Did you read the original study here at all?
Worth highlighting this part of the article since I’ve seen a number of people falsely claiming the opposite on lemmy.world lately:
Transgender women’s bone density was found to be equivalent to that of cisgender women, which is linked to muscle strength.
And this is not the first study showing this same trend
Similar findings have been echoed in previous reporting. According to a recent report that generated an in-depth review of all English-language scientific literature (published between 2011-2021) about transgender (trans) women athlete participation in elite sport, several key conclusions coincide with findings from the IOC funded study
It’s not completely. There is some evidence suggesting certain methods may neutralize the virus, however there’s also evidence to suggest that flash pasturization may not
A good place to start is by changing consumption levels as not doing doing so would make things much harder. It’d be difficult to maintain current consumption levels with slow-growing birds as it’d require a much larger number of chickens to be slaughtered
Maintaining this level of consumption entirely with a slower-growing breed would require a 44.6%–86.8% larger population of chickens and a 19.2%–27.2% higher annual slaughter rate, relative to the current demographics of primarily ‘Ross 308’ chickens that are slaughtered at a rate of 9.25 billion per year.
[…]
In sum, without a drastic reduction in consumption, switching to alternative breeds will lead to a substantial increase in the number of individuals killed each year, an untenable increase in land use, and a possible decrease in aggregate chicken welfare at the country-level scale
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.210478#d1e265
The places one get chickens from are likely going to be the same or similar to the common commercial breeds.
It’s also worth noting that domesticated breeds of egg-laying chickens haven’t been spared either :( They have been selected to lay so many eggs that it harms their bone health. It takes a lot of calcium to make eggs, so naturally they don’t lay them as much. In the wild, they would also often eat their own unfertilized eggs to recover the calcium too. I’ve read that a fair number of animal sanctuaries actually give them medications to lower their rate of egg laying and let them eat their own eggs to recover that calcium
Hens will often lay around 300 eggs per year. That’s very different from the wild ancestor of modern chickens – the red junglefowl – which lays around a dozen per year. And much higher than in 1900, when commercial hens would lay around 80 eggs yearly
They have been artificially selected to grow faster. The breeds of chickens are not natural in the slightest. They are even patented so only one company can for instance sell the Ross 308. The changes in breeds that are most common are due to intensive selection. The breeds themselves will get classified differently as those selections happen, so comparing the same one wouldn’t make as much sense
They can already barely walk…
It’s not just feeding them more that’s caused this. To get chickens this large they genetically selected/modified for what was more profitable. I.e they may lead to features being changed unevenly
This is all at expense of pretty everything else like their health
Some have used the term “Frankenchicken” to refer to them because of their numerous health and pain problems from their fast growth
Quite a lot,
The science is clear that fast-growing chickens like the Ross 308 are doomed by their genetics. These have been engineered to grow so incredibly fast, and their bodies just cannot handle it.”
Jackson said secret filming at broiler farms supplying big supermarkets has shown birds struggling to walk or collapsing under their own weight, or dying from heart failure, and dead birds were filmed lying among the flocks.
[…]
Andrew Knight, a professor of animal welfare and ethics at the University of Winchester, said: “With these really rapid growth rates, it can be difficult for the heart and circulatory system to keep up with the expanding body mass. A proportion of these animals suffer from heart failure. It’s also difficult for the bones, ligaments and tendons to keep up with the rapidly increasing body mass, meaning that a proportion of these birds become severely lame [inability to walk properly].”
They are more likely to have all kinds of other health issues not listed in the quote above such as hock burns
At their expense
I mean it still should still be horrfying, just that it should something to be worried about globally rather than just locally
Yep, for a source for others about the plastic bit
The system that strips off the plastic wrappings can’t capture it all, and so in the UK a limit of 0.15% of plastic is allowed by the Food Standards Agency. The official EU level for plastic permitted in animal feed is zero although in reality many other countries operate within the same 0.15% limit.
That war ended in 2022 though I’d agree it should have received more global news coverage and such
The Tigray War[b] was an armed conflict that lasted from 3 November 2020[a] to 3 November 2022.
It’s worth noting 77% of the world’s soy goes to animal feed. Only 5% of soy goes to soy bean products like tofu, soy milk, etc.
It’s not perfect, but I think that statement is rather misleading. Problems with plant agriculture are multiplied by animal agriculture which relies on it even more to grow crops for feed. Counterintuitively plant-based diets use fewer crops and less cropland compared to animal agriculture due to not loosing energy from feed crops going to creatures who use that energy on their own body function
Academic writing is usually dry, but every once in a while you run into something like that which changes your perspective on how to roast an idea
There is not really strong evidence of plant sentience. Here’s one paper looking at it:
A. Plants do not show proactive behavior.
B. Classical learning does not indicate consciousness, so reports of such learning in plants are irrelevant.
C. The considerable differences between the electrical signals in plants and the animal nervous system speak against a functional equivalence. Unlike in animals, the action potentials of plants have many physiological roles that involve Ca2+ signaling and osmotic control; and plants’ variable potentials have properties that preclude any conscious perception of wounding as pain.
D. In plants, no evidence exists of reciprocal (recurrent) electrical signaling for integrating information, which is a prerequisite for consciousness.
E. Most proponents of plant consciousness also say that all cells are conscious, a speculative theory plagued with counterevidence.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8052213/
Though something interesting and perhaps counter intuitive to note is that even if we realized plants were sentient, a plant-based diet actually involved killing fewer plants due to the lessened need to grow feed (of which most of the energy is lost)
I believe the diference between the two claims may be due to controlling for height in one of the findings that they don’t correlate to athleticism and not in the other
Reading some more scientific literature, I think they probably read that it was associated with muscle mass (due being associated with height which wasn’t controled for). Controling for height makes the association go away
They are basing it off of different reports between those claims