The Stock-Feeder's Manual: the chemistry of food in relation to the breeding and feeding of live stockCameron, Charles Alexander, Sir
Science
The Stock-Feeder's Manual: the chemistry of food in relation to the breeding and feeding of live stock
Cameron, Charles Alexander, Sir
Feeds; Livestock
_Diseased Meat._--The losses occasioned to stockowners by the diseases
of live stock are far greater than is generally supposed. It has been
calculated that in the six years ending 1860, the value of the horned
stock lost by disease amounted to £25,934,650. Pleuro-pneumonia was the
chief cause of these losses. Exclusive of the enormous losses occasioned
by the ravages of the rinderpest, the annual loss by disease in live
stock in these countries for some years past cannot be much under
£6,000,000 sterling.
Whether it is owing to the somewhat abnormal condition under which the
domesticated animals are placed, or to causes which operate upon them
when in a state of nature, it is certain that they are remarkably prone
to disease. It is extremely difficult to get a horse six years old that
is not a roarer or a whistler, or "weak on his pins," or in some way or
other unsound. Oxen, sheep, and pigs have almost as many maladies
afflicting them as human flesh is heir to, notwithstanding the short
period of life which they are permitted to enjoy.
It is a very serious question whether or not the flesh of animals that
have been killed while they are in a diseased condition is injurious to
health. The opinions on this point are conflicting, but the majority of
medical men believe that the flesh of diseased animals is not wholesome.
There are certain maladies which obviously render meat unsaleable, by
causing a sensible alteration in its quality. For example, blackleg
in cattle and measles in the porcine tribe render the flesh of these
animals, as a general rule, unmarketable, or nearly so. But there are
very serious diseases--often proving rapidly fatal--which, whilst
seriously affecting certain internal organs, do not palpably deteriorate
the quality of the flesh. In such cases are we to rely upon the evidence
of our mere senses in judging of the wholesomeness of the meat? If we
find beef possessing a good color and odour, and firm to the touch, and
_appearing_ to be in every respect healthy flesh, are we under such
circumstances to take it for granted that it must be healthy? This is a
very important question, involving as it does the interests of both the
producers and consumers of animal food. If the flesh of all diseased
animals be unwholesome, a very large number of oxen now sold whilst
laboring under pleuro-pneumonia should not be sent into the market.
This, of course, would be a heavy loss to the stockowner, but a still
heavier one to the meat consumer; because, if there were fewer animals
for sale, the price of meat would ascend, in obedience to the law of
supply and demand. The whole question is, then, well worthy of being
considered in the most careful, unbiassed, and scientific manner; for
at present it is in a state which is the reverse of being satisfactory.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account