Makes me really sick.
OMG, I've seen this before, they make sushi from living animals. Horrible.
Beware, you may not want to watch.
I've seen it with lobster and it's disturbing. I don't get it.
it's still blinking... wtf...
I could never eat this. I'm hoping its illegal in the U.K. Wikipedia only names Australia and Germany as countries who have outlawed this.
That's just sick. The frog was still moving, yet she was still eating his insides.
Why did I have to watch that just before lunch :yuck:
How is the way we treat lobsters somehow more humane? We boil live lobsters, crabs, and crawfish. They are best when they are alive up to the moment they are dropped into that pot of boiling water.
Even closer to home, we eat live shellfish. Oysters on the half shell -- yumm. Marinated scallops -- double yumm. Those oysters are alive (or should be alive) right up to the moment they are chomped. Those scallops are (or should be) alive right up to the moment they are sliced and dropped in the marinade.
But they are still dead when I'm eating them. With the video I saw, the chef cuts the lobsters back open and people started digging in while the lobster was still moving around.
We, humans, are as empathetic as how much our mirror neurons tell us.
A human resembling live eye on a plate gives us bigger secondary pain.
A half dead moving animal on a plate gives us secondary pain than a dead animal.
Killing an animal which has more features as our own species give us more secondary pain. (more empathetic on a mammal dying than a non-vertebrate(scallop, oysters))
It hurts you more when a cuter and bigger animal suffering (bird, dog, cat, rabbit) than a not-so-cute smaller animal (fly, mosquitto).
People who are against killing an animal for food has less issue with killing a mosquito.
It hurts immensely to watch a human die that to see a picture of a human dying. It hurts more to see a human dying than to read a news about some death.
So, to answer to why we are less empathetic to some creatures, it is just the way we are evolved.
We just seem to be more connected to some of the species.
If we kill another animal for our own evolutionary benefit, the action seems justified for the masses.
A half dead live looking animal on a plate might give a freshest food feeling for some minds, but there is no evolutionary advantage to it. Plus, we get confused what happened to their secondary pain.
Grosssssss, what's wrong with first knocking an animal unconscious before tearing it apart?
Yes. It's not that bad, just chew thoroughly.
I can't plead innocence, since I love shucking oysters and eating them, but at least they are not looking at me like the frog...
Hopefully they don't feel pain, but the frog definitely can.
There was a recent study on crabs that showed they sense pain and remember. The crab's food was placed in 2 holes. One hole would give the crab an electric shock when it tried to go in to get it's food. No crab entered the hole with the electric shock more than twice, they would only get food from the shock free hole.
This whole thing about eating food while it's alive is based on superstition, that somehow the "life force" from the living animal is transferred to the eater. It needs to be stopped.
I would not eat such food.
I find it distasteful in more ways than one.
Yes, that's true. I watched a documentary where people in India would go to a convention to swallow a fish alive, because they thought it would heal their asthma.
For the Japanese however, I rather think the practice is done out of the need to have fresh fish that isn't spoiled. An animal on the plate that is still moving is an unmistakable sign that the meat is fresh.
On a side note, meat has to die/decay first before it's nice on the palate right? The live meat must be very tough to eat.
In agreement with jobyts, the problem here is logically flawed. Your disgust lies with the frog's appearance being remotely anthropomorphic (specifically, it's eyes), thus making it's prolonged demise seem identifiable on a human level, even empathetic.
If frogs looked like giant featureless blobs of jelly, we wouldn't have this problem. Whether it were alive or not, and whether it felt pain or not, would become irrelevant to this unique cuisine experience.
Throw your petitions away.
They should get its head off the dish, customer won't eat the head with skin on alive anyway. It is there to disgust me, seemingly so.
In our culture, yes. In their culture, no. To the Japanese (and many other Asian cultures), it's a sign of ultimate freshness. Just because we see it as gross doesn't mean they do.
In the first place, I don't think flies or mosquitoes feel pain. And I don't know about other people, but I tend not to focus so much on whether or not the animal in pain is cute, but how much pain it's in and whether it's necessary or not. Find me the ugliest animal in existence that can feel pain and I guarantee you that I'm going to be against torturing it. Humanely killing it before cooking it - okay, I can deal with that. But there's absolutely no need to cut something up while it's conscious, rip its organs out and then leave it to die in excruciating pain.
I get the theory, but if you told me that blob of jelly was a frog and it was still conscious, that would be even more disturbing to me.
Do the Japanese eat their kobe beef with the head still mooing?
Of course they are able to detect noxious stimuli, they have nociception. Flies can be trained to avoid being shocked. The idea that an animal would evolve without pain perception is a strange concept, an animal like that wouldn't stay around long enough to give offspring. The only thing we can't measure is the experience, but we can't even do that in humans.
Of interest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_in_invertebrates
This reminds me of a book written decades ago that the author watched some chinese programme boasted how talented their chefs are. They turned a living chicken into 3 dishes in 3 minutes (thoroughly cooked in this case thankfully) and one of the dishes has the head of the animal as "decoration"
Of course not. Fresh beef doesn't taste very good. Why do you think Texans invented chili con carne? Answer: To hide the not-very-good taste of fresh-killed beef (and also to hide the not-very-good taste of beef that really should have been eaten a couple of days before). Beef needs to be aged a bit to taste good.
The objections raised in this thread are a bit hypocritical. If you aren't a vegetarian you are responsible for some amount of animal suffering. How much? That's a difference of degree, not kind. To make the difference of degree even smaller, there are a good number of non-eastern animal husbandry practices that cause a good deal of suffering. It's just hidden from us. Ignorance of that suffering doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
BTW, I am not a vegetarian. I love oysters on the half shell. I know that my disgust at that poor frog is cultural and hypocritical. I grew up on a farm amongst a family of hunters. I know to some extent what kinds of suffering are involved in animal husbandry. I also spent some time in Asia as a young adult. Their food preferences are a bit different than ours.
If you want to be outraged, aim it at whale sushi and shark fin soup.
Separate names with a comma.