4 ms·

I’m assuming this keeps chicken prices lower. Is this a bad thing? I guess it could be if it is because of gnarly things they’re doing, but if it is primarily

I’m assuming this keeps chicken prices lower. Is this a bad thing? I guess it could be if it is because of gnarly things they’re doing, but if it is primarily breeding larger chickens, well, that sounds ok.

aceki 4y ago
It really hurts their welfare since their skeletal systems were not designed to handle the additional weight and means they cannot really stand on their own. The chickens will also develop lesions/burns from laying in ammonia-soaked grounds, increasing risk of infection and causing unnecessary suffering.[0] [0] https://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/chix_white_paper_nov2015_lores.pdf https://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/chix_white_paper_n...
abc03 4y ago
If you prefer quantity over quality then probably not. Ever wondered how thousands of chickens can survive in one room. Well this chickens are probably not organic because you need to use something that illnesses dońt spread. And personally I think a chicken that canˋt walk normally is a problem.
MiddleMan5 4y ago
The sibling replies here are interesting in that they appeal to personify the chickens
- presentation 4y ago
  Not sure how "they taste worse" personifies the chicken, nor how pointing out that in fact chickens can suffer personifies the chicken either (well, I guess only people can suffer...).
- Fargoan 4y ago
  Chickens are sentient just like us.
kaycebasques 4y ago
> Is this a bad thing? Thread argues that modern chicken is less tasty: > Modern chicken is notorious for being "dry, "bland," and "flavorless." Contrast this to the 1960s, where chicken was considered a delicacy. "Chicken should be so good in itself that it is an absolute delight to eat as a perfectly plain, butter roast, saute or grill." Thread also argues that fat profile is out-of-whack due to modern chickens being fed diets that are different from what they ate in nature: > Conventional Grain-Fed birds have an Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio that can be as high as 17:1. Contrast this to a pasture-raised chicken, which has an Omega 6 to Omega-3 ratio of 6:1. I haven't heard of this ratio before. Supposedly a smaller ratio between the 2 types of fat is healthier.
- Loic 4y ago
  "flavorless" is exactly what the industry wants. This allows easy control of the taste during processing. This is why the chicken "wings" you buy in your well-knownfast food restaurant taste the same everywhere and every single day of the year.
  - hackernewds 4y ago
    That seems backwards and hard to believe. They could use the same chickens and would need less sauce frying and spice
    - Loic 4y ago
      This is backwards for a cook who tries to enhance the intrinsic taste, texture of some good ingredients. But the industry wants a constant taste, texture on a massive scale. The only solution is to produce on one side the needed spices (easy to control the taste) an apply it on a relative tasteless substrate. It means that you do not need to adapt the recipe during production. Source: wife worked a couple of years for Unilever, some of my customers are in the flagrance, food additives industry.
    - Consultant32452 4y ago
      It's important that the chicken breast sandwich from McDonald's has exactly the same taste and texture whether you get it from San Francisco or Toronto. Might not be important to you, but it's important to McDonald's.
SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
The implicit context of this thread (like with a lot of Internet nutrition discussion) is that rising obesity rates over the past half century or so indicate something has gone wrong with our diets. The author is suggesting that this could be one piece of the puzzle.
- jrapdx3 4y ago
  There is a lot wrong with diets in developed countries, but it's not chicken, or at least chicken is way down the list of offenders. AIUI the biggest dietary culprit is the insidious infiltration of sugars into the foods that many people eat. Much of the prepared, convenience foods people rely on contain sugars that even dedicated label-readers may not be able to readily identify. A whole laundry list of cane sugar, sucrose, high-fructose syrup, rice syrup, honey, invert syrup, molasses, panela, muscovado, etc. Unless they're sneaking sugars into chicken, sure doesn't seem that it would be the main problem.
refurb 4y ago
It is a bad thing. We should go back to where only the middle class can afford quality protein like chicken. Let the poor eat beans I always say!
- hackernewds 4y ago
  one could also eat less and receive the same nutritional benefits. today's giant chickens do not seem to be nutritionally dense, flavorful and the unnatural steroids and estrogen levels are certainly worse consumed, than not
  - refurb 4y ago
    Today's chickens have more muscle mass. They are bred for this trait. Are you arguing this larger muscle isn't made of protein? What is it made out of then? Are you arguing these chickens somehow survive without the nutrients that others chickens need to live? How is that possible? Those are some pretty tall claims you need to back up.
    - blindmute 4y ago
      Are you implying that malnutrition or a nutrient deficiency results in immediate death? Death quicker than the 50 days it takes to butcher the chicken?
      - refurb 4y ago
        Are you implying farmers raise these fast-growing, extra-large birds through "malnutrition and nutrient deficiency"?
        blindmute 4y ago
        Yes, I am. Because I am active in the weightlifting community, I'm aware that muscle size has absolutely no correlation with nutrition or micronutrients beyond protein intake. This is extremely obvious if you ever took steroids, because you can become huge eating McDonald's and instant noodle, but even without them the same effect is observed.
throwuxiytayq 4y ago
There are quality issues with these chickens: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277097/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277097/ Probably doesn't make a huge difference for your health, but it's not a very nice culinary experience to find a dead/diseased muscle in the chicken you're eating. Consume enough KFC and it will happen. It looks green, by the way.

aceki 4y ago

It really hurts their welfare since their skeletal systems were not designed to handle the additional weight and means they cannot really stand on their own. The chickens will also develop lesions/burns from laying in ammonia-soaked grounds, increasing risk of infection and causing unnecessary suffering.[0] [0] https://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/chix_white_paper_nov2015_lores.pdf https://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/chix_white_paper_n...

abc03 4y ago

If you prefer quantity over quality then probably not. Ever wondered how thousands of chickens can survive in one room. Well this chickens are probably not organic because you need to use something that illnesses dońt spread. And personally I think a chicken that canˋt walk normally is a problem.

MiddleMan5 4y ago

The sibling replies here are interesting in that they appeal to personify the chickens

presentation 4y ago
Not sure how "they taste worse" personifies the chicken, nor how pointing out that in fact chickens can suffer personifies the chicken either (well, I guess only people can suffer...).
Fargoan 4y ago
Chickens are sentient just like us.

kaycebasques 4y ago

> Is this a bad thing? Thread argues that modern chicken is less tasty: > Modern chicken is notorious for being "dry, "bland," and "flavorless." Contrast this to the 1960s, where chicken was considered a delicacy. "Chicken should be so good in itself that it is an absolute delight to eat as a perfectly plain, butter roast, saute or grill." Thread also argues that fat profile is out-of-whack due to modern chickens being fed diets that are different from what they ate in nature: > Conventional Grain-Fed birds have an Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio that can be as high as 17:1. Contrast this to a pasture-raised chicken, which has an Omega 6 to Omega-3 ratio of 6:1. I haven't heard of this ratio before. Supposedly a smaller ratio between the 2 types of fat is healthier.

Loic 4y ago
"flavorless" is exactly what the industry wants. This allows easy control of the taste during processing. This is why the chicken "wings" you buy in your well-knownfast food restaurant taste the same everywhere and every single day of the year.
- hackernewds 4y ago
  That seems backwards and hard to believe. They could use the same chickens and would need less sauce frying and spice
  - Loic 4y ago
    This is backwards for a cook who tries to enhance the intrinsic taste, texture of some good ingredients. But the industry wants a constant taste, texture on a massive scale. The only solution is to produce on one side the needed spices (easy to control the taste) an apply it on a relative tasteless substrate. It means that you do not need to adapt the recipe during production. Source: wife worked a couple of years for Unilever, some of my customers are in the flagrance, food additives industry.
  - Consultant32452 4y ago
    It's important that the chicken breast sandwich from McDonald's has exactly the same taste and texture whether you get it from San Francisco or Toronto. Might not be important to you, but it's important to McDonald's.

SpicyLemonZest 4y ago

The implicit context of this thread (like with a lot of Internet nutrition discussion) is that rising obesity rates over the past half century or so indicate something has gone wrong with our diets. The author is suggesting that this could be one piece of the puzzle.

jrapdx3 4y ago
There is a lot wrong with diets in developed countries, but it's not chicken, or at least chicken is way down the list of offenders. AIUI the biggest dietary culprit is the insidious infiltration of sugars into the foods that many people eat. Much of the prepared, convenience foods people rely on contain sugars that even dedicated label-readers may not be able to readily identify. A whole laundry list of cane sugar, sucrose, high-fructose syrup, rice syrup, honey, invert syrup, molasses, panela, muscovado, etc. Unless they're sneaking sugars into chicken, sure doesn't seem that it would be the main problem.

refurb 4y ago

It is a bad thing. We should go back to where only the middle class can afford quality protein like chicken. Let the poor eat beans I always say!

hackernewds 4y ago
one could also eat less and receive the same nutritional benefits. today's giant chickens do not seem to be nutritionally dense, flavorful and the unnatural steroids and estrogen levels are certainly worse consumed, than not
- refurb 4y ago
  Today's chickens have more muscle mass. They are bred for this trait. Are you arguing this larger muscle isn't made of protein? What is it made out of then? Are you arguing these chickens somehow survive without the nutrients that others chickens need to live? How is that possible? Those are some pretty tall claims you need to back up.
  - blindmute 4y ago
    Are you implying that malnutrition or a nutrient deficiency results in immediate death? Death quicker than the 50 days it takes to butcher the chicken?
    - refurb 4y ago
      Are you implying farmers raise these fast-growing, extra-large birds through "malnutrition and nutrient deficiency"?
      - blindmute 4y ago
        Yes, I am. Because I am active in the weightlifting community, I'm aware that muscle size has absolutely no correlation with nutrition or micronutrients beyond protein intake. This is extremely obvious if you ever took steroids, because you can become huge eating McDonald's and instant noodle, but even without them the same effect is observed.

throwuxiytayq 4y ago

There are quality issues with these chickens: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277097/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277097/ Probably doesn't make a huge difference for your health, but it's not a very nice culinary experience to find a dead/diseased muscle in the chicken you're eating. Consume enough KFC and it will happen. It looks green, by the way.