The objections that I have made against the use of the flesh of fish and mammals as an article of food may also be assessed against the use of domestic and wild fowls. There are a few special points, however, in favor of poultry as food that are worth special consideration. The production of chickens and other domestic poultry is one of the most prolific industries in America, and is of great importance to the general public because it is capable of being carried on in communities too thickly settled for the economic production of beef and other meats. [Sidenote: Poultry superior to the flesh of mammals] Another point to be observed in the use of poultry as food is that, because of the ease with which every farmer and villager can keep a flock of chickens, it is possible for him to have fresh meat produced under the most sanitary and hygienic conditions, while if he uses meat as food, he will be compelled to depend upon the various meat products of unknown age and origin, secured from the general market. Another reason why the use of poultry, from a hygienic standpoint, is less objectionable than the use of pork and beef is that the quantity consumed is usually much smaller than the amount eaten of these heavy-blooded meats. For example: When five pounds of beefsteak is purchased in the market, the amount consumed would be almost the full weight of the purchase. If the money were invested in a five-pound chicken, a goodly portion of this weight would be lost in preparing the fowl for the table, while a still further loss would occur in the bones and in the inedible portions, so that the actual amount of flesh consumed would not be more than perhaps two pounds. According to the old idea of economy and diet, this would be a serious argument against the use of poultry products, but as has been clearly proved in this course of lessons, the most serious criticism that can be urged against the modern bill of fare is quantity, and especially the use of meat in large quantities, so common among the American people. [Sidenote: Custom vs. hygiene] The chief reason for which meat is kept upon the bill of fare of most civilized people is that of conformity to custom, surely not to that of hygiene. That form of meat, therefore, which is pleasing to the taste, and which has a tendency to reduce the quantity of flesh consumed, is a step in the right direction of true food reform. EFFECTS OF FEEDING POULTRY [Sidenote: Fattening poultry]