Posted on August 26, 2020 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
In August 2020, the Stanford School of Medicine published the first significant study to directly compare plant-based meat to animal-based meat—a critical milestone for alternative proteins.
The 16-week randomized crossover trial, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, compared consumption of Beyond Meat’s chicken, beef, and pork to organic, animal-based versions of the same products. Participants in the SWAP-MEAT study consumed two or more servings per day of plant-based or animal-based meat every day for eight weeks each.
The authors found that consuming the plant-based meat products led to statistically significant positive impact on bad cholesterol and weight. Notably, lead author Dr. Christopher Gardner, a professor at Stanford School of Medicine and director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, pointed out that the authors didn’t expect to see a statistically significant impact on weight in just eight weeks, with participants losing two pounds with consistent caloric intake after the plant-based meat portion of the study.
The study indicated that overall dietary levels of protein and sodium were the same on both diets, that fiber consumption was higher when eating plant-based meat, and that saturated fat consumption was lower when eating plant-based meat instead of animal-based meat.
The study’s results will not have surprised anyone who was paying attention. Where nutrition science is concerned, there is a general consensus that we should cut back on saturated fat and cholesterol and eat no trans fats at all. We should also eat more complex carbohydrates and more fiber, avoid excess sodium, and maintain a healthy weight.
Plant-based meat products have no cholesterol or trans fats and almost always have the same or less saturated fat than their animal-based counterparts. They also have complex carbs and fiber, where animal meat has neither. They are usually higher in sodium, but generally not by much when compared to prepared animal products. This is why the Stanford study found no difference in sodium intake based on the consumption of animal as opposed to plant-based meat.
The Stanford study focused on Beyond Meat, which joined the National Institutes of Health in funding the trial, but it’s worth noting that Impossible Foods’ products are similarly better than their animal counterparts in terms of macronutrients.
For example, the Impossible Burger has the same amount of protein as 80 percent lean beef, the same amount of saturated fat, less overall fat, and about twice the iron. Impossible Sausage and Impossible Pork offer 50 to 70 percent more protein as a percentage of calories and more than three times the iron when compared to conventional sausage and pork. All Impossible products also contain no trans fats or cholesterol, both of which are inherent in conventional beef, and plenty of complex carbs and fiber, where conventional meat has neither.
Although this is the first significant study to directly compare plant-based to animal-based meat, macronutrient analysis has long supported the study’s findings. That’s why Dr. Kim Williams, former president of the American College of Cardiology, frequently talks about the positive results he experienced when he switched from chicken and fish to plant-based meat in 2003, including an LDL cholesterol level that dropped 80 points once he made the switch.
Williams writes, a decade into his plant-based meat journey, “One of my favorite sampling venues [is] the new Tiger Stadium (Comerica Park) in Detroit, where there are five vegan items, including an Italian sausage that is hard to distinguish from [animal] meat until you check your blood pressure.”
Dr. Williams’ experience has been supported by the new Stanford School of Medicine SWAP-MEAT study. As Dr. João Pedro Ferreira from the Clinical Research Center of Nancy, France, explained, “the weight reduction also points towards the overall metabolic benefit of plant-based meat vs. animal meat.”
If eight weeks of plant-based meat instead of animal-based meat can have such a positive impact on heart disease indicators and weight, imagine what a permanent switch could do.
At GFI, we hope this Stanford School of Medicine study will be the first of many to study the health benefits of plant-based meat. To read the results of the study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, please click here. For Stanford Medicine’s press release, please click here.
Large UK businesses could be banned from using products grown on land that was deforested illegally under a new law being proposed by the government.
The legislation would be introduced to clamp down on illegal deforestation and to protect rainforests by cleaning up the UK’s supply chains.
This would mean publishing information to show where key commodities – including rubber, soil and palm oil – came from and that they were produced in line with local laws protecting forests.
Firms would face fines if they fail to comply.
The government said the size of the fine will be set at a later date.
The proposed legislation makes it clear that illegally produced commodities “have no place in the UK market”.
A survey conducted by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) recently found that 67% of respondents believe the government should be doing more to tackle the issue in the Amazon rainforest.
A consultation will run for six weeks and seek views from UK and international stakeholders, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said.
The department also said the consultation will consider potential impacts on businesses and other interests.
The announcement follows the establishment of the Global Resource Initiative, the government’s independent taskforce, which was formed in 2019 to consider how the UK could “green” international supply chains.
The UN’s COP26 Climate Change Conference is being held in Glasgow next year.
International Environment Minister Lord Goldsmith said: “The UK has a duty to lead the way in combating the biodiversity and nature crisis.”
Lord Goldsmith added: “We have all seen the devastating pictures of the world’s most precious forests being cleared, often illegally, and we can’t afford not to act as a country.
“There is a hugely important connection between the products we buy and their wider environmental footprint, which is why the government is consulting today on new measures that would make it illegal for businesses in the UK to use commodities that are not grown in accordance with local laws.
“Ahead of hosting the UN Climate Change Conference next year, the UK has a duty to lead the way in combating the biodiversity and nature crisis now upon us.”
Sir Ian Cheshire, the chair of the independent taskforce, said: “I’m delighted to see the government respond to one of the key recommendations of the Global Resource Initiative.
“Starting a discussion on how changes in UK law could help us all to reduce our global footprint. I would encourage as many people as possible to respond to this important consultation.”
Ruth Chambers, from the Greener UK coalition, added: “This consultation is a welcome first step in the fight to tackle the loss of our planet’s irreplaceable natural wonders such as the Amazon and in the pursuit of supply chains free from products that contribute to deforestation.
“The evidence linking deforestation with climate change, biodiversity loss and the spread of zoonotic diseases is compelling. A new law is an important part of the solution and is urgently needed.
“The proposal must now be tested thoroughly to ensure it will deliver the government’s domestic and international environmental leadership ambitions.”
Mike Barrett, executive director of science and conservation at WWF-UK, added: “It’s clear businesses and consumers don’t want imports that wreck the planet, drive deforestation in areas like the Amazon and lead to devastating fires.
“The government must now fast-track strong, effective laws, that clean up our supply chains and show the UK can take the lead in tackling the global nature and climate crisis.”
Posted on August 26, 2020 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
Emergency Legal Petition Filed with USDA to End Cruel Farm ‘Depopulation’ Methods
Emergency Legal Petition Filed with USDA to End Cruel Farm ‘Depopulation’ Methods
Ventilation shutdown and water-based foam methods used to kill animal populations during the pandemic are among the cruelest ways to kill farmed animals
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today a coalition, led by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, filed an emergency petition with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to prevent COVID-19 relief funds, resources, and any other forms of support from facilitating or compensating for the costs of ventilation shutdown or water-based foam “depopulation” — the mass killing of animals on factory farms — and to withhold COVID-19 relief funds, resources, and any other forms of support from integrators, processors, and meatpackers that order or permit ventilation shutdown or water-based foam depopulation.
Ventilation shutdown is executed by shutting off all fans and closing vents to create an airtight environment while animals suffocate and are baked alive in rising temperatures over multiple hours. In some circumstances, steam is also pumped into the barns to speed the process. Water-based foam depopulation, typically used to kill birds, is executed by filling a barn with shaving cream consistency foam to cover the animals, resulting in suffocation over an estimated 15-minute period.
COVID-19 has sickened thousands of slaughterhouse workers across the country, which has forced many slaughterhouses to shut down for periods of time and slow their processing rates, resulting in a backup of millions of animals on factory farms. This backlog leads to the mass killing of animals because, in an effort to maximize profits, the industry’s business model leaves no room to accommodate delays in the supply chain. This “just-in-time” model means new herds and flocks are scheduled to arrive at farms just in time to replace those who have reached slaughter weight and are being trucked to one of very few slaughterhouses.
“Some of the cruelest depopulation methods, like using ventilation shutdown — which was recently revealed by a worker to have occurred at Iowa Select Farms — can leave animals suffering for many hours before they suffocate or are cooked alive,” says Animal Legal Defense Fund Executive Director Stephen Wells. “We’re taking this initial action urging the USDA to prevent these extreme measures.”
The petition also requests that the USDA create affirmative and enforceable standards for depopulation and for the agency to establish an online database of animal agriculture industry recipients of COVID-19 relief.
Depopulation as a result of COVID-19 is likely to continue. Slaughterhouses are backed up for months, and current corporate and government policies — which force workers to stand close together on slaughter lines while also speeding up those lines — make it more likely that the virus will continue to rage in these facilities, causing more temporary closures, supply-chain disruptions, and gruesome depopulations, all culminating in the animal agriculture industry turning to the USDA for monetary relief for a problem of its own making.
To address this untenable situation, the coalition — which is made up of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, Animal Equality, Animal Outlook, Animal Place, Association of Irritated Residents, Center for Biological Diversity, Compassion in World Farming, Farm Forward, Farm Sanctuary, Mercy for Animals, PETA, The Humane League, Woodstock Sanctuary, and World Animal Protection — is proposing a solution that incentivizes responsible, forward-thinking policies to avoid some of the cruelest outcomes for animals.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund continues to seek whistleblowers who can report safety issues, animal cruelty, or other concerns anonymously through an online tip portal —ReportAnimalAg.com. The mass killing of animals and other side effects of animal agriculture’s fragile supply chain can strain the mental health of workers tasked with carrying out such cruelty.
Posted on August 25, 2020 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
During the corona lockdown, the borders were closed, which almost brought animal trade on the Internet to a standstill for a few weeks.
Unfortunately, since the borders were reopened, the sale of baby animals on internet portals has been booming again, and dogs, but also small kittens, are sold to anyone interested for a few hundred euros.
Together with the animal rights activist Stefan Klippstein and a television team from RTL, PETA Germany went on the trail of the illegal cat trade and made sad discoveries.
In the meantime, kittens are offered on various internet portals. As the photos show, some animals are so young that they have only just opened their eyes.
Those who pay the retail price also get those animal children who are actually still dependent on their mother’s milk – this is also the case with two kittens aged around three to four weeks that were offered on eBay classifieds by “Hanna”.
After only one hour of contact with the saleswoman, the kittens were to be handed over “the piece” at a Berlin train station for EUR 289 each.
Under no circumstances should the “buyers” take the cats to the vet. The saleswoman actually appeared at the subway stop as discussed.
In her handbag, she had put the little kittens, who were huddled together in fear.
The kittens huddled together, frightened.
The trader kept talking to her accomplice on the phone and was getting more restless by the minute. She wanted to get rid of the little kittens as quickly as possible and leave.
But the animal rights activists alerted the police, who arrived after just a few minutes. The seller was questioned on the spot and must now expect a complaint.
The kittens were confiscated and taken to a local animal shelter, where they are safe and properly cared for.
The kittens were confiscated on the spot.
Selling animal children in apartments is also “normal”
Another case of cat trafficking was discovered in an apartment in Berlin. A PETA-known dealer there regularly sells kittens “whose mother was run to death”.
Or she deceives interested buyers by pretending to be a different cat as the “mother animal”.
Here, too, it could be seen that the kittens are still well under eight weeks old.
A price of 160 euros should be paid per animal. They were vaccinated, she said, but there was no vaccination card.
The dealer also offered to get medication for the animals from a Polish veterinarian friend – another criminal offense.
And I mean…There would be no pet trade if everyone who REALLY wants to adopt an animal had taken it from a shelter.
The shelters are full.
Thousands of animals are waiting for a home there, most of them die without realizing the dream of their own home
NEVER buy creatures on the internet, on the street, or from breeders.
Someone is waiting for you at the shelter, give them a chance at a new life in freedom, warmth, happiness.
Over 189,000 signatures so far – keep on making more – share with all your contacts
Stop the sales of foot hold/leg hold traps and snares in the United States
Amazon, Federal Officials, and State Officials: Stop the sales of steel-jaw leg hold/foothold traps and snare traps. Please sign & share this petition.
This is a request to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon.com, to immediately cease the sales of steel-jaw leg hold/foot hold traps, snare traps, and attractants on Amazon.com, as these are used in poaching and the maiming of bears and other wildlife. Amazon’s outreach and large selection of such traps put wildlife in danger everywhere. The enormous amount of leg hold/ foot hold traps for sale on Amazon makes it incredibly easy for a person, anytime and anywhere, to begin trapping wildlife, resulting in the maiming and killing of the animals. The easy obtainability of these traps has already resulted in this, based on the number of traps Amazon sells online along with attractants for bears.
The use of leg hold/ foot hold traps for bears is illegal in the United States. Bear traps are illegal to use but are not illegal to sell. Many types of steel jaw traps are legal for use on other wildlife such as foxes, wolves, and coyotes. Selling items illegal for bears is propagating illegal acts and causes horrific impacts on bears along with all wildlife and Amazon should not want to be part of this. These leg hold/ foot hold traps maim wildlife, as has been seen in the historic tragedy in the Asheville, NC area where there are 12+ bears missing limbs. These bears with missing limbs might have suffered this fate because of products sold by Amazon. In addition, our pets and children are at risk-as they could easily step into a trap. With Amazon’s customer outreach, anyone can be trapping within days near you and hurting the things you love. Please sign and share this petition to persuade Amazon to urgently stop the sales of these traps.
The listing of prohibited items on Amazon includes, “Products intended to be used to produce an illegal product or undertake an illegal activity.” Therefore, per Amazon’s OWN policy, the sales of such traps should be banned on Amazon.com and the signers of this petition are asking for that.
This is also a request to state and federal officials to ban the use and sale of steel-jaw leg hold/ foot hold traps and snare traps in the United States. According to the Library of Congress, steel-jaw leg hold traps are banned in over 100 countries including China. Tragically however, they are not banned in the US and are for sale on large sites such as Amazon.com.
Asheville, NC has 12+ bears missing limbs from trap escapes. This could be your city or town next! These maimed bears and their struggles are shown on this video, along with traps sold easily in stores and on Amazon. We hope the video will help convince you to both sign this petition and convince others to sign as well. With your efforts, we can stop this cruel trapping and prevent the horrific death and maiming of wildlife that occurs with steel-jaw traps and snare traps.
The questions to ask yourself when deciding if to sign this petition are simple:
Should kids, pets, bears, and other wildlife be safe living their lives in nature without the threat of stepping into traps like these?
Do I want these traps around my home and family or in places of nature we might visit?
All signatures and comments will be sent weekly to the Amazon head office and to Federal and State officials. Your comments will mean a lot!
“Steel-jaw traps work by slamming shut on the paw or leg of an animal and holding it until a trapper arrives. The devices are outlawed in more than 100 nations, but not in the U.S….Iraq bans them. So do China, Somalia and Sudan….But in the United States, steel-jaw traps are not only legal, they are the go-to tool for trappers who capture and kill millions of wild animals a year for the global fur market.” Credit: Tom Knudson/Revealnews.org
Posted on August 25, 2020 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
In Basondo Zoo there are 100 individuals locked up.
In Sendaviva, around 800 non-human individuals are kept in cages for human entertainment.
Aside from that, this zoo has been having financial losses since it has been open, but the Government of Navarre has given them around 70 million euros so that they can remain open, believing that the profits brought by tourism outweigh these losses.
Non-human animals are not economic resources, their freedom is non-negotiable, close all zoos and aquariums!
And I mean…Of the 80 leading zoos in Europe, which each have more than 500,000 visits per year, 26 – almost one in three – are located in Germany.
Germany is the most densely populated country in the world with zoos and zoo-like facilities.
Zoos are open-air prisons.
Teach your child the right thing and never go to a zoo with them.
Zoos are and will remain prisons where animals are locked up for life and displayed for the pleasure of a paying audience.