Burger King goes cage free. Step in the right direction, or gimmick?

So BK has vowed to now only use cage free eggs and pork.

I think “cage-free” is now going to explode into the next big buzz-word. Much like “Certified Organic”, “All Natural”, “RBST free”, “No Antibiotics”, and the list goes on.

Originally these words meant something. They served a purpose, to inform the consumer that this product was better in some way, but as all things go, the politics win out in the end. For example, in order for a product to obtain an “all natural” certification, it must only contain carbon. Lots of things contain carbon, but that does not make them healthy or beneficial ,does it?

Cage Free doesn’t really mean much in terms of food quality or living conditions for the animal. Cage free literally just means that it wasn’t confined to a small cage. It has no bearing on the animal’s diet, treatment, health, or wellbeing in any other aspect.

You can bet the pork and chicken will still be grain fed, which means the meat and eggs will be sub-par, poor products as they have always been. The animals will still be sick and unhappy. Because as we all know, to have a happy healthy animal you need to feed it what it would normally eat in the wild.

For chickens, that means not grains, but allowing them to forage for grubs, bugs, worms, snails, small rodents, and even each other. Pigs also do better on a free range fed diet, not grains. The meat will have a better nutition profile on a non-grain diet.

Anyway you look at it, this is pretty much just a PR stunt. As always, BK is looking to improve its image and bottom line. Hoping to gain better ground with public opinion. Watch for the other fast food peddlers to follow suit.

The food is still shit.

Advertisements

The most important guest post of all: Why it’s inherently ethical for humans to be able to eat meat.

At what point can it be said that behavior wholly subsumed in the nature of a species of animal can be wrong, unethical to practice? To even ask the question requires an introspective, intelligent conscience—the qualitative aspect of our being that differentiates us from other animals. Because otherwise, the question we’re asking demands first that we identify and explain how ethics could arise external to our own natural experience, from some super-existent realm sporting an external authority that trumps our own individual authority over our own behavior. In simpler terms: we are ethical beings. Ethics, a sense of right and wrong, is as much a part of what makes us human as the consumption of other animals along the way made us human. It’s all baked into the cake: meat gave us the nutritional density to evolve big brains, big brains gave us the intelligence to introspect, and conscious introspection gave us ethics. Eating meat made us ethical beings. As such, eating the flesh of non-ethical beings can’t logically be unethical.

Read the whole essay [here]