The liver is made fatty by a forced feeding (gavage) of the ducks and geese in the last 12-15 days of their lives, by inserting a tube down their throat which forces the food (corn mash) directly into their stomach, thereby fattening up the liver. This tube is said to not hurt the animal.
Foie gras has been banned in certain areas before, notably in 2006 in Chicago. The ban there lasted two years before protestors had it brought back on the market.
Do you think the California ban of 2012 will stand? Would you support the ban or are you against banning foie gras?
Discrimination against French products! (sarc/on)
ReplyDeleteI am actually surprised Californians even know about foie gras. Being from France myself I have never met anyone in CA who had ever tried it or even know what it was. The only store that would maybe sell it here would be WholeFoods but I never found it there.
Oh well, in foie gras' defense I would say that at least we don't give our animals growth hormones and what have you.
Regulators have in my opinion other WAY more important things to worry about in the food industry than a rare luxury product that most people eat only in Christmas.
I am pleasantly surprised to see the support behind this measure. Although I come from a cattle-ranching family and have always eaten meat, I love animals and do not believe in certain unnecessary cruel practices some are subjected to. This includes topics such as animal testing and the process in the production of foie gras. Additionally from a business standpoint, I do not think that this is a popular product in America. Therefore, the cost of what the animals go through compared to profit made is much greater, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI am also against unnecessary cruel practices but knowing California, if something gets banned, more often than not, there will be a protest--especially if people who enjoy this delicacy find out. If Chicago protests, so will California.
ReplyDeleteI believe that if California bans foie gras, they should also ban growth hormones, let livestock run free before they are slaughtered, and not use painful, unsanitary machines to milk cows. This happens to the masses; though it does not make it moral, worrying about a delicacy is less of an issue.
ReplyDeleteWho decides on the ban? With culinary hotspots, such as Los Angeles & San Francisco, and large farming communities, such as Turlock & Ontario, it is hard to determine the followthrough on the ban.
I would support the California ban on foie gras due to the cruel practices of how the livers are made to be so large. Although many people enjoy eating foie gras, there seems to be a difference in simply raising an animal for ultimate human consumption and force-feeding an animal in order to create a desired taste. Unlike raising "grass-fed cows," using a tube to inflate the duck seems harmful at any angle you look at it.
ReplyDeleteI think that cruel treatments are not necessary to feed us. However, I know how important foie gras is to my culture, and I can not even imagine a Christmas without it. I can totally understand that the way to produce it would shock American people, maybe we can find a way to produce it differently? But I definitely think that if we ban this type of product, there is a thousand of other products that should be forbidden too. And not only french products!
ReplyDeleteI think that the ban against Foie gras would stand in California as in many respects Californian's can be considered progressives. Thus, by taking to fact there is cruel punishment towards animals we would stand against it. Although, with the fact that the tube causes no apparent threat or damage to the animals it causes some controversy. Yet the fact of the matter is, this is a delicacy and simply unnecessary otherwise makes it an easy decision in that I would unquestionably stand by the ban of Foie gras.
ReplyDelete