General Researchers to Study Avalanches By Burying Live Pigs in Snow - and watching them die

[Avaleirra]

How do we know this is a trusted source?


Although it does look pretty brutal

 

[Samael88]

Although it does look pretty brutal

If you are talking about the boxes, then you come up with a better way to store them^^ My neighbor has this little sheds with a little fenced yard that he use to grow the little swinelings^^ But when they are about 6months they are put into those boxes^^

@All who protests against this: Have you ever heard about the muslims way to kill pigs, halal(this also goes for kosher)? If you have not I suggest you google it and get an oppinion on what I would say is about 10times worse for the animals:thdown:

 

[Sevion]

Really? http://www.all-creatures.org/anex/pig.html

Don't support the meat industry! Don't eat animals!

So... we should be herbivores when in reality, humans are omnivores? Makes tons of sense.

And you can't really argue that humans are herbivores and not omnivores. Humans eat both meat and vegetation, so we are omnivores.

 

[thewrongvine]

You guys that are like "oh it's so cruel!"
Don't just say that out of quick reaction and say it cuz it seems sad.
Like the stuff with avalanches by humans and pigs suffering... get your facts first.

Better them than us, lol. There's a lotta worse things going on.
It's cruel, yeah, but you can't do anything about it...

~Hai-Bye-Vine~

 

[Miz]

Like all threads involving Pig research such as the bullet proof vest article last year I must ask:

Was there bacon involved after this test?
Otherwise we are wasting precious bacon resources.

Also does the bacon after this freezing research conclude to taste different?

 

[Lyerae]

Why, I hope so.

Mmm, bacon...

 

[Avaleirra]

If there was bacon involved then this was not a sad story, but a successful project :thup:


Bacon is god.

 

[Aqua Dragon]

The pigs could be used in the name of science. Bacon could then be distributed equally afterwards.

Really, I don't think it's all that cruel. Sure, it sucks, but when you consider what pigs gotta suffer when they go through the meat plants, and the sheer number of them that die, this is child's play.

Especially once you look around for some more information and find out that the pigs are going to be both sedated and anesthetized only makes the test even less cruel.

 

[tom_mai78101]

I don't know what you guys think...If we can't see any test results, how are we going to prevent something disastrous if a much larger scale event happened just right next to you?

An old Chinese saying, "If we can't go in a tiger's den, we wouldn't be able to get the cubs."

 

[FireCat]

oh it's so cruel!
Don't just say that out of quick reaction and say it cuz it seems sad.
Like the stuff with avalanches by humans and pigs suffering... get your facts first.

Not Just sad... It is cruel. No matter what!

Facts? how pigs try to take air under the snow before it die?
Holy crap, That's so interesting facts to know and watch.

 

[Aqua Dragon]

Not Just sad... It is cruel. No matter what!

Facts? how pigs try to take air under the snow before it die?
Holy crap, That's so interesting facts to know and watch.

Think about this logically - you only think it's cruel because it's your natural human reaction to feel empathy before thinking about results. It is much the same that conservatives give about homosexuality, and incest, and other such issues without rationally figuring out implications.

In the end, this study will save more than 29 human lives. If we can do that, then the deaths of these pigs are not going to waste.

 

[tom_mai78101]

We need to control our empathy on test animals. Besides, we have these brilliant ideas of cloning and artificial birth control.

 

[Pineapple]

Think about this logically - you only think it's cruel because it's your natural human reaction to feel empathy before thinking about results.

We're not Vulcans. We have emotions and they shouldn't be ignored all the time.

I think killing pigs this way is horrible. What if they wanted to run this test on a a few people? It would be shot down right away.

i agree that it may save lives. but I KNOW it will cost lives.

I mean, why not use death row inmates for this? Oh right, its inhumane.

 

[ElderKingpin]

it would seem science is more important than an animal's life. And that really is debatable on whether or not that is right. Certainly people want technology to further. But at what cost?

 

[Aqua Dragon]

@Pineapple
I'm probably just not sympathetic enough then to feel for what's happening to the pigs.

I think that the reason why the test would be shot down if it was used with people is because people naturally assort different creatures onto a sliding scale of importance. Much like:

Insects -----> Vermin ------> Pigs -----> Dogs ------> Humans

With some noticeable variation based on culture of course.

Now assume you have a utilitarian goal: you need to kill some people because there is a possibility it may lead to future advancements that will save even more people. But out of the 5 things on your sliding scale, only pigs will work.

In that case, the reason pigs are used is because they are assigned less of an importance then humans, and can be used for the same purpose without having to waste the life of something more important. Like if you have 5 pieces of pretty paper and 5 pieces of regular paper, and you want to see what happens to paper when it burns, you'll throw in the 5 pieces of regular paper because it isn't as useful or important.

Why use human lives to run an experiment when you have something that gets the same thing? The main reason again is empathy: people will share more of an emotional reaction when you're dealing with humans to do something, especially when they know something else can be used. And these emotions completely ignore that the people would have died anyways. That's the only reason they aren't used: because people feel uncomfortable about it.

Plus, there's the whole "We eat animals on a regular basis anyways" thing. They would have died in a possibly more cruel manner for their meat if they weren't used for this.

And finally, they're going to be sedated and anesthetized. They won't even be awake when they're dying anyways! It's not like they're going to be squealing or feeling themselves being crushed or suffocating. Their bodies will perform the same function it normally would if they were awake, but without the pain or consciousness. It's not like the scientists are sick and cruel creatures that get their fair share of giggles from seeing pigs die. They're letting them go off in a peaceful, even ethical manner.

 

[ReVolver]

Lets just say that we where all in charge of slaughtering our animals that we use it's meat to eat. My slaughter would probably be more painful and messier than what they do.

 

[Avaleirra]

I would probably slaughter my animals quickly and painlessly. Eventually I would probably be desensitized enough to not feel sick when doing such a thing.