Posted by Larry Hoover on November 27, 2004, at 8:43:05
In reply to Re: Whoops--again- AlexandraK, posted by Gabbix2 on November 27, 2004, at 2:28:58
> Chickens are also force fed, your friend was correct
I did a google search on that, and found no instance of even a claim of that, let alone evidence supporting the claim. Nor for turkeys, either. I suppose it could be done, though. Wild chickens, the jungle fowl of Asia, must be force-fed if captured from the wild, as they will not eat in captivity. But I don't think that's what's being talked about here.
Just being my usual geeky self.
Apparently, the whole force-feeding thing is thousands of years old. The reason was that the birds' fat was prized for cooking (called schmaltz). The liver was also prized as a delicacy (high in nutrients), and the fatter the goose/duck, the better the liver.
Of course, this whole thing has gotten out of hand when the whole purpose is to produce the fattest possible liver, but even the idea that stomachs routinely burst with "modern" force-feeding is not substantiated by necropsies done on dead ducks. Poor sanitation, combined with esophageal injuries which become infected are the primary causes of death, as is the fat liver itself. The fat liver, called steatosis, is a direct result of too much carb intake. The same thing happens to humans, sometimes. It is a serious illness, but the point here is to make the duck really sick, while keeping it alive long enough to "harvest" the liver.
I don't mean to support the practise. It is abhorrent. I just want to remain factual.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:420601
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20041122/msgs/420859.html