Topic: Foie Gras uproar: P&O Responds...

QUOTE:

I'm so glad this was posted. I had no idea that P&O would be serving foie gras on Azura.

When I was on QE2 a couple of years ago, I was most disappointed to be told they no longer served it. The speciality restaurants on Celebrity serve the most amazing sautéed foie gras - it really is to die for. I will certainly look forward to trying it on Azura. Thanks P&O, long may they keep serving haute cuisine to the many Brits who enjoy fine food.

Nice one Nick - that's a tactic I've used many times to wind people up! For example, if someone complains that a particular ship is relatively smoker-friendly, I always make a point of thanking them and saying that I will certainly use that line in future.

Of course, no one ever takes me seriously - and I doubt if many will take your comment seriously either. ;)

Aaah, but were they Polish of British workers?? I thought this was the place where they advertised specifically for fluent POLISH speakers only.

And Morton - I agree - haven't ever tasted foie gras but would not eat that or veal. Prodcution of both is too horrific.

QUOTE:

Nice one Nick - that's a tactic I've used many times to wind people up! For example, if someone complains that a particular ship is relatively smoker-friendly, I always make a point of thanking them and saying that I will certainly use that line in future.

Of course, no one ever takes me seriously - and I doubt if many will take your comment seriously either. ;)

Now that it something that might fly, as they say in the advertising world ......"Smoked Foie Gras". ......It's a thought. ....Neil

QUOTE:

Now that it something that might fly, as they say in the advertising world ......"Smoked Foie Gras". ......It's a thought. ....Neil

I'll provide the smoker ~ Alder woodchips or Apple?

I really do get fed up with the howling of the self-righteous here. If you don't approve of foie gras or veal, then don't eat it, but don't tell *me* or other passengers what they can or can't eat!

QUOTE:

I really do get fed up with the howling of the self-righteous here. If you don't approve of foie gras or veal, then don't eat it, but don't tell *me* or other passengers what they can or can't eat!

A charming first post. I am sure you could have made your point in a less confrontational manner.

No one is trying to tell anyone what to do. We are merely taking issue with P and O who are disingenuously promoting their foie gras as being welfare-led and sustainable, which is misleading.

Of course everyone has freedom of choice. However I wonder how many would make the same choices if they were aware of the facts?

Funny how the hand-wringers always say 'we', when they actually only speak for themselves. For the record, I don't eat foie gras myself but I do eat veal, and I'm confident that more than 90% of those who eat foie gras and veal on board cruise liners are well aware of the production methods. Your comment about freedom of choice is of course disingenuous, as the whole agenda of the thread is to force P&O to stop offering foie gras to *anyone*. Welfare is a matter of degree and culture (let's not get into Oriental food production!), and foie gras is of course sustainable, as with any other farmed animal.

QUOTE:

Funny how the hand-wringers always say 'we', when they actually only speak for themselves. For the record, I don't eat foie gras myself but I do eat veal, and I'm confident that more than 90% of those who eat foie gras and veal on board cruise liners are well aware of the production methods. Your comment about freedom of choice is of course disingenuous, as the whole agenda of the thread is to force P&O to stop offering foie gras to *anyone*. Welfare is a matter of degree and culture (let's not get into Oriental food production!), and foie gras is of course sustainable, as with any other farmed animal.

I never say "we" when arguing that cruelty of any kind is wrong - I say it's wrong all by myself.

I'm sure I do sound self-righteous to people who are happy for animals to die because they enjoy eating them. In my view, self-righteousness is a lesser evil than indifference to cruelty.

It's self-evident that foie gras is sustainable. (Does anyone imagine ducks and geese are on the verge of extinction?) Until you brought it up, I hadn't thought it worthy of mention.

Whether or not 90% are aware of the "production methods" is a matter for conjecture. You don't like people saying "we", but seem happy to assume to know what others think and to use them to support your arguments. Perhaps you should just speak for yourself?

Do most people know the arguments against veal? Just in case someone reading this doesn't... The calf is removed from its mother soon after birth. Humans take the milk that the cow produces for her calf. The calf (which may live its very short life in a shed) is deliberately undernourished in order to make its flesh pale and anaemic. And then its killed and eaten by gourmets.

Regards

QUOTE:

/......

Do most people know the arguments against veal? Just in case someone reading this doesn't... The calf is removed from its mother soon after birth. Humans take the milk that the cow produces for her calf. The calf (which may live its very short life in a shed) is deliberately undernourished in order to make its flesh pale and anaemic. And then its killed and eaten by gourmets.

Regards

And this is the more humane way of producing veal. The use of veal crates makes the whole process even worse.

Like Dave, I would sooner be seen as self-righteous than condone this practice.

I am not a tub-thumper on the subject but I don't like to see practices like this being misrepresented to people who may make a different decision if they knew the facts.

Here is a question - would people rather make an informed decision on the facts or rather not know the facts? I suspect a lot would fall into the latter category

One could of course predict that you failed to note the other side of veal production in the UK - the calves would otherwise be slaughtered at birth, as they are otherwise useless male calves of a milking breed, and they are not 'undernourished' as you claim, as that would lead to less veal from each calf. It might interest readers to note that UK veal production is also overseen and approved by the RSPCA, so perhaps a little less politically-correct posturing might be in order. The colour of the meat (called rose veal in the UK) comes from its diet, not from the calves being anaemic, indeed the much paler colour of Continental veal comes from the calves being fed almost entirely on milk, so your argument is, as one could have expected, internally inconsistent and inaccurate.