In the end, for me its about taste, What a joy to tuck into a corn fed free range chuck that.s lived a happy life. The chuk do actually taste like chicken. Yes. a free range may cost a little more. But when I was small, roast chicken was a treat. NOT a convenience throw-away meat.
Big ups to Hugh, hes got the the guts to use his access to television to call out the big companies and educate people on matters otherwise hidden from them.
one beer less and you can feed your family ..... where is the problem ... are our priorities wrong ?? nice one Hugh... now lets do milk ... fair price ... look into it ??
I think he was very brave for making this show, but people just don't care what happens to animals as long as they get cheap food, by the way I've been vegetarian for 30 years.
More and more people are waking up and realising, how their need for discount food impacts the lives of animals and their own health. More and more people are changing their ways.
good job hugh!i grew up raising our chickens,free range,its much cheaper here in our country to raise your own chicken than to buy from big supermarket.and we have fresh eggs daily from our chickens.
Because youtube worsens resolution as time goes on or it might have been the best resolution the uploader could get as a non official source, i watched the episodes near when they came out and they were nowhere near as bad
Not all 'conventional' chicken is equal, either. Some producers are very conscientious, keeping the top layer of bedding fresh and dry, which minimizes amonia and odors - and keeping the birds both happier and healthier. Others don't even bother to remove the dead chickens. Inspectors are sometimes bribed, or things are 'prettied up' for inspection day. Feed & other aspects of care are dictated by the chicken packers/processors - who will NOT buy or process chicken or other poultry for small farmers - or anyone except those either raising chickens for them under contract OR under their rules, on their feed. Just another advantage of de-centralizing US food production - along with food security - would be to revitalize rural communities by supporting small family farms NOT through tax dollars, but by returning market access to them, and removing the essential monopoly enjoyed by Big Chicken.
With all due respect to Hugh Fearnley-Wittingstall, and appreciation for his attempt to educate the public on how they can eat higher quality food, sustainably and humanly raised, knowing where, how, and by whom your food was raised beats any lable. In the USA, 'free-range' chicken is often standard chicken raised in huge steel buildings with the addition of a couple small doors opening out onto a concrete pad. Or a small dirt lot, at best. Producers are -understandably- concerned about the birds being exposed to potential pathogens. Losing a batch of birds can mean financial disaster to people just trying to make a living. The processors, who lablel and sell the chickens wholesale, dictate how the birds are to be raised. They only buy, or pay for contract rearing, of chickens fed their feeds and raised according to their rules. Small, local farmers raising food in ways that mimic natural eco-systems is the best way to be assured of quality, nutritious food. Reducing it to lables, laws, or regs is to downgrade the entire movement. Best of all - raise your own!
Wow! so many years on and the issues remain the same. I grew up in the wilds of Shropshire So eating our own animals was normal. Normal now, is all about cost and disassociation from the food we eat.
I don't know why he isn't telling the people in the housing estate to breed the chickens then eventually there chickens for eating will be cheaper than 2.50 and eggs aswel instead of giving them a once off.
in all fairness Hugh, you are supposed to turn the litter over regularly and there should be ventilation in there. your experiment is flawed and it kinda puts a fly in your ointment. in Africa where I am, the challenge is food security and making animal protein affordable to people living on below USD2 a day. free range is not going to cut it.
+Brian Mooketsi Seabela you're being ridiculously picky because you deliberately want find a fly in the ointment but that's weak. and so torturing chickens has to be the answer to affordable food? fuck that
There could be a lot more care taken to ensure humane killing - if profit wasn't the primary motive. Money should never take precedence over the experience of sentient beings, including chickens. There are people in the world who have far more wealth than they can ever use - if they're not already decent people who like to help their fellow beings, they need to be compelled to donate that wealth to making the world better for all. Individual profit isn't a worthy value to uphold. We need to extend care to all sentient beings, especially those who sustain our lives with theirs.
Anyone who eats meat is living on the lives of other animals - it has always been thus. We owe it to the animals who sustain our lives to give them the best possible experience of life. I would have thought this should be obvious.
@@paulleggatt670 the rooks were wild and very near fledging, also its a rare practice and I would say less than 20 rooks are eaten a year country wide probably not even that many, but there are millions of chickens that we control there environment, unlike the crows, which are wild, The point isn't not to eat animals, nor is it to not eat young animals, the point is that the life the animal has Up untill the time it's killed is fulfilling and natural, unlike the birds in the intensive farms, which you see in this program and which Hugh is trying to stop, that's the point
Who decided that electrocution was the best way to die? Non-lethal electrocution followed by bleeding is apparantly the approved way to slaughter meat animals in the European Union. What a horrible way to go! (The bleeding is neccessary, of course.) But is it worse than a 'natural death' by predator?
In the end, for me its about taste, What a joy to tuck into a corn fed free range chuck that.s lived a happy life. The chuk do actually taste like chicken. Yes. a free range may cost a little more. But when I was small, roast chicken was a treat.
NOT a convenience throw-away meat.
Exactly it’s people eating meat nonstop that drives mass production of chickens etc
Big ups to Hugh, hes got the the guts to use his access to television to call out the big companies and educate people on matters otherwise hidden from them.
I'm a huge fan of Hugh and free range for me is the best way to go
Chickens eat grass. That's what make them taste good. Well done Waitrose !
one beer less and you can feed your family ..... where is the problem ... are our priorities wrong ??
nice one Hugh... now lets do milk ... fair price ... look into it ??
love this guy .... obe i hope
Yes but one beer doesn't cost twenty pounds
I think he was very brave for making this show, but people just don't care what happens to animals as long as they get cheap food, by the way I've been vegetarian for 30 years.
More and more people are waking up and realising, how their need for discount food impacts the lives of animals and their own health. More and more people are changing their ways.
Since you are a vegetarian, you are in NO position to speak for people who are not!!!
good job hugh!i grew up raising our chickens,free range,its much cheaper here in our country to raise your own chicken than to buy from big supermarket.and we have fresh eggs daily from our chickens.
why do all these look like theyve been filmed on a blackberry?
Because youtube worsens resolution as time goes on or it might have been the best resolution the uploader could get as a non official source, i watched the episodes near when they came out and they were nowhere near as bad
Not all 'conventional' chicken is equal, either. Some producers are very conscientious, keeping the top layer of bedding fresh and dry, which minimizes amonia and odors - and keeping the birds both happier and healthier. Others don't even bother to remove the dead chickens. Inspectors are sometimes bribed, or things are 'prettied up' for inspection day.
Feed & other aspects of care are dictated by the chicken packers/processors - who will NOT buy or process chicken or other poultry for small farmers - or anyone except those either raising chickens for them under contract OR under their rules, on their feed. Just another advantage of de-centralizing US food production - along with food security - would be to revitalize rural communities by supporting small family farms NOT through tax dollars, but by returning market access to them, and removing the essential monopoly enjoyed by Big Chicken.
Wonderful Film Wonderful Awakening... Thank You for sharing
ive yet to see the said screen in sainsburys.
With all due respect to Hugh Fearnley-Wittingstall, and appreciation for his attempt to educate the public on how they can eat higher quality food, sustainably and humanly raised, knowing where, how, and by whom your food was raised beats any lable. In the USA, 'free-range' chicken is often standard chicken raised in huge steel buildings with the addition of a couple small doors opening out onto a concrete pad. Or a small dirt lot, at best.
Producers are -understandably- concerned about the birds being exposed to potential pathogens. Losing a batch of birds can mean financial disaster to people just trying to make a living. The processors, who lablel and sell the chickens wholesale, dictate how the birds are to be raised. They only buy, or pay for contract rearing, of chickens fed their feeds and raised according to their rules.
Small, local farmers raising food in ways that mimic natural eco-systems is the best way to be assured of quality, nutritious food. Reducing it to lables, laws, or regs is to downgrade the entire movement. Best of all - raise your own!
Exactly. Free range in USA is barely better than regular factory farmed chicken. "Pastured" chickens are what we would call Hugh's outside birds.
free range just gives the supermarkets the go ahead to up the price.
Wow! so many years on and the issues remain the same. I grew up in the wilds of Shropshire So eating our own animals was normal. Normal now, is all about cost and disassociation from the food we eat.
they are still being raised the same way now the price has doubled.
Hi Hugh, the result in your battery chickens in human value amounts to austwitz
I don't know why he isn't telling the people in the housing estate to breed the chickens then eventually there chickens for eating will be cheaper than 2.50 and eggs aswel instead of giving them a once off.
in all fairness Hugh, you are supposed to turn the litter over regularly and there should be ventilation in there. your experiment is flawed and it kinda puts a fly in your ointment. in Africa where I am, the challenge is food security and making animal protein affordable to people living on below USD2 a day. free range is not going to cut it.
+Brian Mooketsi Seabela you're being ridiculously picky because you deliberately want find a fly in the ointment but that's weak.
and so torturing chickens has to be the answer to affordable food? fuck that
Food security wasn’t a challenge in Rhodesia before 1980.
There could be a lot more care taken to ensure humane killing - if profit wasn't the primary motive. Money should never take precedence over the experience of sentient beings, including chickens. There are people in the world who have far more wealth than they can ever use - if they're not already decent people who like to help their fellow beings, they need to be compelled to donate that wealth to making the world better for all. Individual profit isn't a worthy value to uphold. We need to extend care to all sentient beings, especially those who sustain our lives with theirs.
spend less tescos is one of the dearest stores on the highstreet.
up huey you legend
Anyone who eats meat is living on the lives of other animals - it has always been thus. We owe it to the animals who sustain our lives to give them the best possible experience of life. I would have thought this should be obvious.
If the already-wealthy weren't so focussed on increasing their wealth, so much could be accomplished in our society, in terms of welfare for all.
A Fox 🦊
But when they get sick then things change
But quite easily take baby Rooks from there parents
Where is his standards
You talk of standards and yet you've not even mastered the English language.
@@SpeccyMan 😂
@@paulleggatt670 the rooks were wild and very near fledging, also its a rare practice and I would say less than 20 rooks are eaten a year country wide probably not even that many, but there are millions of chickens that we control there environment, unlike the crows, which are wild,
The point isn't not to eat animals, nor is it to not eat young animals, the point is that the life the animal has Up untill the time it's killed is fulfilling and natural, unlike the birds in the intensive farms, which you see in this program and which Hugh is trying to stop, that's the point
47:44
Who decided that electrocution was the best way to die? Non-lethal electrocution followed by bleeding is apparantly the approved way to slaughter meat animals in the European Union. What a horrible way to go! (The bleeding is neccessary, of course.) But is it worse than a 'natural death' by predator?
Never going to happen