Jump to content

Who's looking forward to chlorinated chicken?


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Robin Powell said:

I am not sure what the problem is with using chlorine to disinfect the chicken.  We drink it in our water and spent a long time in our youth diving into chlorinated swimming  pools. I know it was a problem in the 1st WW in concentrated form when pumped into the trenches but has been used ever since in diluted form

Except in Syria until recently, Robin, where it was used as a poison. The authorities pumped large quantities into the country's waterworks. Many articles in New York Times on the issue. Small amounts disinfect, large quantities poison. We always forget about the Majority World, me included.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go. The highlighted part shows how the govt will get around it when the US demands come in. They’ll just change the legislation and claim they’re following the science. 

3C1DA726-48D8-4222-8F93-E3199472B520.jpeg

Edited by peejay4A
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2020 at 10:22 PM, peejay4A said:

Here you go. The highlighted part shows how the govt will get around it when the US demands come in. They’ll just change the legislation and claim they’re following the science.

To rephrase that sentence, it would read something like:

"The only way for that to happen would be to drop our standards through new legislation, with the implication that this is not something being countenanced".

The way I interpret this official statement does not suggest to me they want to drop existing UK standards to compromise. But maybe I am not cynical enough.

Footnote: If my interpretation is correct, there is still no reason why the letter should not be couched in plain English. Official documents are legal documents. Unless, that is, ambiguity was deliberately intended —as a loophole. But surely not. Clumsiness, I'd say, poor schooling in the Internet Era.

Edited by DavidBee
Addenda
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2020 at 1:08 PM, RobH said:

 

I don't believe there is any suggestion that our own standards will be relaxed in any way and neither do I believe we have any right to dictate to other countries how they do things. Personally I find ritual killing methods to be abhorrent but those still seem to be accepted here, as is the use of antibiotics in feed which is far more of a potential danger to us.  

As I said before  - if you don't like it, just don't buy it.   

 

Sorry Rob, don't agree, the chlorination is to reduce production costs in the US, why put our country's health at risk to increase US companies' profits.

ps I used to be a research microbiologist & currently work in the food industry.

 

Edited by duncan
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, duncan said:

chlorination is to reduce production costs in the US, why put our country's health at risk to increase US companies' profits.

The US is a highly litigious and health-conscious society Duncan. If there was any risk to health those companies would have been sued into bankruptcy years ago.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, RobH said:

The US is a highly litigious and health-conscious society Duncan. If there was any risk to health those companies would have been sued into bankruptcy years ago.

 

Health conscious society, Rob? They mostly eat whiter-than-white bread; their population's diet is hardly "balanced", obesity is a major problem, need I go on?

Monsanto, a US multinational, has been successfully pushing genetically modified food for decades, and no litigation has stopped them — except from preventing them to copyright a staple food like rice in India.

True enough, it is indeed an intensely litigious society, but health is a different kettle of fish altogether.

Edited by DavidBee
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DavidBee said:

Monsanto, a US multinational, has been successfully pushing genetically modified food for decades, and no litigation has stopped them —

Because there is nothing wrong with it perhaps?  If you can't prove harm of course the litigation will fail. 

Yes US society as a whole is every bit as health conscious as ours, believe it or not, in terms of public health and hygiene which is what was under discussion.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RobH said:

Because there is nothing wrong with it perhaps.... yes US society as a whole is every bit as health conscious as ours...

Well, genetically when the US-owned food industry modifies their diet, I think we need to make an important distinction here.

Individuals may well be litigious and health-conscious, while groups, companies, collectively, that is, they may be less health-conscious than we are prepared to admit. If they were not, they would not be peddling unhealthy food and encouraging it, through promotion and supportive legislation, as they are.

You may wish also to consider how children are targetted in the schools. This is an enormous problem, in the UK, in the US, and everywhere else. Why is that? Because the multinationals selling their sweets and Coca Cola (excellent abrasive in the garage, I've heard) are not proving, in practice, health-conscious in the slightest. So we need to distinguish between health-conscious individuals, on the one hand, and societal health awareness, as it manifests in practice on a wider scale, on the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DavidBee said:

the multinationals selling their sweets and Coca Cola  are not proving, in practice, health-conscious in the slightest. 

Well, at least they've stopped putting cocaine in it!

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

As babies my wife prepared their food not from a jar, we regulated what they eat and Burger king or McDonald’s was part of the diet.  Even when they went to school we provided packed lunches so we knew what they ate.  It seems things have changed it’s become far more fast food,  food prepared for us rather than by us and not aware of what we are eatIng. Perhaps then we will be eating things we would not ultimately want too

Edited by Misfit
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stillp said:

Well, at least they've stopped putting cocaine in it!

Pete

In case you're wondering, it was me who awarded you a cup for your comment. Yes, very true and funny:P. But doesn't change the point.

There are North Americans I like, as individuals. And some I admire. For example, my friend Mike Strang, owner of Penny, a TR3, who lives in Alaska and is restoring his car when he gets the time, against all the odds, and inclement weather. (It's winter there almost all year round). 

I don't know; could be Mike is health-conscious, probably not. But his country isn't, in terms of policies, and legislation and free marketeering. You have to look at the bigger picture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don’t care about animal welfare then you’ll probably be OK with chlorinated chicken. 

Edited by peejay4A
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, peejay4A said:

If you don’t care about animal welfare then you’ll probably be OK with chlorinated chicken. 

Yes indeed. Or, you may be choosing what you consider the lesser of two evils: (anxiety over) trade deals to go ahead, over and above qualms about chlorinated chicken — or other such dubious practices.

PS. If so, you can teach Machiavelli how to suck eggs.

Edited by DavidBee
Typo and post scriptum
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Chlorinating is just another way of reducing the risk of food poisoning when processing chicken.

We are quite happy to drink a little in out tap water & wipe down our food prep areas and so forth.

I am not entirely sure that there is any great risk to those that eat it.

The concern would be that it might disguise or mitigate the impact of poor animal welfare from intesive factory farming.  I wouldn't be too worried about eating a free range chicken that had been chlorine washed but I guess that's not the market the chlorinated chicken will be aiming for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2020 at 5:07 PM, Andy Moltu said:

Chlorinating is just another way of reducing the risk of food poisoning when processing chicken.

We are quite happy to drink a little in out tap water & wipe down our food prep areas and so forth.

I am not entirely sure that there is any great risk to those that eat it.

The concern would be that it might disguise or mitigate the impact of poor animal welfare from intesive factory farming.  I wouldn't be too worried about eating a free range chicken that had been chlorine washed but I guess that's not the market the chlorinated chicken will be aiming for.

No, there's no direct risk to health of eating a chlorine washed chicken. That's completely irrelevant to the actual issue, which is about animal welfare and the wider/global health hazards of factory farming (as already explored in this thread).

Nigel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.