Horsemeat

I agree Granjura. Neither will I eat kosha meat as I understand that's not stunned either. I tend to go veggie when in Europe as so much of the meat is transported live huge distances under terrible conditions and being a tourist I don't have the local knowledge to source proper meat. Welfare organisations have campaigned for better conditions for animals but the legislation is ignored.

the following is how Halal meat should be produced :

"The traditional method of halal slaughter is done by cutting the animals throat, arteries and wind pipe in one cut by a very sharp knife whilst the animal is still conscious, this is practised all over the far east, a Muslim cleric utters a prayer before the animal is cut. The animal then bleeds out until dead before processing begins. In Britain however, 90% of halal meat in the UK has been pre stunned before the throat is cut, meaning the animal is completely unconscious before slaughter begins, this falls in line with British slaughter methods the same as our non halal meat is killed. The other 10% is done in the traditional way and under current UK and EU law this is acceptable to meet Muslim dietary requirements."

if you google Halal meat you will be surprised at how widespread halal meat is in supermarkets without being labelled as such. I think all NZ lamb is halal.
there are currently epetitions underway to get clear labelling so that people who do not want Halal meat can be informed. In the same way those that want Halal meat can be sure what they are buying is what they think it is.

Sorry, as the following article is quite long, but it is very interesting. It does explain that according to the Koran, some forms of stunning are NOT Haram = wrong/disallowed. In Switzerland, halal slaughter has to be used in conjunction with electrical stunning, which keeps the animal alive but unconscious. The Mosques and Imams here accept this as acceptable. Fundamentalists or very traditional Muslims go to France to buy non stunned halal meat.

Is Stunning Animals used for Meat Haram?

The question of stunning animals used for halal meat has become somewhat of buzzword amongst some UK Muslims. This is mainly due to poor communication from the relevant bodies on the differences in stunning techniques and what the shariah (and scholars of fiqh) actually say about the matter of stunning.

This short article outlines our approach to stunning.

In short, Abraham Natural Produce would rather all animals were slaughtered without stunning . However most abattoirs in the UK, unless purpose built for halal slaughter, use stunning on animals. Where we are based in the UK there are no Muslim abattoirs. We therefore have no option but to stun our produce as only animals processed through abattoirs can be sold for human consumption. On top of this we are bound by organic standards which demand that any animal solds as "organic" must be stunned before being stuck. The stun used is a very low voltage that knocks the animal out for around 15-20 seconds. After 20 seconds it is potentially back to normal and during that 20 seconds it is alive and breathing. This means that when the animal is cut it still bleeds the animal properly.

If any animal is stunned and as a consequence dies, it would be haram to eat. However the chances of this happening are extremely slim if not impossible. As we personally slaughter we are also able to see if signs of life still exist in the animal and that it has been bled properly.

Before starting this company we researched the area of stunning and were confused by mixed messages. The popular belief that stunning rendered meat as haram did not actually correspond to what scholars have said. We therefore sought guidance from trusted scholars. They, in agreement with many others, concluded that the act of stunning does not make meat haram as long as the animal is alive and the rules of slaughter are adhered to.

The Halal Meat Authorities

Many people in the UK are now obsessed with the issue of stunning having been given the impression that it is haram. What has in truth happened is that some within a certain UK halal meat authority have taken a disliking to stunning and as a consequence people have been (mis)informed that it is totally haram. In fact, the meat is still halal - all it means is that businesses can not get that authority's logo on their produce.

If one reads their literature or website carefully one will note that they do not term stunned meat as haram anywhere. What one finds is that they have implemented a "blanket policy" against stunning on the basis that there may be some doubt over whether or not an animal is alive at the time of slaughter. This shows that they agree that if a stunned animal is alive at the time of slaughter it is halal.

We asked the authority, the Halal Monitoring Committee, for their response on this matter and they kindly responded with the following proving that just because an animal is stunned it is not haram:

"HMC is erring the side of caution by adopting a blanket policy to the issue of stunning and not certifying it. HMC has never claimed that all animals die due to stunning or that stunning the animal renders the animal Haram automatically."

The Arguments

Some of the reasoning used by voices against stunning is based around the following ayat of the Quran:

"Forbidden to you (for food) are dead animal, blood, the flesh of swine, and that over which has been invoked other than the name of Allah, that which has been killed by strangling or by a violent blow or by a headlong fall or by being gored to death, that which has been partly eaten by a wild animal, unless you are able to slaughter (in due form), and that which is sacrificed on stone (altars)." (5:3)

The authorities argue that:

1) Research has shown that animals can and do die from stunning. If an animal dies because of stunning it is haram to eat. As we can't be 100% sure that the animal was alive at the time of slaughter we should then avoid all stunned meat.

We are partly in agreement. However, as we work in an abattoir we know from first hand experience that it is impossible for a lamb to die from a low voltage stun. In addition, if we follow the logic that because an animal may "possibly die" before slaughter we should not eat it, then why do we not also apply that logic to the person slaughtering the animal? They "possibly" did not follow the correct procedures for the slaughtering in terms of carrying it out properly and as a result we should consider the meat as haram. In fact the chances of this happening are higher than an animal dying from stunning.

2) The ayah says, "forbidden to you is the blood to consume." The halal authorities state that blood is dangerous if left inside the meat. Stunning can cause more blood to stay in the animal if the animal dies before being slaughtered.

Again, this is only applicable to an animal that dies before slaughter. It is not applicable to those that are still alive with hearts pumping when slaughtered meaning the blood runs free from the animal just as it would if it were alive. Furthemore, there is independent research to suggest the bleeding of stunned animals is equal to those on un-stunned.

3) The ayah says, "and an animal killed by a violent blow". This is compared to the act of stunning an animal and therefore invalidates it being halal.

Anyone who works in an abattoir will tell you that when you stun a lamb, there is absolutely no "blow" as this would make it impossible to stun it. The tongs must be carefully placed on the head otherwise they would not stay there.

Fatwa about Stunning

Some of the halal meat authorities have cited fatwa from scholars to support their stance that it is haram. Upon closer inspection however one finds that such fatwa are quoted out of context and not in full.

For example, one fatwa oft cited is that of Muhammad Usman, Darul-Ifta, Jamia Sarul Uloom, Karachi. His fatwa has been used to say that stunning is haram, whereas if one reads the fatwa in full you will see that he in fact does not say it is haram at all but in fact that it is completely halal. A few of his comments include:

"As for the ruling regarding the meat of an animal slaughtered in this way [meaning stunned], if the animal was definitely alive at the time of slaughter, and was slaughtered correctly, it would be considered Halal."

"It is not correct to check some animals and deduce from this that the rest were also alive. In such a situation the meat of those animals about which it is known with certainty or beyond reasonable doubt that they were alive at the time of slaughter, and they were correctly slaughtered , will be considered Halal. And the meat of those animals about which it is known (or there is a strong possibility) that they were dead at the time of slaughter, or those animals about which it is not possible to ascertain if they were dead or alive at the time of slaughter, will not be considered Halal, and it is not permissible to use such meat."

"The jurists have mentioned many signs that can be taken as proof of an animal being alive at the time of slaughter, for example if the animal bleeds at the time of slaughter like a living animal, or closes its mouth or eyes, or pulls together its legs, or shows any kind of movement, etc. Therefore, if the fact that the animal was alive can be established in any way, it will be permissible to slaughter it, and its meat will be considered Halal. The observation of movement in the animal, or establishing the fact that a pulse exists is sufficient to prove an animal alive."

For more legal opinions from scholars please read Fatwa on Stunning Animals.

Conclusion

As mentioned above, in an ideal world stunning would not be used. However the act of stunning according to the principles of fiqh (jurisprudence) are not seen as rendering any meat haram as long as the animal is treated well, alive at the time of slaughter and all other necessary actions and conditions are carried out properly. This is the position adopted by the majority of scholars including the late Zaki Badawi and one adopted by the Halal Food Authority.

As a result all our meat is 100% halal - this is indisputable for the simple reason that we know that every animal slaughtered is alive at the time of slaughter.

In addition to being halal our meat has the extra benefits that it is tayyib - it has been ethically treated, free of injected hormones and alien bodies, grazed on organic grass and slaughtered by someone who takes the act seriously and conducts it according to the shariah.

Allah knows best.
navigation header

Delivery
The Suppliers
Our Ethos
Aqeeqah
Eid Lamb
Resources
Sitemap

Abraham Natural Produce

Home
About Us
Online Shop
Go to Checkout
Contact

Does this apply to kosher too?

It all seems rather silly to follow rules laid down so long ago, the same as live transporation of animals for slaughter, before we had faster, more efficient slaughter methods and the ability to transport frozen carcasses half way around the world.

Environment Secretary comment today. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21391891

This vegetarian is sitting on the sidelines of this thread trying not to be seen with a self righteous smirk on her face.

The halal information is interesting.

I thought the problem with horsemeat was that it is not subjet to the regulations that other meats are & could contain traces of tranquilizers that are carciogenic. This was from something I heard on the radio last week.

I would rather not eat horses but then I was veggie for 25 years. I now eat meat again but will only shop at Sainsburys, Waitrose or M&S for it as from research they do comply with higher standards of animal care than other supermarkets. My local Tesco never stocks free range chicken for example.
I KNOW it is dearer but personally I would prefer to eat far less meat of better quality - that is just a personal preference. I still eat & love a lot of veggie food & it is very cheap. So when I do have meat I allow myself to pay a bit more for it.
I am still haunted by a TV programe a couple of years ago showing 3 day old piglets being castrated without anesthetic in Denmark or Holland- i forget which- I will never forget the look on that poor animal's face so i only buy British pork except Sainsburys Dutch pork and bacon which I have been assured by their quality control manager comes from their own farms in Holland that have to comply with British standards.
It is all down to personal preference so yes- it IS wrong to have horsemeat or pork in products we believe to be beef- no question.

We need to know what is going into the food we feed our children & grandchildren ( & us!)

How can we know whether aything we eat is as described on the labels? Are the calorie figures true? Is aspartame hiding in some foods? What about gluten free?

Perhaps the good thing to come out of all this is that some people will start cooking their meals from scratch and not eating processed food. We very rarely eat processed food so are not affected. Yes, we had burgers last week but DH made them from real meat.

This fiasco has to be good for our high street butchers. We buy burgers from our local butcher. He makes on the premises and buys his meat from the local abatoir four miles away, choosing the carcasses himself and knowing which farm they come from. They are so filling I can only eat half a one so they're not as expensive as they seem.

I suppose at the end of the day, we, the customers, are to blame. How can we expect to buy, for instance, 2 large chickens for a fiver - and expect the husbandry, feed, etc, to be quality? I know quality food is expensive - but much rather have less meat and cook it in such a way as to go further (adding veg and pulses for instance - or keeping the carcass to boil for stock and soup, etc.). So much food is wasted -as it is so cheap people have lost all respect for it. Add half a cupful of lentils to bolognese for instance will give you another 2 helpings, and they want even notice, etc.

NellieM me too. So - it's meat...

Many local abattoirs were forced to close back in the seventies and eighties thanks to the supermarkets buying processed food from whichever source gave them the most profit - often overseas.

Use your local butcher and buy British Beef!

Hear hear - in a way- this whole debacle maybe a good thing for our farmers, and for the animals too.

I do hope so, granjura. The crippling cost of feed is at crisis point for some farmers.

The carcinogenic scare is over egged!
The drug they are talking about is butuzolidine which was a very good drug until it was found to carry a slight risk of being carcinogenic.
The amount that would be in any tissue from an animal should not carry a risk unless you consume a whole animal.
I know people say that they're 'so hungry I could eat a horse!' But I think the likelihood of them actually doing so is so small as to be 'remote'

And it's all a short-sighted Tipperary farmer's fault!

Bags

Another complacent non-meat-eater here! In the days when I did cook meat, however, I used to do it all from scratch - including burgers - and if you want to know what you and your family are eating, that's the only way to do it.

That really appealed to my sense of humour, B! Very funny.

Bags thanks for that.

Bags bit like the sheep and the goats. The only difference in Israel is the direction of the tails, sheep down goats up, I think

I totally agree with Galen about her assessment of the risk from any drug given to a horse. Some will surely be processed and degraded and excreted from the horses body before it reaches the "market.

I cannot see that this drug would be given to a horse that is not actively being ridden and only then if it might be considered to prolong the animals usefulness. I would doubt if anyone is likely to administer it if they are selling on the animal or sending it off for slaughter, so by the time any animal that has been treated actually reaches the food chain I would doubt if the amounts originally given to the horse would be traceable in the meat.

As Galen says you would probably have to eat one hell of a lot of horse to even get traces of a dose.

It all makes for entertaining outrage for the press to speculate about though.

Mr soop is chuckling. Thanks again, Bags...I hooted when I read the list of animals/contents in the farmer's field.

I don't think it matters whether bute is a carcinogen to humans or not or whether traces remain in the meat of a horse that has been treated with it. What does matter is that the meat is not traceable as far as we know and there is a strong indication that this is a sizeable criminal exercise. In which case, we have no way of knowing the state of health of the horses when slaughtered or how the meat was treated afterwards. However, it is a fair bet that more corners were cut besides mixing horse meat with beef or selling it purely as beef. Goodness knows, we've actually seen appalling examples of rat-infested, totally unhygienic meat-processing plants in this country when they were prosecuted. This meat comes from abroad and we have no idea of its ultimate source.