[pc86]

I don't have the slightest bit of guilt eating meat products, including octopus, but it seems pretty self-evident that "pain per pound of meat" is a ridiculous standard. Pain doesn't exist in measurable units, the entire idea of trying to quantify it in relation to food production, much of which happens with little to no pain at all, seems pretty silly.

[hansvm]

If we draw on human comparisons, it's generally agreed that more deaths are worse than fewer, and I posit that the weight of a person doesn't factor into that calculus. If we assume that a given quantity of meat will be produced and that animal deaths are undesirable for analogous reasons to human deaths then it's perfectly natural to attempt to minimize deaths per pound.

[cgriswald]

You're not comparing humans to humans. You're comparing cows to (say) chickens. The underlying assumption then is that chickens and cows share the same experience of pain. That's not proven, seems unlikely to be the case, and is, in any case, currently unmeasurable.

[philipswood]

Agreed, but battery farming conditions sometimes makes it a easy call to make.

The “quality of life” (hard as it is to measure) of battery chickens is clearly not good.

We’ve kept some pet bantam chickens and I was surprised by what intelligent, curious and communicative creatures they where.

[hackernewds]

why is the experience of pain the standard? would anaesthetics present an ethical conundrum

[pc86]

Maybe (I would argue feeding more people is better), but the GP is referring to pain, not death. Cows can be killed pretty quickly - perhaps not painlessly but pretty close to it. Lobsters not so much.