Panorama - Treatment of Dairy Cattle

[SplashinginPuddles1]

Anyone else watching Panorama tonight about the treatment of cattle on dairy farms? It’s shocking and heartbreaking. Cows being hit with spades, kicked, dragged. How is this being allowed to happen?

I’ve seen elsewhere people saying that farm animals can get enough nutrients from plant food so humans can too, and wanted to point out that herbivores have different digestive systems so can extract nutrients from the stuff that humans would otherwise throw away.

Well managed grass fed animals are not the carbon footprint that we’re told they are.
Beef and dairy lots in USA are a nightmare, but it should be obvious to anyone that industrialising animals is never going to be good for anyone involved, but fortunately here in the UK it’s different.

There is plenty of unbiased information out there, and hooved, herding mammals are essential to keeping land fertile.

Even if the "just buy organic" thing solved the issue how do you square that with the fact there's milk powder in bloody everything?

Handy if you want to avoid confectionery though

Also from a purely environmental perspective....isn't continuing to use animal products at the same rate because of the (lesser) harms caused by alternatives a bit like carrying on smoking because you don't know exactly what's in a vape/nicotine gum? Haven't climate scientists pretty much agreed that moving towards a plant based diet is across the board is less harmful than an animal one?

Regardless of what vegan agenda might be humans are mammals.We are not supposed to be consuming milk when grown up and certainly not from different species. Its just not natural.So I am not sure how much meat we are biologically meant to consume for optimum health but I do know that milk is as unnatural as it comes

Yes they have .But till it is more convenient to listen to them than stay ignorant nothing will change.
Morals and brain comes after indulgence and instant gratification.
For example a lot of people who are not religious do not agree with unstunned killing.Yet every Friday they have no problem buying their kebab

Regardless of what vegan agenda might be humans are mammals.We are not supposed to be consuming milk when grown up and certainly not from different species. Its just not natural.So I am not sure how much meat we are biologically meant to consume for optimum health but I do know that milk is as unnatural as it comes

It's not that simple though. Humans have evolved lactase persistence, although this varies a lot between ethnic groups. We've been consuming milk for thousands of years so it seems odd to suggest it's fundamentally unnatural, as opposed to ultra-processed nut milks for example. Not objecting to those or to a vegan diet, but humans are omnivores. Historically, we've taken what we can get and done pretty well on it, and as a species we've made so many changes over generations to the crops and animals we consume that 'natural' seems a bit of a moot point. I do agree we should consume less meat and dairy though. And we should pay more for it and support farmers like the ones on this thread who do care for their animals.

@Aspiringmatriarch

Regardless of what vegan agenda might be humans are mammals.We are not supposed to be consuming milk when grown up and certainly not from different species. Its just not natural.So I am not sure how much meat we are biologically meant to consume for optimum health but I do know that milk is as unnatural as it comes

It's not that simple though. Humans have evolved lactase persistence, although this varies a lot between ethnic groups. We've been consuming milk for thousands of years so it seems odd to suggest it's fundamentally unnatural, as opposed to ultra-processed nut milks for example. Not objecting to those or to a vegan diet, but humans are omnivores. Historically, we've taken what we can get and done pretty well on it, and as a species we've made so many changes over generations to the crops and animals we consume that 'natural' seems a bit of a moot point. I do agree we should consume less meat and dairy though. And we should pay more for it and support farmers like the ones on this thread who do care for their animals.

Ultra processed nut milks..you can always make your own or not consume any at all. Agree with omnivorous bit but surely like other primates,not in a meat 3 times a day and dairy literally in everything. Just not healthy for us or the planet

@Selma22

Find it very odd.Farming and treatment of farm animals (insemination,slaughter,management in general ) is in odds to loving the animals.I love my pets and I wouldn't dream of subjecting them to that sort of treatment but perhaps its different sort of love

I trust that your pets had been kept with their mother until they naturally parted ways? That you keep them in a manner as natural to their habitat as possible? That you only feed them on food that you have grown yourself, organically without any wildlife or insects being harmed? An area twice the size of the UK is needed to produce dry pet food for dogs and cats worldwide. That's going to require quite a few farmers. Owning pets seems to be at odds with your stance.

I have given couple of budgies home (their owner passed away ).I definitely haven't mated them,nor planning to kill or eat any part of them.

Ultra processed nut milks..you can always make your own or not consume any at all.
Agree with omnivorous bit but surely like other primates,not in a meat 3 times a day and dairy literally in everything. Just not healthy for us or the planet

I agree with this, but there are lots of different arguments here whether it's natural, whether it's ethical, whether it's healthy, whether it's environmentally friendly. None of these has a single simple answer IMO. For example 'natural' diets have varied over time and geographically; Inuit tribes have historically had an almost entirely carnivorous diet and this obviously worked well for them for many generations. Whereas we have a long tradition of consuming dairy.

I haven't seen the programme yet, and it sounds like there were some examples of bad and unacceptable animal welfare practices which need to be exposed and stamped out. But I think the issue of whether taking calves away from their mothers is cruel is a complex one. For wild herbivores, only a small proportion of young ever make it past their first year - the majority are predated, killed by hunger, disease or weather. It's impossible to know what feelings cows have and whether they grieve their lost young, but I don't think they have human feelings. Given the amount of resources they require humans would not keep cows to live freely as pets, they are kept in large numbers because they're useful to us for milk and meat. So let's not pretend that if dairy farming did not exist, cows would all be living happy and contented lives together with their calves.

I completely agree that consumers need to pay more for milk if that is what is needed to support high welfare standards across the industry.

The person who pointed out that cow's milk is used in enormous quantities for the baby formula industry made an excellent point.

@IceandIndigo

I haven't seen the programme yet, and it sounds like there were some examples of bad and unacceptable animal welfare practices which need to be exposed and stamped out. But I think the issue of whether taking calves away from their mothers is cruel is a complex one. For wild herbivores, only a small proportion of young ever make it past their first year - the majority are predated, killed by hunger, disease or weather. It's impossible to know what feelings cows have and whether they grieve their lost young, but I don't think they have human feelings. Given the amount of resources they require humans would not keep cows to live freely as pets, they are kept in large numbers because they're useful to us for milk and meat. So let's not pretend that if dairy farming did not exist, cows would all be living happy and contented lives together with their calves.

I completely agree that consumers need to pay more for milk if that is what is needed to support high welfare standards across the industry.

The person who pointed out that cow's milk is used in enormous quantities for the baby formula industry made an excellent point.

Just because in wild its a common outcome doesn't mean animal doesn't feel distress or that we should practise it.Without medical advances etc humans often died young too (childbirth for example ). I don't know what the answer is but it certainly isn't humane what we do.They might not have human feeling but to assume they don't have any just because it suits our agenda is wrong

I think there's a lot of out of touch posters on this thread shouting 'propaganda'. I don't think that works anymore because the facts are mainstream now with regards to climate and animal agriculture. Would you accuse David Attenborough of propaganda?

@Selma22 I never argued that cows do not feel distress or that their welfare should not concern us, I'm surprised you took that from my post. I'm not convinced we should equate a cow losing their calf to a human losing their child, but that's not the same as saying they have no feelings.

Your position seems a bit inconsistent. You say we shouldn't consume milk because it's not "natural" for humans to do so, but you are (rightly) in favour of modern medicine and other non-natural interventions developed by humans that have improved the way we live. In fact I find the "natural" argument is not terribly helpful. For most of our evolutionary history humans were hunter gatherers, so you could argue that all forms of farming are unnatural for our species. Stable food crops like wheat and corn have been completely changed from their wild ancestors by many centuries of selective breeding by humans, does that make eating bread unnatural?

I think it makes a difference on how the agriculture is practiced.

Industrial lots in USA are bad, a climatic nightmare.

Animals living mostly outside, trampling the grass and encouraging its growth to be thick and lush, whilst fertilising it at the same time is good, and not a climate nightmare.

The problem is not farming, it’s industrialising those farms, it’s people thinking they should be able to buy unrealistically cheap meat, and prices driven down as supermarkets compete with each other to do so. The losers in these cases are usually the farmers, look at how factory farming of chickens developed - not by farmers deciding to keep their chickens in intolerable conditions, but by supermarkets driving the prices down so much that they faced an option - lose their livelihood or keep working. Not many people have the luxury to be able to stop work out of principle, I mean, it would be lovely, but it’s not realistic.

It’s not difficult to buy only organic eggs, or to choose high welfare meat, but the majority of people don’t care, won’t look at threads like this, and most likely don’t give a shit about the provenance of their eggs or bacon. Those are the people who need reaching, not keep having these pointless divisive arguments from different, but nevertheless valid, viewpoints.

I've worked with dairy farmers for over a decade.
The vast majority of farmers have high welfare standards, but there are definitely some who are bad performers, as there are in any industry.
We need stronger enforcement, more transparency & better understanding of animal farming & welfare by consumers.
Having seen what I've seen over ten years I am still happy to eat meat & dairy, I buy local & organic, & free range eggs.
Chicken, pork & fish I find much harder to source ethically & sustainably & affordably.

@outsidevoice is spot on, I completely agree.

A lot of the research saying meat is bad is funded by those who directly benefit from more people eating plant based diets.

Plus using industrial lots to base this research in (as several studies do) is dishonest and leads to skewed results.

Much like the peer reviewed scientific research saying red meat is bad for you often fails to be clear that they are using a diet full of processed red meat and the buns and chips that go alongside them. Dishonest, and suits an agenda.

@tothemoonandbackbuses if you look at some areas of upland Britain, the only species making any use of it are deer and birds for shooting. many more species would use it if it was rewilded. see recent examples in Scotland - the Feshie Estate is one.

me and DH are much healthier on plant milks. I had horrendous acid reflux, after switching to dairy free alternatives I no longer get it at all. I also don't gain weight easily like I used to. My DH has a life threatening gut problem, in the approx 5 years since going plant based he hasn't had a single flare up - flare ups requiring hospitalisation occurred yearly before this. cow milk is associated with various health conditions, its not the straightforward healthy food some people think it is. if milk could have a lower environmental footprint, then why isn't anyone doing it? It cant have a lower environmental footprint than plant milks because it involves cows, which will always push the environmental impact higher.

@OutsideVoice

A lot of the research saying meat is bad is funded by those who directly benefit from more people eating plant based diets.

Plus using industrial lots to base this research in (as several studies do) is dishonest and leads to skewed results.

Much like the peer reviewed scientific research saying red meat is bad for you often fails to be clear that they are using a diet full of processed red meat and the buns and chips that go alongside them. Dishonest, and suits an agenda.

Works the other way around too! Sadly these industries are subsidised by governments and often bullied by dairy and meat industries. For example not being able to call plant drinks milk as it isn't dairy...nobody has a problem. With peanut butter though. This is such long topic that not even worth discussing unless people are willing to look into it themselves

@lochmaree on the other hand though there are species of birds thriving in moorlands which are endangered in other areas. It’s not the monoculture we’re told it is.

That’s not to say I agree with the shooting that these areas are maintained for, but keepering those areas maintains a huge amount of diversity in the wildlife.

@Selma22 of course it goes both ways, but there seems to be endless money from grain and pharmaceutical corporations to prove that meat is bad, which tends to twitch my brain into doing further reading.

Scientific papers should be clear and unbiased. Sadly they’re not.

@outsidevoice agreed but moorland would still exist, it just wouldn't be the dominant landscape type of upland Britain. in areas they are rewilding in parts of Scotland, red list endangered species are spreading out and increasing numbers. that wouldn't have happened if it was left as moorland. there really isn't a huge amount of diversity in those areas, maybe in some there is, but in the areas I walk through I can walk for miles and see nothing. at best I will see some deer and grouse. there is more wildlife in my garden!

Yes I see your point.
Usually if anyone discusses this they want all moorland eradicated, rather than more balance (something lacking in so many issues!).

@outsidevoice no I wouldn't want that, I love the moorlands but now I know more from an environmental pov I find it hard to see past that. moorlands are definitely needed, more balance would be great!