Foie Gras, Served in 1k Restaurants in NYC, Is Banned

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/30/nyregion/foie-gras-ban-nyc.html

by frutiger • 7 years ago

76 90 7 years ago

Well foie gras was a horrifying thing to learn about! This seems hard to excuse.

sneak3• 7 years ago

I encourage you to learn more about it. It is not harmful or painful or cruel, the animals come willingly to the person who feeds them.

inamberclad• 7 years ago

Hard for them to come anywhere with a tube down their throats, I imagine.

computerex• 7 years ago

The animals are literally force fed with a tube. The animal's liver swells to many times its normal size. I am not sure what you are talking about. There is a reason why this practice is controversial to begin with. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

reitzensteinm• 7 years ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras_controversy#/media...

sneak3• 7 years ago

Under the law, it will be assumed that all foie gras came from duck or geese that have been force-fed unless “documentary” evidence is provided to the contrary.

Guilty until proven innocent seems to be the general trend in NYC these days.

pentae2• 7 years ago

Or maybe lawmakers are just tired of seeing loopholes abused by unscrupulous people. It's like banning shark fin, it just gets taken off the menu but can be ordered in mandarin.

donw3• 7 years ago

That may not be the best analogy.

If shark fin is illegal, then being able to order it in Mandarin isn't a "loophole" -- it doesn't magically become legal on a technicality.

It's just a means of avoiding enforcement of the law, by making the illicit activity less obvious.

asjw3• 7 years ago

But it's an inversion of innocent until proven guilty nonetheless.

People will find loopholes anyway.

It's not even hard in this case.

donw3• 7 years ago

I don't think it is entirely unfair that restaurants be required to prove origin when challenged, especially for commonly counterfeited ingredients.

Let's say that I go to a restaurant that claims they only use true cinnamon and Kashmir saffron to flavor a cinnamon roll, which they sell at a premium because of the high-quality ingredients.

When challenged, that restaurant needs to be able to show proof that they are delivering as advertised.

If it turns out that they were instead using artificial flavors and colors, then they are guilty of fraud, and the punishment should be scaled to the difficulty of detecting infraction.

Similarly, if a restaurant claims to be selling humanely-sourced shark fin (not even sure how that works, but let's roll with it), and can't substantiate that claim, then there does need to be some kind of punishment for deceiving their customers.

thaumasiotes• 7 years ago

Let's say that I go to a restaurant that claims they only use true cinnamon and Kashmir saffron to flavor a cinnamon roll, which they sell at a premium because of the high-quality ingredients.
When challenged, that restaurant needs to be able to show proof that they are delivering as advertised.
If it turns out that they were instead using artificial flavors and colors, then they are guilty of fraud, and the punishment should be scaled to the difficulty of detecting infraction.

Can the punishment also be scaled to the harm, or potential harm, caused by the fraud? In a case like this, that would be nothing.

sneak3• 7 years ago

The specifics of an alleged crime are irrelevant. Treating people as if they are guilty when you have no evidence of a crime (“reasonable suspicion”, in legal terms) is a violation of their civil rights.

Ecco• 7 years ago

Quelle excellente nouvelle ! Ça en laissera plus pour nous :-D

simonblack• 7 years ago

I came here to say the same thing.

But it reads much better in the original French.

cm2187• 7 years ago

I can’t help thinking that this has little to do with foie gras, but is part of wider push by vegetarians to ban meat eating. You could argue that an animal had a bad time for any meat.

jeswin4• 7 years ago

I was surprised to learn that India is the only country[1] to ban the production and import of Foie Gras. Very few people would even know about the dish in India.

But anyway, I hope this torturous practice comes to an end worldwide.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras_controversy

CaptainZapp• 7 years ago

Do you eat meat at all? If so, how were the animals raised, slaughtered and processed?

This ban seems rather hypocritical to me given the atrocities happening in mass meat production.

While there are absolutely terrible things happening in Foie Gras production (I would never, ever buy any products from Hungary, as a for example) the really good stuff is raised quite humanely.[1]

To me this just looks like an attempt for quick political gain without any advantage to any factory raised animal (which, for the record, I regard as one of our biggest moral failings as humans).

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2010/11/ethical-f...

praptak2• 7 years ago

It's just a step in the right direction.

jeswin4• 7 years ago

Do you eat meat at all?

Not anymore; stopped about three years back. It was difficult personally after I became a parent. The rest of my family are meat and fish eaters and I keep out of their preferences.

This can only be done in phases. Raise awareness, ban instances of extreme cruelty, support substitutes etc. I'm very optimistic - Impossible burgers and sandwiches are quite close to the real thing and if prices come down (and we have more choices and availability) it could be a guilt-free, and even healthier alternative.

synt4x1k0• 7 years ago

It isn't like this is new.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras_controversy#Statutor...

fulafel• 7 years ago

One man's hypocrisy is another man's whataboutism.

29athrowaway• 7 years ago

Eating meat is not the only way to inflict pain on animals.

Animal tested products are horrible on animals. For example, they test that a soap or a shampoo doesn't irritate eyes too much by putting a concentrated form of the product on some animal's eye over and over again, sometimes rendering them blind. And that's just the beginning. It's just horrible.

Milk doesn't kill cows, but cows can only produce milk after giving birth. You are smart enough to figure out the rest of the story: cows are forced to give birth to calves, the calves are "taken away", and the milk is harvested. The animals get traumatized in the process, crying for days.

Chicken eggs should not require us to kill, but in practice if a male chick is born they're often "sacrificed" (often by being ground alive). The survivors spend their lives in a cage.

mcv2• 7 years ago

We should absolutely also address other atrocities in meat production, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't also address this. Personally I only eat animals I know to have had a decent life, because I don't want to contribute to the torture of animals.

But changing the mass meat market is sadly a lot harder than changing the market for such a specialty item. Avoiding restaurants that serve meat is a lot harder than avoiding restaurants that serve foie gras. I hope it's a step in the right direction and we'll create better standards for how we treat animals.

brillas• 7 years ago

I support this, but I’m not sure about its moral groundwork. I’ve never tried foie gras, and after reading about it I’m increasingly sure I never will. The fact that I find little pleasure in food delicacies and am thus not affected in the slightest by this ban makes it hard to sympathize with those who resist it; It’s just wasteful to me, after all. But someone could just as easily say that about my leather jackets and my fast fashion, or my snazzy tech purchases or all those luxuries I thoroughly enjoy. It feels unfair to decide this by a vote of people who are likely not affected, who don’t reap its value. But how, then, do we choose what’s right and what’s not?

anovikov• 7 years ago

I enjoy foie gras and i happily live in a place where it's unlikely to be banned in my lifetime. No nation which has only recently turned to service economy from agriculture-driven economy and most population grew in the countryside, will do it, because they know and readily accept that all agriculture is the torture of animals or it just doesn't pay for itself. Also, it's just tasty.

calf2• 7 years ago

If I were an investor I would ask Hudson Valley and the other specialty farms to look into GMO and lab-grown foie. Maybe liver is easier to do than muscle tissue.

Foie tastes like magical butter and it would be wonderful if there was a more ethical way to have it.

eurg3• 7 years ago

There is: https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_barber_s_surprising_foie_gras_...

He talks about a farmer who is not force feeding the animals, but instead prepares the grassland such that those animals voluntarily eat themselves into a fat liver. Taste seems to be superb, for those who eat animals for fun.

gus_massa• 7 years ago

It is posible to transplant part of the liver from a person to another, and both will regrow a complete liver. So this may work but IANAMD. More info https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liver_transplantation#Living_d...

asjw3• 7 years ago

Meanwhile you can force feed beef and get expensive steaks at any of the fancy NY steak house downtown

jillesvangurp• 7 years ago

Nice case of double standards. The practice of force feeding geese looks more cruel than it is. It's basically nothing compared to what we routinely do to chickens and other farm animals. Industrial chicken farming is infinitely more cruel compared to this.

We're talking about organically farmed birds that are kept such that they are fattened up and delicious (aka. in good health) in a way that is the complete opposite of the dystopian life of a chicken bred in cage that needs antibiotics just to survive their miserable life long enough to be slaughtered.

Banning Kentucky fried chicken or other fast food chains would be considered ludicrous. So, is this.

I eat meat and chicken but I'm well aware where it came from. I've had foie gras a couple of times. Not crazy about it but I appreciate it.

jamil74• 7 years ago

I can't help feeling a similar way, a small group of wealthy people eating an obscure, traditional food is an easier target and makes for a much better story than addressing the elephant in the room that is mainstream factory farming.

realusername• 7 years ago

It's very far from a "luxury" or "wealthy" item in France, it's something most families will have on their table at Christmas. I don't know where this false luxury stereotype comes from.

oh_sigh• 7 years ago

Also, there is some. Anthropocentric thinking going on. A person thinks they wouldn't want a funnel stuck down their throat and forced fed grain. Yet, the birds will line up for it and seem to really enjoy it(for one, they don't have a gag reflex)

ivanhoe3• 7 years ago

That's also very similar to how baby birds are fed by their parents.

kmlx• 7 years ago

i raise you "tobacco".

gadders• 7 years ago

I would argue that live plucking geese for goose down as is just as unpleasant for the goose as force-feeding. Some unfortunate geese even have to suffer through both.

carlmr• 7 years ago

We're talking about organically farmed birds that are kept such that they are fattened up and delicious (aka. in good health)

A fatty liver is by definition the opposite of good health.

lucideer• 7 years ago

I'm not sure of the level of overfeeding that happens, nor the precise health implications thereof, but afaik foie gras originated from killing wild geese who had "over"-fed themselves as part of their regular pre-migration preparation.

mcv2• 7 years ago

Foie gras does not come from geese who are merely "fattened up". It comes from geese who have been made intentionally sick to make their liver swell up to several times it's normal (healthy) size.

There is such a thing a thing as more natural "animal friendly" foie gras which apparently takes advantage of geese's natural instinct to gorge themselves before migration, which results in a slightly enlarged liver, but still much smaller than the traditional foie gras. I've never been able to find any in a restaurant, though, so I just avoid foie gras and the restaurants that serve it.

camexp• 7 years ago

I don't believe it is double standards to ban one thing and not another, if that was the case then progress would never be made with anything. Maybe banning the wholesale production of meat is a bit more complex than banning a few restaurants serving one particular cruel foodstuff? I have worked in chicken factories, and I can say without reservation that these places are not nice. I still eat chicken though.

machinecoffee• 7 years ago

Whilst battery farming is cruel and inhumane to the animals, it can be done in a better way.

However, foie gras can never be done humanely, it's a horrible practice where the animal has to suffer in order for a diner to have 5 minutes of gastronomic enjoyment.

lazerpants• 7 years ago

Not quite true. There are ethical ways of getting foie.

https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_barber_s_surprising_foie_gras_...

ivanhoe3• 7 years ago

Weird that there seems to be much more debate in US about force feeding geese than force-feeding prisoners. Not that I support either of the practices.

fxj• 7 years ago

In germany there is a labelling system called "Animal Welfare Labelling" where consumers can choose what they buy.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tierwohllabel

For eggs this is even mandatory:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierkennzeichnung

gumby2• 7 years ago

Despite what the article says, the California foo GRAS ban was blocked by the courts on federal grounds and foi gras is widely available.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_foie_gras_law

gumby2• 7 years ago

Sometimes I really hate spell correcting: apologies for "foi gras" becoming "foo GRAS"

Foie Gras, Served in 1k Restaurants in NYC, Is Banned

Related Stories