Latest:

03:02 Stars play charity football match
03:02 Hunt faces Leveson Inquiry grilling
02:12 Egypt candidates woo middle ground
01:22 Clinton: End Assad 'rule of murder'
00:22 Rebel groups agree on Islamic state
00:22 Saltire Games ban 'ridiculous'
00:22 Food industry experience offered
00:22 Scott: Sci fi is getting worn out

Why halal is more humane

Monday, 19 October 2009

Andy Elliott may think that the suffering faced by animals slaughtered under Halal law is 'unimaginable' (Write Back, October 16), yet should he inadvertently cut himself with something sharp, he would not notice until he saw the bleeding, as happens from time to time when handling sheets of paper.

When the arteries in the neck are severed, blood pressure to the brain falls to negligible levels almost instantly, rendering the animal unconscious, certainly faster than the time lapse until any pain resulting from the cut could possibly be felt.

What Mr Elliott fails to appreciate is that the stunning process itself often fails to be effective at its first application, requiring repeated attempts which causes considerable pain and distress to the animal.

In reality, when performed by a skilled slaughterer, this is the most humane way of killing animals.

MARTIN D STERN

Salford, England

Print
Text Size
- Normal
- Large
- Extra Large

Sorry, no, halal is a disgusting way to kill. The animal remains conscious for some time after the incision. Why hasn't this practice been banned because of the inherent cruelty?

Posted by Hetero | 21.10.09, 11:46 GMT

Halal method of slaughtering animals consists of a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries. There is nothing cruel about it as you suggest. A German study using electrodes surgically implanted on the skull of sheep, and conducted by Wilhelm Schulze et al. at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Germany concluded that "the slaughter in the form of a ritual cut is, if carried out properly, painless in sheep and calves according to EEG recordings and the missing defensive actions" (of the animals) and that "For sheep, there were in part severe reactions both in bloodletting cut and the pain stimuli" when Captive Bolt Stunning (CBS) was used.

Posted by Halal Al | 21.10.09, 09:57 GMT

Martin,

Could your own personal religious views (I assume that you are Jewish) have clouded your judgement on this issue?

Nice caveat - "...when performed by a skilled slaughterer".

Posted by WH | 19.10.09, 12:56 GMT

Erm, last time I cut my finger on some paper it was really quite sore. I noticed the pain before I saw the blood.

I imagine the same would be true if my throat had been sliced.

Posted by Richard | 19.10.09, 12:10 GMT