The article says allowing the virus to rip through flocks could kill "billions of birds" [1]. Is that really OK with the movement?
___________
[1] Allowing widespread infection of commercial flocks would kill billions of birds, drive poultry and egg prices up, as well as destabilize local economies and global trade through import restrictions imposed on U.S. products, the authors wrote. Simultaneously, it could also foster reservoirs of H5N1, increasing the virus' odds of making the leap to humans — and gaining the ability for human-to-human infection.
Isn't this just switching from, if you detect any infections you're required to kill your flock, to if you have any infections your flock will die of illness? Your flock is still dead either way.
And guess what, America will have next to no say in the animal welfare of the source of the eggs.
I'd like to see a world where animals are treated better though. I don't really understand why food and food production has to be so shit.
I guess you know that the reason of shitty treatment is price, would you rather buy 20x priced eggs ? There’s many family farms that would be happy to deliver them anywhere at that rate.
I think decent treatment of animals and access to decent food is a basic human and animal right. But yeah, it's hard to have this discussion if all it ever comes down too is economics or the decision between communism and capitalism.