-
Stunning Before Slaughter
Should stunning before slaughter be allowed to reduce any potential pain?
-
23 Replies
-
Stunning Before Slaughter
updated 1 year, 11 months ago
5 Members
·
23
Replies
-
There’s no harm in it from the sharia perspective.
-
The blood supposed to flow when you slaughter an animal. Doesn’t stunning stop the blood from flowing?
-
This is correct that blood is supposed to drain. But stunning generally has little effect on this. In New Zealand all animals are stunned before slaughtering, and New Zealand is the largest halal meat exporter certified by many Islamic authorities. Slaughtering a conscious animal helps with draining the blood because the heart pumps faster, but it’s not a requirement. As long as the blood is still drained out of a slaughtered animal that was stunned, it’s still considered zabiha.
-
Apparently there is a large possibility that the animal dies from stunning. Should this be a concern?
-
There’s only a small possibility of an animal dying from stunning, and if it happens it becomes a matter of ijtihad.
-
Why ijtihaad? If an animal dies because you dropped it (or any other example) whilst being taken to slaughter- wouldn’t it be maytah?
-
?
-
May I ask why it’s ijtihaadi again? Could it be like hunting where the animal is dead but we just slaughter it after w e find it?
-
It becomes a matter of ijtihad in that one person can hold the view that the animal died before slaughtering it while another person can argue that the animal died as part of the slaughtering process itself.
-
If, whilst getting the goat down for slaughter, you use too much force and it dies- is the animal halal?
-
Personally, I would not consider it so.
-
-
This topic came before and we looked into some expert studies. It was determined that significantly less blood flows out if an animal is stunned or administerd anesthesia before slaughter.
-
On ask Ghamidi? Do you have the link?
-
Yes on this forum. Let me find it.
-
Thanks 👍
-
I couldn’t find that conversation, but I researched and I found many indepth academic research and studies and all concluded that there is no significant difference in blood loss among various slughter techniques including stunning and preanesthesia techniques.
I am not sure how we concluded in the past that there is a significant difference in blood loss among various techniques.
-
-
I am still searching for other studies that concluded that there is less blood loss from stunning or anesthesia. I came across a few small studies with such conclusion but not the big one yet.
At the end when there are conflicting results from various studies, the question arises as to who funded or influenced the studies.
Due to conflicting results, many Muslims have decided to stick with traditional slaughter as the only accetable slaughter method.
-
There’s lot of misconceptions about stunning. Just like Jews, the religious Muslims formed “halal certification” with essentially zero knowledge about science of meat production, packaging, storage etc.
stunning has no effect on blood loss unless animal dies. In reality, animals are globally “under stunned” so the heart doesn’t stop and animal bleed out completely. This is because if the blood stays in the veins, it affects the taste of meat and hence it’s beneficial for meat producers to under stun animals. It’s definitely more humane way to slaughter.
-
Actually loss of too much blood reduces the taste of meat, impacts its color and becomes less desirable due to appearance and taste.
I have seen studies that say stunning doesn’t impact the blood drainage and other studies that say it does. If an animal is unconscious I believe the point is that the animal doesn’t move when dying and due to no musscle contraction less blood drains out.
I am not sure which study is correct and which study is biased or influenced.
-
-
Draining blood is absolutely necessary to make meat more tasty. The color of the meat is due to myoglobin and not hemoglobin that’s in blood. Brother Nadeem plz share the study which says draining too much blood will make meat taste bad. May be I have understood wrong.
Stunning (via current, bolt gun, carbon dioxide) make the animal unconscious and doesn’t feel pain. As soon as BP drops, body releases strong transmitters making the veins contract and push all the blood in the arterial system and then to the heart to be pumped. Hence it drains more. Limb movement has no effect on draining blood. Muscle do push blood to the heart during normal circumstances. The same mechanism happens in humans.
Causing heart failure via stunning can cause less blood to be drained. That’s why animals r under stunned to render then unconscious only.
-
Brother Faraz, you sound more knowledgeable, I was merely sharing info I see on the web. I am no way an expert. Actually I asked my question a long time ago why they don’t give anesthesia to animals before slaughtering and I received links to studies that suggested that it drains less blood. I can’t seem to find my conversation at Ask Ghamidi now.
-
Here’s your discussion. Moderators didn’t share any links to any studies. The only thing that was shared is that regardless of anesthesia if the blood is drained properly then it’s halal.
-
Thanks for sharing the discussion
The posted article was also very informative. It showed no difference in blood loss by either kosher method without stunning or the conventional method
“. Results showed no significant difference between the two treatment groups in terms of blood loss, although the conventional group had a higher bleed-out.”
-
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
