Sunday, May 5, 2013

Chicken: To eat or not to eat?


As a college student I am typically restricted to the horrors of Sodexo, however, there is one food that seems to be the best prepared and happens to be a healthy choice. This food is chicken and before a long, hard rugby practice there is nothing more comforting than sitting down to a nice dinner of chicken and fruit. This made to order option is a wonderful alternative to the typical sub-par food of Sodexo. Growing up we come to think of chicken as a healthy food, and it is. Being such a light meat packed with protein makes it a great meal for athletes. Therefore, once I found this dining option I stuck with it, unaware of the horrors of producing this historic food.

            Chicken is a delicious food, however, according to the doctoral work of Louis Grivetti it was not always a food item. This cultural geographer from the University of California came to this conclusion using anthropological clues in Egypt to show, “[…] although chickens were introduced into Egypt 1500 BC they were not used as food for another 2,000 years […]” (“History). This is an interesting concept to not have used chickens as food for 2,000 years. It seems slightly unreasonable because chickens are much too small and weak to provide an agricultural benefit, such as cows or horses. Also, they would not be able to serve a hunting service like dogs. Using these two reasons it seems unlikely to use these animals for much besides a food source. However, the anthropological clues used by Mr. Grivetti must have shown them used for different functions in society. Beginning those thousands of years ago when the Egyptians began eating these birds a new food source and culture would arise and over the nearly 1,500 years since that time the production of chicken has moved from the ancient farming methods to large chicken farms to the horrific conditions of today’s commercial chicken slaughterhouses.

            The focus of this paper is to discover the extent of today’s production of commercial chicken. The reality is a horrific story of disease and mistreatment of workers and animals. The disease ridden slaughterhouses are present all around the world and in the collection of peer-reviewed articles examined for this paper the majority of these articles discussed various examples of incredibly of toxic diseases found in the slaughterhouses. Two major examples were two studies, one in Greece and the other in Spain. The Greek slaughterhouse was examined in a study “[…] conducted to determine the prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Listeria monocytogenes recovered from chicken carcasses in slaughterhouses in Northern Greece. […] 38 yielded L. monocytogenes (38%)” (Sakaridis 1017). As mentioned by the study the carcasses were examined in a lab for the listeria virus and 38% of the chickens examined tested positive for this deadly disease. The Spanish equivalent showed that “A total of 336 chicken carcasses were collected from six slaughterhouses in Northwestern Spain. […] Salmonella strains were detected in 60 (17·9%) carcasses” (Capita 1366). This study also shows an alarming rate of infection within the slaughterhouses. While it is important to examine the possibility for disease, the microorganisms can be killed with proper cooking techniques. These studies and prior knowledge of mistreatments in large farm facilities and slaughterhouses really make one consider their choice when it comes to eating chicken.

            Personally, this research has made me question my chicken eating. I find it incredibly disgusting that we would subject ourselves to companies serving food that has been processed in plants like the ones discussed above. However, I hold a personal belief that we should trust everything and everyone until the entity affects us directly. Therefore, these articles make me examine my relationship with chicken and make me wary of eating the food. Without a direct effect on my well-being or treatment the chicken will continue to be a part of my diet. The one area where I see an effect is mistreatment of animals and people that Cook discusses in his infographic (Cook 78-79). He repeatedly discusses the horrors of the chemicals used around the humans, who risk their limbs and digits cutting and plucking the chickens and the treatment of the chickens that are raised in incredibly small pens then thrown into a truck and beheaded (Cook 78-79). This can be remedied some by the availability of organic and farm-raised chickens that claim to be raised without these awful conditions in disease ridden chicken farms and slaughterhouses. However, Sodexo, reportedly the world’s largest prison food supplier, is not likely buying the more expensive, better raised chicken. The chicken industry seems to be in poor shape in the commercial production aspect, but this tasty meal is a favorite and unless people demand for better and cleaner conditions for workers and the animals it seems the slaughterhouses will retain their disgusting ways.

Works Cited

Capita, R., C. Alonso-Calleja, and M. Preito. “Prevalence of Salmonella enterica serovars

and genovars from chicken carcasses in slaughterhouses in Spain.” Journal of Applied Microbiology 103.5 (2007): 1366-1375. Online.

Cook, Christopher D. “Fowl Trouble.” Harper’s Magazine. (1999): 78-79. Online.

“History of Chickens Dug Up in Egypt.” Los Angeles Times 25 Dec. 1973: OC_B32. Online.

Sakaridis, I, and N. Soultos, et. al. “Prevalence and Antimicrobial Resistance of Listeria

monocytogenes Isolated in Chicken Slaughterhouses in Northern Greece.” Journal of Food Protection 74.6 (2011): 1017-1021. Online.

3 comments:

  1. 1. You discovered chicken in Sodexo dining hall as a good source of protein and fairly tasty. You look at the historical aspect of chickens in Egypt. Then you look at different slaughterhouses for chickens in Greece and Spain, looking at the diseases found and their treatment. You state that it won't change your habits unless it affects you directly.
    2. You look at Cook's article a bit, as well as the LA Times, Sakaridis and Capita. They are all incorporated well to help prove your points, such as the statistics of salmonella and monocytogenes.
    3. I like how you used your experience of finding the chicken in Sodexo and staying with it, especially for rugby practices, which we all know are demanding. I also like how you said that it won't change your habits unless it affects your own life.
    4. I really don't have any suggestions for you, sorry..except simply proof reading.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1. Main point chicken is a very important food to eat for athletes for its protein. It also has a long history in human society and is now produced much differently "horrifically"
    The history is used to show how its been around for a long time and how it used to be produced better.

    Production part show how it has changed for the worse over time




    2. "Foul trouble" "history of chickens dug up in Egypt" are just two sources(more used) and are both quoted in and related to in the argument




    3. Author is a rugby player who likes to eat chicken after rugby. Wanted to know more of how it was produced and its history




    4. Use the word horror or variations of the word less often and substitute it for other words in some cases

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. Main focus is on the production horrors of making chicken. The author also focuses on history and and its involvement with chicken.
    2. Two sources are used pretty extensively.
    3.The author is on the rugby team and enjoys eating the light meal of chicken before practice
    4. The paper is overall written very well. I really like how you tie it into rugby as well, it makes the paper interesting.

    ReplyDelete