Opposition to Animal Agriculture Hypothetically Saving Billions of Animals

NEW YORK–A new study reveals billions of farmed animals were hypothetically saved from factory farms last year when millions of Americans throughout the country expressed their “utter disgust” and “shock” over standard industry practices but continued eating animals. Although Americans agreed animals should not be treated in this manner and that they are subjected to such cruelty as a result of consumers buying them, they did not stop eating animals.

Animal rights organizations hailed the findings.

“We’re hypothetically making tremendous progress,” said Jared Bogenheim, Executive Director of the non-profit Abolish Animal Agriculture. “If these hypothetical trends continue, we could hypothetically eradicate the industry within ten years. Breeding animals for food will hypothetically be thrown into the trash heap of American history.”

The majority of Americans acknowledged they’re aware of the study results.

“I saw a video of a factory farm employee hitting a pig over the head with a steel pipe,” said Deb Forten, as she ate a bacon and cheese omelet at IHOP. “It is totally unacceptable! Just horrible.”

“That is some messed up stuff they do to those animals,” said local resident Rudy Franklin. “How the heck can anyone do that?” he asked as he passed on a grilled Gardein sandwich and ordered a medium-rare steak.

“Our greatest fear is that the millions of people who feel bad actually start aligning their feelings with their actions,” admitted Jodi Fry, spokesperson for America’s Animal Agriculture Alliance. “Any significant change in consumer trends would force us to abandon current practices and probably shift to plant-based options to remain viable. We’re grateful most people continue to ignore their conscience,” she added.

Researchers expect Americans will continue to eat animals while expressing outrage over their mistreatment in the years ahead.

animal abuse

9 thoughts on “Opposition to Animal Agriculture Hypothetically Saving Billions of Animals

  1. It really is amazing to me how people can be aware of the despicable cruelty perpetrated on animals, and then simply compartmentalize that knowledge, and then eat animals. I wish we could show videos continually at busy intersections in every major city of the undercover videos of the treatment of animals on factory farms so that people could not turn their backs. Thanks for doing this blog, Andrew! I hope you have a very large audience that is growing rapidly.

    1. Thank you Pat!

      It is fascinating. It is so interesting that I study the phenomenon and read research on the human brain and other factors that cause these behaviors.

      I have given Foer’s book Eating Animals as a gift to many people. In almost every case, the readers tell me how much they learned and how much disdain they have for animal agriculture and compassion for animals–and then they continue eating them. These are not people living in food deserts or without the means to afford plant-based options.


      It’s hard to imagine how anybody could read that book and not make immediate changes but the human brain and its varying capacity to empathize explains a great deal.

      Thank you for matching your values with your actions.

      1. What is even weirder though is that by all accounts Foer himself is apparently not vegan. The book has changed a lot of lives, and the information in it so completely clear and damning… But he is involved with the group Farm Forward which promotes a lot of the humane meat propaganda. Perhaps he has shifted more by now… But it is really hard for me to recommend that book any more because I fear my friends will look into it, learn he is not even vegan himself, and discredit the info. ) : Thanks Andrew for thought-provoking writing.

        1. Hi Rebecca,

          Yes, I heard he started eating animals again years ago (not sure if it’s true) but it never dissuaded me from recommending the book because people’s decisions once they’re exposed to the atrocities of animal agriculture shouldn’t be based on one person’s decision to eat or not eat animals (imo).

          In the book, he makes a mainstream, simple, and effective case for not eating animals. That’s what matters imo and should resonate with people and impact change.

  2. People have had euphemisms cloud their thinking since they were old enough to use words. No matter what the topic, a polite word is inserted for the factual, realistic ones that truly describing what is happening. My most disliked term is harvest used in hunting rather than killing or field dressing instead of disemboweling. Even the word “hunting” or “hunter” dignifies the action and perpetrator of cruelty. They forget we no longer live in the paleolithic era when humans gathered more than they ever hunted. There’s no sense to praise an act of cruelty because it’s fashionable to do so. Regarding factory farmed animals, this is cruelty beyond words. Whenever I drive on the expressway and a truck full of animals passes my car, I shudder at the thought of what these innocents will be going through in a few hours when they reach their destination. For shame on the people who continue to demand bacon on everything and so forth. All advocates can do is try to educate.

    1. Excellent post Chris. Well said. Some people may argue that “shame” doesn’t work as a form of advocacy to change eating habits though. I realize that’s a contentious issue.

      Advocates can “educate,” donate, lobby, lead by example, write, organize, and so much more. If we all do a little, it will add up to a lot.

      Thank you for being on the right side of history.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s