0
After slaughter of animal the oocytes are used for culture in vitro whether oocytes are live if yes then who did they live after slaughter of animals?
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoWant this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Is there anyway to eat meat without contributing to the animal abuse done in slaughter houses without becoming a vegetatarian?
That depends on whether or not you keep kosher. One of the goals of kashrut, in regard to the slaughter of animals, is to make it as painless as possible for the animal. If you don't keep kosher though, you might want to look into local farms/meat producers that don't work on a mass basis.
How much does it cost to slaughter a cow?
It depends on whether you are doing it yourself or not. It'll be relatively free if you slaughter your own cattle, but a bit costly if you hire someone else to do it. If you hire someone else to do it, then the costs depends on that butcher, as well as your location.
What is an example of mood in the story lamb to the slaughter?
I think that examples of the mood in Lamb to Slaughter were: Suspense- You were wondering whether or not she would get caught Mystery- There was a mystery, after she covered up how she murdered him Anticipation- You were waiting for them to realize that she could have killed him with the lamb that they were eating.
What culture is the dog from?
The Dog could be from many cultures. It depends what sort of Dog. Whether it is domestic or wild changes what culture it is in.
What is a slaughter lamb?
The correct phrase is "leading a lamb to slaughter." See the related question below for the meaning. This is both an idiom and a literal phrase depending on whether or not you actually have a baby sheep.
What do pyramids have to do with culture?
Pyramids have everything to do with culture. Whether the pyramids of Egypt or Central and South America, these are what is left of great civilizations in which culture was of the utmost importance. The pyramids are the monuments to their cultures.
What term refers to the deliberate and systematic mass slaughter of Europe Jews and others by the Nazis during World War 2?
It is not clear whether you are looking for the word - which is Holocaust, or whether this is a 'please-tell-me-all-about' question, or both.
Does President Obama really want to slaughter horses?
Horse slaughter was never illegal in the USA, it was just made so that the inspection of horse slaughter facilities could not be funded. Without the meat being inspected, it could not be sold. It was a roundabout way to try preventing the slaughter of horses.What happened though was that the slaughter simply moved north and south to be performed in Canada and Mexico instead.What Obama has done is removed the ban on funding, but no funding has actually been put towards it yet.This paragraph is totally incorrect. He did this because horse slaughter was not stopped, it just moved out of the country where it could not be inspected, the slaughter methods could not be confirmed, and the animals suffered during transport. He'd rather that if it has to happen, the USFDA should be able to oversee it.Horses are being sent to Mexico and Canada, but the slaughter plants in Mexico where most of our horses go are regulated by the European Union - the largest purchaser of our horse meat - as are all the Canadian plants. The regulation is at least as good as what we had from the USDA when plants were here, and in some cases better. However, given that there is no humane way to slaughter a horse, it's still absolutely inhumane.Horses are different from food animals because they are prey animals and their flight response makes it impossible to get a clean shot - especially with a captive-bolt. I was in Texas when the plants were open there. I know what I'm talking about from first hand experience.President Obama has said - as a candidate and Senator - that he is opposed to horse slaughter and said he would work to get it banned. So far, he has not done that. This bill however, was not his fault.The removal of the language that defunded the USDA inspection of horse slaughter plants was quietly removed by threelegislators in a closed door meeting as part of the Conference Committee. This kept it from being discussed or having a floor vote in which case it would have been defeated. This was the Federal Budget and it had to pass to keep the government running. Even those legislators opposed to horse slaughter had to sign it - including Obama.He could still stop horse slaughter from being reintroduced by an Executive Order. It remains to be seen whether or not he will do this however.
Why shouldn't the world have slaughter-houses?
It is a general belief among most people who do not understand the workings of animal agriculture that the activities that go on in a slaughterhouse are cruel and inhumane to those animals that are killed for meat, so much so that they believe most animals that go through these plants suffer before they die. This has quite a bit of merit for those few slaughterhouses and farms in North America that decide that following the guidelines for humane handling and slaughter animals is a waste of time that haven't been caught yet by the media, as well as with those slaughterhouses in those countries where such guidelines do not exist such as in India, China or the Philippines. This does not have merit for those slaughter plants that DO follow strict humane handling and slaughter practices of animals. Of course the debate of whether the world should or shouldn't have slaughter houses doesn't just come from concerns of animal cruelty. It also comes from the half-truths about more food and water being available to the human population if animals were not grown or slaughtered for meat. While it would make for more food available, it doesn't exactly answer how land that is best used for grazing will be utilized, nor does it answer question of how such food crops will be managed if killing animals for food or otherwise is made universally illegal (if that is what original question is implying). As far as water is concerned, there will likely be only slightly more because a lot of that water that will not be used to grow slaughter animals will go into being used for food crops. And of course this will not stop the destruction of native animal habitat if the human population keeps growing and keeps wanting more food than what the earth can naturally produce. Of course no more slaughter houses will mean people will no longer be omnivorous or carnivorous, only relying on plants to sustain ourselves. But as mentioned above, if the human population keeps expanding, more land will be needed for people to live on and to grow more food crops on, pushing more native wildlife and plant life to extinction. Less water will be available because it will be used to irrigate crops that shouldn't be growing in a particular arid area in the first place (and where grazing animals like sheep and cattle are best to be raised on instead of food crops). More fossil fuels will be consumed to produce such food crops. However we will digress here. Yes, the activities of slaughter houses is a major concern among those who love and care about animals, but it's all about educating not only those concerned about the slaughter houses practices, but also those who work at such plants so that more slaughter plants can be more humane than today or in the past.
What do animals eat in the Sahara?
It depends on the animal, whether they are a herbivore, carnivore or omnivore. It ranges from plants, to animals such as goats.
Why are human not animals?
because human is a human. ***** Whether we like it or not, humans are animals. We are mammals and belong to the animal kingdom.
Is cattle processing cruel?
No. Of course, it also depends on your definition of "processing," whether you're referring to slaughter or running cattle through a chute to be vaccinated, dewormed, dehorned and/or castrated.
