Thursday, March 26, 2009

PETA celebrates victories prematurely

A recent PETA files blog post says "I told you so" in response to a Washington Post article about a new, definitive study that exposes the health dangers of red meat. The study, which boasts about its large sample size and thorough follow-up procedures, found that eating red meat decreases life expectancy.

PETA celebrates the recent coverage of articles such as this saying,
"We love to say 'We told you so.' And this time, what we've been telling you for years is finally making headlines. Here's the truth—drumroll, please—meat, as it turns out, is bad for you. Specifically, meat increases your chances of dying prematurely...This could end up as a real victory for our arteries—and for animals."

The researchers of the study, however, do not draw conclusions that are actually beneficial for factory farm animals. The article quotes Walter Willett, a nutritional expert at the Harvard School of Public Health, commenting on the study saying,

"The take-home message is pretty clear. It would be better to shift from red meat to white meat such as chicken and fish, which if anything is associated with lower mortality."

PETA somehow overlooks how detrimental conclusions like this are to the animals. As it takes significantly more fish and chickens--the mutilations of whom are some of the most egregious in the industry--to produce the amount of meat of a single cow or pig, statements about replacing red meat with chicken and fish should not be claimed as "victories" for the animals.


  1. just curious what you guys think of this...

    It seems biased, could someone give me PETA's side on this situation

  2. read Ingrid Newkirk's defense of PETA's policy: