Thursday, April 15, 2010

McDonalds Opposes Cage-Free Eggs

April 13, 2010, 3:49 pm
McDonald’s Board Opposes Cage-Free Eggs for U.S.
By LEORA BROYDO VESTEL

The board of directors of McDonald’s has recommended that the company’s shareholders vote against a proposal to require that 5 percent of the eggs purchased for the chain’s restaurants in the United States be the cage-free variety.

Sally Ryan for The New York Times Eggs are washed, rinsed and coated in a thin layer of oil to protect their porous shells before they are dried and packaged at a cage-free supplier in Indiana.
The proposal was advanced by the Humane Society of the United States.

Some major fast food companies, including Burger King, Subway and Wendy’s, and the retailers Wal-Mart and Trader Joe’s, have already made some level of commitment to purchasing or selling cage-free eggs.

But the McDonald’s board said on Friday that the science was not there to support a switch.
“As we have examined this issue over the years, we have deter­mined that there is no agreement in the global scientific com­munity about how to balance the advantages and disadvantages of laying hen housing systems,” it said in a proxy statement. Read More

It’s nice to see a company not cave to emotional pleas, but rather rely on scientific evidence to make sound decisions. Obviously, the animal rights activists don’t want companies to study the issues since the answer might not match their agenda. Shouldn’t this be a warning sign not to trust these groups that shun studying animals welfare in favor of bullying people into agreeing with them?

4 comments:

Steph B said...

Good for McDonalds! Looking at the facts and not falling for HSUS.

~ Janis said...

Just read a really good article and this quote explains why battery caged hens/veal/pork are NOT a good thing:

"Animal agriculture has either tried to argue science, or economics, or food security. They've done everything but the moral argument for what they do with animals. And if they can't make the moral case, they will lose in the long run."

And...... Stop blaming hsus or other animal concerned organizations for "our problems " with the media, public and consumer. Thats a really big mistake that all amateurs make: Blaming some assumed enemy.

The problem is ours: "We" didn't watch-dog our own agricultural practices in the past and now the consumers are better educated and can clearly identify unhealthy animal practices. "We" either transition to healthier farm practices or the consumer will find healthier, "morally raised" foods elsewhere.

amrust21 said...

good 4 mcdonalds! in response to janice....science is the way to go....u shouldn't let emotions get in the way....if science told u that you could beat cancer possibly w/ treatments even tho it may be emotionally hard would u get treatments or give up....geez some ppl just don't get it!!!

justin said...

I agree with Janice.

It's consumers who are ultimately voting with their dollars in the marketplace and who will determine the ethical course of farming in the future. Not the HSUS or PETA or ALF ...or any of their opposition or the USDA, FDA, or 'policy' makers in general for that matter... Those organizations may be working as social catalysts of some sort in various (often conflicting) directions regarding these issues, but they are not going to be the primary diving force behind the inevitable changes coming to the agricultural industries and therefore I think it's misguided for blogs like this to be constantly ragging on the animal rights organizations. Like it or not, there is certainly a trend towards a growing awareness of cruel, unnecessary, unhealthy and environmentally destructive practices (particularly in large scale factory farming) that will eventually win over more and more consumers who I'm convinced will make more and more ethical choices in the future. In general, we the consumers prefer to eat more humanely. I'd wager that it's a rare (and sick) individual who prefers to think in detail about the true horrors and suffering that went into his factory farmed steak as he devours it. But indeed there are thousands of other even more compelling reasons for consumers to start caring more about where their food comes from and how it was raised besides mere morals.

I know it's often scary and frustrating to work in an industry where big changes to your practices lie on the road ahead seemingly mandated by arbitrary regulatory officials or "activists" that you may not be entirely comfortable with or agree with. Working for the government and in the field of information technology, I know a thing or two about change and people's resistance to it. But my personal advice to farmers: I think in this case it's unwise to drag your feet, because I guarantee there's a larger movement behind this than just the crazy vegan activists you think are simply trying to ruin your business with some shortsighted personal morals and retaliatory vendettas for killing cute animals.

Justin