authors cannot replicate Wakefield’s 1998 “findings” of a distinct autistic enterocolitis, although they do report a higher incidence of gastrointestinal problems in their autistic group. 2. It appears that the Gonzalez paper was funded by Thoughtful House, under Wakefield’s leadership as previously shown
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

28. Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303 =
Balzola F, Daniela C, Repici , Barbon V, Sapino A, Barbera C, Calvo PL, Gandione M, Rigardetto R*, and Rizzetto M .

This is a meeting abstract that has never been published as a peer reviewed study since 2005. Nine adult males with autism and GI symptoms were evaluated for GI disease. Study did not look for measles virus, nor did study look for mumps or rubella virus. Study did not evaluate changes in gut structure.
In no way “replicates” or “supports” Wakefield’s “findings”

Numbers: of 28 studies 2 were duplicates, 3 were only retrievable because of the links on the whale.to page, 13 were written by Wakefield and/or Lancet co-authors and/or Thoughful House colleagues (counting two duplicates), 3 predate the Lancet paper by years or even decades and not one independently replicates Wakefield’s claims, made in the retracted Lancet paper, the associated press conference and in many statements since.

by SavedByFerrets Fri Jun 15, 2012 15:52

*cough* narcolepsy *cough* flu jab *cough*

by lefty Fri Jun 15, 2012 16:06

"Amygdala is not just fear, it is also emotion."

erm...... fear is emotion. The fight or flight / primitive responses are present in all animals. That bit of the brain is present from ancient reptiles. It's the new bits that allow abstract reasoning and empathy and overriding of those primitive reptilian responses that distinguish our brains from other animals. Y'know, the bit that says "I think I'll stop eating meat because it's inefficient, unnecessary and gives rise to mass cruelty" when the nose and amygdala are saying "Mmm tasty, kill, eat" outside the local mcdonalds !

by ehmmm Fri Jun 15, 2012 16:28

"erm...... fear is emotion"

Nooooooo

Fear is AN Emotion

but fear is not 'emotion'

There are mnany emotions, of which fear is but one.

by Pseudonym Fri Jun 15, 2012 17:01

*cough cough* demonstrates monitoring of side effect profile of vaccines *cough cough* to the point where *cough* very rare conditions can be picked up *cough cough* and not suppressed *cough* thus *cough* further invalidates assumption that *cough* medical community is *splutter* hiding anything. Thanks for strengthening my argument, ferret.

by Matters Fri Jun 15, 2012 21:39

If that part of the brain tells you that, I would reckon it should also say "if I was silly enough to get pregnant with this human being, then it shouldn't be ok to kill it".
By your reasoning Ella mc sweeney is a bad person for killing and eating a pig, yet she would be ok if she kills an unborn human.

by Horrrible Meat Eater Fri Jun 15, 2012 21:45

"Cows fart out 200litres+ of methane per day and are estimated to be responsible for 14% of greenhouse gases"

That would be a prelude to about 200+ kilos of shite (bullshit shall we call it) which would be < Leftys comments!

Have a nice day, off for a bacon double cheesburger.

by lefty Sat Jun 16, 2012 18:33

"By your reasoning Ella mc sweeney is a bad person for killing and eating a pig, yet she would be ok if she kills an unborn human. "

I already stated clearly that I'm "pro choice", i.e. I stated clearly that "I don't like the idea of abortion" but my position is that it's not really my business if ella decides after much painful ethical deliberation to take a particular action with her own body.

Stop putting words in my mouth, and stop trolling an animal rights thread and trying to make it about abortion.

Thats just ad hominem smearing, topic derailing and is not actually a proper argument for or against whether it is right or not to kill a sentient intelligent animal just for publicity and career furthering when there is no urgent life threatening nutritional need.

attacking my separate pro choice views is ad hominem and irrelevant to the actual argument being made regarding ella being ethically wrong to kill the pig. At best doing that is merely an attempt to show me up as a flawed human being, but it doesn't actually address the argument itself. Even a flawed human can present a correct argument.

your argument goes something like this

fred says A is the case
but fred has some other unpopular view x
therefore A is false

a clear logical fallacy!!

Such "arguments" are all about winning popular votes to villify and shut up the person postulating the original point of view.

It is a cheap dirty trick commonly used by scurrilous underhand individuals who are incapable of making a decent honest strong argument that will stand up to scrutiny

You sir are philosophical scum!! ;-)

by lefty Sat Jun 16, 2012 18:52

""Cows fart out 200litres+ of methane per day and are estimated to be responsible for 14% of greenhouse gases"
That would be a prelude to about 200+ kilos of shite (bullshit shall we call it) which would be < Leftys comments!
Have a nice day, off for a bacon double cheesburger. "

Not my figures. I got them here
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/zoo...w.htm
and they were also corroborated elsewhere.

In the absence of a proper argument, you resort to "proof by authority" (yourself!) abuse.

Well I guess you would be an authority if eating cow's arses on a regular basis somehow infused you with knowledge about their biological and chemical processes. However sadly it doesn't. It just gives you health problems.

Enjoy your burger.

Here's a link to the full version of Morgan Spurlock's "Supersize me" to watch while you munch.

Caption: Video Id: H-eRXuuH9AI Type: Youtube Video
Supersize me

by Horrible Meateater Sat Jun 16, 2012 20:35

do you, man (and woman) have been killing animals for food since day 1.

This is a non story and you are a totally weird idiot Mr/Ms Lefty.

Fine you eat grass and weeds if you like but don't try to force others with your pontifications.

Now its time for a bacon sambo tonight I think, do you have any comedy videos to watch after that?

(PS I won't actually be coming back to read your furious reply cause I checked out a bit more of the site and..shhh your not the only weirdo here, I seem to have found a meeting place of cranks, weirdos, communists and anti-semites, nearly all stories and comments are idiotic so I'll escape back to reality).

by lefty Sat Jun 16, 2012 22:40

just because people have done something for a long time does not prove it's ethical worth.

We've also been making war on each other for a long time. Is that right too?

Good riddance. Might I suggest you frequent P.ie, the right wing sociopath echo chamber. It would seem to be populated with many similarly ignorant bacon guzzling neanderthals with equally fucked up moral compasses who couldn't formulate a coherent ethical argument free of fallacy if their life depended on it similar to yourself. You should get along famously.

by Kermit - pigs & bacon society Sun Jun 17, 2012 02:43

Don't know what all the hullabaloo is about or should i say ' Much ado about Nothing ', pass the sausages and rashers please ;

by lefty Sun Jun 17, 2012 23:19

typical idiot response from a speciesist without conscience or the ability to think clearly and examine the true nature of their reality, numb to the gory slaughter inherent in their daily lives perfect fodder for a profitable corrupt meat industry and it's chains of fast food outlets. A sad waste of a human mind.
Democracy: A tyranny of the stupid

by Matters Sun Jun 17, 2012 23:25

Lefty, you come out with words and sentences like "asshole" "philosophical scum" and "ignorant bacon guzzling neanderthals with equally fucked up moral compasses". I think the intelligence was given more to the animals given to us for food than yourself.
Vegan diet will not save the planet as you think you will do. Less animals farming means less manure for vegetables. Manure is the most effective and sustainable fertilizer for growing all those vegetables.
So it won't fix global warming. It is also the unnatural and unhealthy choice. Everyone knows the dangers of the vegan diet, very serious issues when the body lacks Vit b12 for one. Certain supplements cannot be got from the vegetables alone and the body doesn't absorb quite as well the artificial supplement tablets.
Two clear points as to why humans and the environment need meat, it's something even the primitive minds understood. So pushing your opinions on others is not only irritating, but dangerous.
Back to Ella, the 2 pigs killed were not just done to further a career. Both were used for food as they ought to be. Can't see why anyone would have a problem with that, but I guess your moral compass is just fucked up (as you would put it). And because someone doesn't agree with your view doesn't make them trolls as you try to suggest

by lefty Mon Jun 18, 2012 01:08

"body doesn't absorb quite as well the artificial supplement tablets."

what a wonderful argument for killing unnecessarily

by lefty Mon Jun 18, 2012 02:26

"Lefty, you come out with words and sentences like "asshole" "philosophical scum" and "ignorant bacon guzzling neanderthals with equally fucked up moral compasses". I think the intelligence was given more to the animals given to us for food than yourself."

ok, does that mean I can expect to be slaughtered and eaten for a stupid tv program with no rights whatsoever?

"Vegan diet will not save the planet as you think you will do."

never said it would. don't put words in my mouth. But it is certainly more efficient use of resources and less cows = less methane.

"Less animals farming means less manure for vegetables. Manure is the most effective and sustainable fertilizer for growing all those vegetables.

So keep some animals for manure production. You don't need to slaughter and eat them. Not an argument.

"It is also the unnatural and unhealthy choice. "

that's your opinion. Personally I'm a lot healthier than most big mac guzzlers I know. Most are fat and overweight with a higher risk of cardio vascular disease which is a real killer in Ireland
I on the other hand am healthy slim and athletic with a much lower risk of CV disease. Anyone looking at me and looking at the average mcdonalds denizen would have to concede on that point.

"Everyone knows the dangers of the vegan diet, very serious issues when the body lacks Vit b12 for one.
Certain supplements cannot be got from the vegetables alone and the body doesn't absorb quite as well the artificial supplement tablets."
whooooo........ scaremongering.....fear.........bullshit...
The fact is, I have had no health problems related to B12. a simple supplement has worked fine for me. Ask my doctor. I'm in excellent health living as a vegetarian / vegan since I was a child

"Two clear points as to why humans and the environment need meat, it's something even the primitive minds understood. So pushing your opinions on others is not only irritating, but dangerous."

I can accept that you might be irritated by my post. Thats the only valid point you make. However dangerous?? Puh-lease!
Dangerous to the lucrative profits of a disgusting corrupt meat industry based on industrial scale killing and cruelty if people listen to me, perhaps. However, nothing to worry about there. This well heeled industry also has the media by the balls with their lucrative advertisement campaigns so no fear of my posts making so much as a dent in the prevailing consensus of exploitation and cruelty. Your disgusting murder burgers are pretty safe for now.

Again you suggest my mind is primitive because I don't accept meat eating as necessary, but I would contend that what is more primitive is letting your lizard brain override any more advanced abstract reasoning about right and wrong, such as ethics, more associated with the cerebral cortex. Y'know, the bit that most differentiates us from other animals.

"Back to Ella, the 2 pigs killed were not just done to further a career. Both were used for food as they ought to be. Can't see why anyone would have a problem with that, "

I guess you lack imagination as well as empathy! Ella can afford to eat ethically. She did this as part of a program. It was unnecessary.

"but I guess your moral compass is just fucked up (as you would put it). And because someone doesn't agree with your view doesn't make them trolls as you try to suggest"

However if someone tries to make this about abortion instead of about the unnecessary killing of sentient intelligent animals for a fucking rte program then that IS trolling

Caption: Video Id: fXSzIhFlz6U Type: Youtube Video
if slaughterhouses had glass walls...

Caption: Video Id: 6Snpdp2Nmqs Type: Youtube Video
Halal slaughter

by Damien M - PW Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:00

Them big bad butchers are cruel blokes, yet if it was a video of curettage or disection of a human animal, not yet sentient (although some would differ), then you would jump back up on your high sentient horse Lefty?

For the record, Vitamin B12 deficiencies can take decades to manifest!

Why you go to your local GP for nutritional advice tells me a lot..~perhaps The B12 deficiencey is kicking in already...

"Hey Doc, how much nutrition did you learn at university!?"

by lefty Mon Jun 18, 2012 14:59

Blood tests are pretty standard thing to ask your doctor to do occasionally Damo. Get a grip.

Stop trolling about abortion ok? start a pro life thread if you must to talk about that. This one is about the ethics of a well known public figure ella mcswiney killing a pig publicly for career purposes without a nutrirional imperative.

I have never ever had an abortion in my entire life. But I'm pretty sure you have eaten plenty of animals. So Get off your own selfish ethically unsound stupid faddish "paleo" high horse. When I have or perform an abortion then we'll talk. Meanwhile, STFU about abortion ok?

Stop throwing something at me that I personally have never ever done. It's not an argument.

by Righty Mon Jun 18, 2012 21:41

Special treat for Lefty

by lefty Tue Jun 19, 2012 00:39

Does that pathetic "proof by authority" attempt at getting a rise out of me mean you concede the actual argument?

ok...*ding*.....Thanks for playing Righty. ......Next

While you are waiting you could do worse than watch this movie "earthlings" narrated by none other than Joachim Phoenix:

by Damien M - PW Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:46

You can't have it both ways. Cursing and swearing at folk, then throwing a strop when they shred your argument. It was put to you that Ella was a mean nasty person for killing a pig but it would be perfectly ok for her to kill an unborn baby. Cries of "Speciest! Speciest!" rang out in the warped world that you inhabit.

You can't talk about trolling, tis you who turned have turned an animal rights issue into a nutritional debate.

Stick to the ethics issue, at least you have some semblance of what you are talking about.

Paleo isn't a fad, it's a way of eating and living recommended by the world's top strength and conditioning specialists. All established humans...I mean established in their field..

'narrated by 'none other' than Joachim Phoenix'

Wow, is he some sort of guru?

by lefty Wed Jun 20, 2012 10:54

There you go again with the abortion crap.

How would you like it if I was to derail your pharma threads with discussions of potentially life saving drug treatments for big eyed poor starving third world babies that bringing down pharma giants might mean are never created. Think about it Damien, you're potentially killing babies in africa by damaging GSK et al.

I'll say it one last time.
I advocate responsible use of contraception so this issue should not arise. If it does, then what a woman decides to do with her own body or whatever is attached directly to it is not my business. Thats a pro choice viewpoint. I never personally had any abortions, I don't like the idea of abortion. However neither do I think it reasonable to directly equate potential with actual. Such comparisons logically descend into farce very quickly (as highlighted above)

Even if I am a flawed human being does not address the argument itself. Its just a variation on the "fred postulates A, fred has an unpopular view, therefore A is false" fallacy.

You however with your "paleo" chic diet, have, over a prolonged period, ACTUALLY directly colluded in a reprehensible immoral and disgusting cruel industry as outlined in my video links. Not only that but you are helping to perpetuate the practice of killing and eating sentient and intelligent animals publicly for free in an underhand manner on this thread, POTENTIALLY leading to bungled acts of animal cruelty in the back gardens of idiots. You sir are in no position to criticise me.

I won't waste any more of my time responding to pro life anti woman deliberately off topic derailling posts which have nothing to do with the topic

Topic concerns whether high profile acts of animal killing, encouraging other impressionable easily led copycats or bored idiots to do the same thing and in the process no doubt clumsily kill unfortunate pigs are morally justified and are a responsible use of a position of influence.

Damien said:"You can't have it both ways. Cursing and swearing at folk, then throwing a strop when they shred your argument."

Nobody has shredded my argument yet. Just made comments about abortion and eating bacon in puerile unfunny attempts at humour, and tried to muddy the water by bringing abortion into the discussion.

Damien said:" It was put to you that Ella was a mean nasty person for killing a pig but it would be perfectly ok for her to kill an unborn baby. Cries of "Speciest! Speciest!" rang out in the warped world that you inhabit."

Exactly when did I ever say it was "perfectly ok" for ella to have an abortion??
I have to say, I'm generally not in favour of 2nd rate self publicist careerist hacks reproducing ;-)
but when exactly did I ever say that?. I said it's not my business what a woman decides to do with her own body. Not that it was "perfectly ok".

She ACTUALLY did kill the pig. However, she will probably never have an abortion so how is that "potential vs actual" argument really relevant?

Both Ella and yourself and others who ridiculed the viewpoints expressed on this thread ARE speciesist by definition, affording or denying rights based on whether an entity belongs to a particular species.

Like I said, I could probably make a "potential vs actual" argument that GSK might invent a new medication that will save millions of big eyed babies in africa and by your ACTUAL undermining of them, you might be preventing that. You're a potential BABY KILLER Damien. So everything you say is false,.

Once you start comparing Hypothetical events with actual ones, it just descends into farce and you can just make up any shit you like as an argument.

Damien said:"You can't talk about trolling, tis you who turned have turned an animal rights issue into a nutritional debate."

This debate IS about nutrition. Killing and eating of animals does come down largely to an argument about how we get our nutrition. We have other more ethically defensible options to get the nutrition we require without industrial scale systematic cruelty to animals yet we still choose to continue with this horrific silent animal holocaust.

Damien said:"Stick to the ethics issue, at least you have some semblance of what you are talking about."

I am sticking to it. Discussion of the ethics of nutrition is INTRINSIC to addressing the majority of animal cruelty on the planet

Damien said:"Paleo isn't a fad, it's a way of eating and living recommended by the world's top strength and conditioning specialists. All established humans...I mean established in their field.

Oh, well thats all right then. Carry on slaughtering. I mean it's not as if you have other options or anything..You are only following orders.

Damien said:"'narrated by 'none other' than Joachim Phoenix', Wow, is he some sort of guru?

No, Just a world class actor and a person in the limelight who chooses to use his position in a more ethical fashion than 2nd rate presenter Ella.

by Damien M - PW Thu Jun 21, 2012 16:14

"Think about it Damien, you're potentially killing babies in africa by damaging GSK et al."

Doubt it very much. Think it's GSK that is killing babies in Africa, South America etc, by using them as guinea pigs, human guinea pigs, not porcine sentient pigs (1,2). If you hold firm to the idea that GSK are somehow toiling in the labs day and night to end world poverty or some dreadful disease then you're more deluded than originally feared (3).

."...argument that GSK might invent a new medication that will save millions of big eyed babies in africa and by your ACTUAL undermining of them, you might be preventing that.."

Sure, asking pharmaceutical companies not to use sentient children as guinea pigs will prevent this happening? (4).

Back to the original topic-
"We have other more ethically defensible options to get the nutrition we require without industrial scale systematic cruelty to animals yet we still choose to continue with this horrific silent animal holocaust."

Exactly my point. Raising and killing a few animals yourself hardly denotes a holocaust, silent or otherwise! For the record I am a huge opponent of factory farming of any kind.
(1). http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/88922/gsk-lab-...ined-$1m-over-tests-that-killed-14--babies
(2). http://en.mercopress.com/2012/01/04/gsk-argentina-fined...ilies
(3). http://www.cchrint.org/tag/gsk/
(4). http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Foster_child...rials

by lefty Fri Jun 22, 2012 02:03

damien

Haven't you ever heard of reductio ad absurdum??

The hypothetical argument is meant to highlight the absurdity of that line of thinking.

The idea of you attacking GSK leading to a "hypothetical" loss of a cure for babies in africa was meant to illustrate the stupidity of arguing "hypothetical vs actual" and how it quickly descends into a farce where any shit you can imagine can be used as an argument against a real event. Y'know, like my supposed support for ella's hypothetical abortions vs your actual support for meat eating. Ridiculous!

Well at least you are against factory farming, that's something. It would be rather hypocritical if you weren't though, considering the relationship between factory farming, use of antibiotics leading to resistance in the population consuming the product, the pharma industry and the fast track incubation of flu in the animals.

Smithfield pig farms in mexico were the supposed source of the last swine flu "epidemic" resulting in lucrative profits for the pharma giants and near forced vaccination for a flu that killed less people than the usual winter flu. Mary harney spent nearly 1 billion stockpiling tamiflu, donald rumsfelds nice little earner, while grandmothers waited days on trollies. But I digress....

But you must admit, ella in her program was not addressing this issue properly at all, merely encouraging a bunch of fad conscious idiots to torture pigs in their own garden for their own selfish reasons (taste, health).

I don't agree with killing pigs for food period, however the local conscientious organic farmer is far more experienced in doing this job quickly and humanely wheras beavis and butthead following ella certainly won't be and it will result in unnecessary cruelty and botched killings.

by Damien M - PW Fri Jun 22, 2012 17:15

She tortured them now? I didn't realise that, I thought they were killed pretty humanely. Why didn't you say so?

by lefty Sat Jun 23, 2012 08:34

stop being a dick Damien.
please show me exactly where I said that ella tortured her pig.
Perhaps the prions are damaging YOUR brain sooner than expected!! ;-)

by lefty Sat Jun 23, 2012 08:47

"Raising and killing a few animals yourself hardly denotes a holocaust, silent or otherwise! "

but multiply this by 7 billion and what do you get? We need to change our thinking here.

Currently most of our killing is done on the cheap by proxy by greedy sociopathic corporate killers who only care about their bottom line. See the movie "earthlings" posted above for more details.