> Its not. But only because we have differing set-points for defining animal cruelty. Force-feeding an animal so vigorously that it develops hepatic steatosis,

> Its not. But only because we have differing set-points for defining animal cruelty. Force-feeding an animal so vigorously that it develops hepatic steatosis, only to kill it and consume its liver sounds equally cruel to me. Don’t get me wrong; I’m delighted the U.S. Congress saw fit to ban this practice. Now go ban the thousand other forms of cruelty visited on non-human animal species.