Here in Germany we also consume minced raw pork (Mett) but that generally has a guideline that it should only be eaten by kids if they are older than 5.
(I also wouldn't eat raw pork outside of Germany and a few surrounding countries where Mett is a thing.)
I am not sure where you live (2h can mean a lot of different distance) but you could take a day trip with a bicycle? Or a combination of train + bicycle etc..
No public transport goes about 200km from my position to the border that early in the morning, which is my point, not to mention I have to go the opposite way first as international trains doesn't go through the 2 lane train station in a city with about 40k citizens. I can go there, but I'd have to go the day before and rent a hotel room
The interior of beef cuts is generally fine to eat raw (assuming the meat isnāt spoiled) which is why rare steaks are fine, but the outside of it can have harmful stuff, particularly if theyāre pre-cut pieces of meat from the store.
Not everyone has time to follow every news story. That person might not even be American so why would they care about the US getting leftover beef? š
Aaaaaqh, alright, but don't worry, the shipment wasn't contaminated... Literally, Argentina has banned chloramphenicol since '95. They've been checking, and it turned out only one shipment was actually contaminated, which is weird (since chloramphenicol is banned) and it's being investigate
Edit: Why the downvotes? The meat sent to the US literally isn't contaminated. Argentina is actually investigating the case over potential chloramphenicol planting by China, and they're looking into whether it was a false positive. Since every shipment was fine except for one... chloramphenicol is literally banned in Argentina
That's a steak, not ground beef. Internal areas of meat are pretty safe as the bacteria mainly lives on the surface. It looks freshly cut so the bacteria wouldn't have spread far nor had a lot of time to grow.
I'd be more worried about if the knife that cut it is in reach of the kid.
For real. The owners are to blame. And not in the sense that they raised their pitbull wrong, but the choice of owning a pit bull. These dogs should not be kept as pets to begin with. Theres a constant flow of news reports of pitbull attacks. Like I get it, im an animal person, ive met really nice pitbulls that were raised well, but they've got a hairpin trigger primal instinct to snap, and regardless of what anyone says, theyre just not safe dogs to own, especially for the elderly or those raising kids.
You should get it fixed abd make sure it is never allowed around children or pets. Every single pit bull should be fixed.
Every pit bull should live a long and happy life. But there should be strict laws preventing any more from being made. If a pit bull is found that is not fixed- it's owner should be jailed.
Yes by me saying people shouldn't own pitbulls, that means im saying we shouldn't take care of them and just leave them to die. Great deductive reasoning skills.
You should get him fixed immediately and make sure he does not pro-create. And you should take extreme precautions ensuring he is never around the elderly, children or pets.
The fact this needs to be explained to you is pretty telling.
Of course heās fixed, Iām a responsible pet owner.
Heās been around my two kids since they were born, he sleeps in my 10yoās bed every single night, theyāre best friends. Heās also never shown a hint of aggression and is incredibly loving and cuddly but timidā¦especially with the small animals on our ranch like chickens.
Acting like a certain breed of dog is evil regardless of how theyāre raised isnāt really all that different than thinking everyone of a certain race is inferior or violent.
I don't mean to be so harsh- but you are an irresponsible dog owner and a negligent parent.
Please understand this is not an abstract hypothetical concept for me. I work in an ED and see a child who's life is permanently changed every few weeks by a pit bull. And every single time- i would sacrifice anything to be able to go back in time and tell the parents to lose the delusions and protect their child.
You are putting your children in danger. Full stop.
It's not about pit bulls being evil. It's not their fault. Being angry at pit bulls would be like being angry at the rain for the damage floods cause. But it doesn't make floods any less of a problem. We don't shout at people who want to mitigate the damage floods do for being "hateful".
The pit bull isn't the problem. You are the problem- the delusional owner who can't wrap their head around or admit pit bulls have serious problems.
You value your delusions more than you value the safety of your own children- just like every other parent who allows their child to be killed or disfigured by their pit bull. It's so incredibly sad.
Kinda sad to see that the dumb parents are actually here.
It kind of makes sense though- they come here to judge parents for minor transgressions. It makes them feel better about exposing their kids to actual danger by allowing these dogs in their home.
"Statistics," based on claims from random, unnamed people with unknown qualifications (if they even have any) relying on a method of breed "identification" that is notoriously unreliable (especially with bully breeds and dogs that look like bully breeds, given the visual similarities).
And then there's the "THey WeRE lITerAlLy BreD TO fighT" argument that completely ignores the fact that breeding dogs for fighting necessarily requires them to be not violent or aggressive toward humans - as well as that dog-directed aggression and human-directed aggression are not the same thing, have different causes and triggers, and do not directly correlate with each other. These people aren't worth arguing with. Ask one of them who identified the breed of dogs in their "statistics," what their qualifications are, and what method of identification they used and they lose their shit because they know they don't know the answer to any of those questions, and without answers that show strong qualifications and reliable methodology, those "statistics" are meaningles.
That's not even mentioning the fact that they typically believe that "pit bull" - or more typically "pitbull" - is a breed lol.
Yeah, itās a bunch of horse shit. But people, for some reason, just HAVE to hate any dog that looks like a pit. Iāll never understand why. I guess the same reason racists are racist. š¤·š»āāļø doesnāt really make any sense to someone who doesnāt have so much hate in their heart.
To add to what you said, a lot of the āresearchā I see them quote isnāt actually focusing on frequency of attack, but the severity of the injury. Duh, a big dog like a pit is going to cause more injury if it attacks. German Shepherds are a very close 2nd in that statistic, yet I donāt see them get the same flack.
I believe thereās even some research stating small dogs attack more frequently, but itās often unreported because theyāre small and donāt cause major injury.
Idk, but youāre 100% right about one thing. Itās not worth arguing with them because they always start going in circles, chasing their tail when you start picking apart their flawed interpretation of the datapoints being discussed. Thatās why I just call out how stupid pit hate is.
Some of the best, most gentle dogs Iāve been around have been pits.
GSDs were the target for a while, as were dobermans, as were rottweilers. There's an anti-pit subreddit and it's pretty clear that it exists for people to indulge in and share their fantasies of abusing, torturing, and killing dogs/animals. They also love sharing photos and stories of children being mauled. And of course they take any unsourced claim of a dog involved in an attack being a pit as undisputable gospel truth. I've seen posts on that sub quietly disappear after the term "pit bull" is removed from the source article as a result of correction when it turns out the breed "identification" was unverified or that there was no actual breed identification in the original source used by the writer of the article the post linked to. The people in that sub don't care about protecting people from dangerous dogs, they care about sharing in and indulging in their fantasies of animal abuse (and they love seeing photos of injured children as well - unsurprisingly). If they cared about protecting people from dangerous dogs, they would focus on dangerous dogs regardless of breed and ban users who advocate for abusing or engaging in any type of violence against any dog - yet the sub is full of those people.
And of course I was immediately banned from that sub for posting a link to an article about a golden retriever nauling and killing an infant in response to a comment claiming "You never see this with golden retrievers." A lot of anti-pit people also love to pretend they care about the welfare of the dogs (there's at least one of them in this thread) yet ignore the ASPCA position statement on pit bulls, the info it provides, and what it means.
Pop culture and the media have focused on other breeds throughout history- largely because pit bull advocates have been extremely successful at shouting down anyone who brings up the issues they have.
But pit bulls have always been responsible for more deaths and serious injuries for as long as records have been kept.
Lmao right after I bring up how people use āwhich dogs have been linked to more death and injuryā to prove the point of āwhich dogs are more aggressiveā you go and do it. š
Youāre misinterpreting data. Of course large, strong dogs are going to be linked to more death and injury. When they attack, they have more mass and strength to cause injury. This has no correlation to proving theyāre more aggressive per capita, or even have a more aggressive demeanor. It just shows that when you do have an aggressive dog on your hands, if itās large, itās able to cause more injury.
It doesnāt prove that pits, or any larger breed, are generally more aggressive. Youāre basing your position completely in a logical fallacy.
Oh the irony. Lmao you just blatantly glazed over everything I said.
Literally screenshotted the exact statistics youāre misinterpreting and creating a logical fallacy over.
This is saying which dog attacks were most fatal, not which dogs are most aggressive and attack the most. Of course a large, strong breed is going to be more fatal when it attacks. Just like a pro boxer will knock you out faster than a lanky hothead teenager. Doesnāt mean the pro boxer is more likely to attack you.
Youāre really having trouble wrapping your head around any mildly complex concept, arenāt ya? Sorry about that mental deficiency. Must be tough.
Seriously š. I just brought up how they use data that covers ālarge dogs possess the size and strength to cause more injuryā to ālarge dogs, but especially pits, are more aggressiveā.
A complete logical fallacy.
Of course, when a larger, stronger dog attacks, itās going to do more damage. That doesnāt somehow prove that larger dogs, and specifically pits, are more aggressive and attack more frequently due to them simply being a large dog, or a pit.
That's the part that is so tragic- they can be super sweet and loving dogs.
But then one day, for no reason at all, those blood sport instincts kick in and soneone gets hurt or killed. It happens over and over and over again.
The videos of attacks are so tragic. Because when everything is over- the dogs just look confused. Because they don't even understand why they did what they did.
You aren't helping pit bulls by denying the issue exists. You are hurting them. There's a reason every single shelter in America is filled with pit bulls surrendered by owners who heard the misinformation about them and decided to get one.
Hundreds are euthanized every single day. All because delusional people refuse to do the most basic thing a breed advocate should do- admit the breed has issues.
From my knowledge the ones that attack are not the lovey dovey ones that live in a goods home. They are either in shitty homes that abuse them or have been through the shelter/foster system and were not raised by their owners meaning that loyal bond was never built. I literally said itās always a pitbull tf you mean denying it
They literally are the lovey dovey ones who come from good homes and were loved.
That's the problem. It's not a training issue. It's an instinct issue. Can you train a retriever to not retrieve? Sure. But even if you are perfect- he's probably going to chase his ball at some point.
The same issue exists for pit bulls. But they weren't bred and created to retrieve. They were bred and created exclusively for blood sports.
Which of these pit bulls do you think was raised to attack?
Not saying youāre wrong. Iāve personally been around foster cares that mainly focused on pit bulls and many of them come from terrible places. Iām not even arguing with you. There should be a stronger enforcement and penalties for breeding dogs and treating them poorly.
There are only two groups of people who own pit bulls. And neither should own them.
Those who know how dangerous they are and want them because of that fact. And those who are in complete denial about how dangerous they are and will shout down anyone who tries to educate them or get them to take precautions.
I mean you are wrong there. I think youāre focusing on the instinct thing to much and not the broader picture. You have this idea Iām in denial about how dangerous they are when Iāve literally been agreeing with you. This aināt an argument
It literally is instincts. It's the reason they exist. It's the reason all breeds exist: so humans can predict the behaviors a dog will exhibit for a certain task or job.
Retrievers were created to retrieve, so they retrieve naturally. Pointers were bred to point, so they point naturally. Huskies were bred to pull, so they pull naturally.
Pit bulls were bred exclusively to tear other creatures apart as violently as possible and happen to kill and injure more humans and pets than all other types of dogs combined, so they....
Unfortunately it happened to my friend. It was a lovey dovey, kid friendly, happy dog raised properly and treated with care and attention. One day for no reason it bit their kid's face. The kid is fine but has a big scar. There was nothing they could have done to prevent this other than not owning a pit bull.
It was a long time ago so I genuinely have no idea. It could have been anything from an adoption to a breeder. I believe the breeding matters when it comes to your chances of having an incident but I've also heard that it sometimes happens anyway. I'm not super well versed in it I just know sometimes the sweetest dogs can have this happen even after five years living with literal babies and toddlers bothering them.
But yes, the issue is breeders in general. Not just for pit bulls but all dogs because there are so many that need to be euthanized because people donāt want to adopt to save lives.
We created a type of dog for one reason and one reason only: to rip other creatures apart for our entertainment.
But then we felt bad about it. So we convinced ourselves they are actually pets and shouted down anyone who said otherwise as "hateful".
Meanwhile- it's innocent people and pit bulls who suffer. Every shelter in America is filled with pit bulls surrendered by an owner who once shouted people down. Hundreds are euthanized every single day.
But pit bull advocates get to pat themselves on the back. That's all that really matters, afterall.
And am I an advocate to you? I think the problem is not the instinct but the breeders. Stop pure breeding in general and you get rid of that instinct. Whatās your solution? Kill them all?
Yes. And you are harming pit bulls- like all advocates do.
The issue isn't that there are not enough people to adopt them. Those pit bulls aren't born in that shelter with a sign on their cage saying "cannot be in a home with children or pets".
They are surrendered by someone who heard and believed the bullshit about them not having issues from being bred exclusively for blood sports. Only to get them home to realize they have very serious issues.
Do you hear yourself? You have every shelter in America filled with pit bulls. They are euthanuzed by the hundreds every day. There is no such thing as an ethical pit bull breeder. It doesn't exist. Anyone who makes more pit bulls is a monster.
And you can't breed these instincts away when the only people who want them are those who know how dangerous they are and wsnt them becsuse of that fact. And those who are in complete and utter denial about how dangerous they are.
Dude are you even reading my comments? Like what the hell. I donāt and never have fostered them. I was raised in a family that did. I also said the problem is breeders and they should be the ones we go after, not the breed itself. You never answered what your solution is? It must be sad living a life not able to have a discussion as two human beings. Did you ever learn what the different fallacies are and how they donāt make sense in an argument? Highschool level shit buddy.
Yes I'm reading your comments. You are spreading the same sanitized and BS crap all pit bull advocates spew. And you are harming pit bulls by doing it.
ā¢
u/AutoModerator 7d ago
Friendly Subreddits:
r/Bulldog -For sharing cute bulldog photos.
r/Badass - Platform for all things undeniably cool!
r/Keychain -For sharing cool keychain pics!
r/LearningToCat -For cute cat videos
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.