Pregnant women and children have been warned against eating game such as pheasant, deer and grouse killed with lead shot because it could pose a serious risk to their health.
In an official statement released on Monday, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) said that everyone who ate lead-shot game regularly should cut down on it because it was potentially toxic.Hmm, personally, I don’t eat any lead shot I find in game, I roll it to the side of the plate.
But it turns out it’s just as toxic if it’s left in too long, though ‘just as toxic’ might just mean about as much as second hand smoke, i.e. hardly at all…
Certainly, they had a fight on their hands in trying to put this out:
The release of the FSA's advice follows a row last week after its expected publication last Wednesday was delayed following disputes in its expert advising panel, the lead ammunition group, over the terms and extent of the warning.Hardly surprising. It was, however, welcomed by a certain wildlife pressure group…
The Wildfowl and Wetland Trust (WWT) has been at the forefront of campaigns against lead shot. Its analysis showed lead shot was to blame for poisoning thousands of waterbirds.And I guess, since they weren't making much headway with that claim, why not try frightening humans by suggesting it’s poisoning them?
Not that the ones who drink liquid nitrogen will probably care, but still…
Christopher Graffius, head of communications for the BASC, said the risks of eating lead-shot game "should not be exaggerated" and insisted it posed a minimal risk to consumers.
He said that "pound for pound", chocolate had more lead in it than game.Now, you’re trying to handle an emotive subject with science. You should really know that’s not going to work!
And as Clarissa points out, it's interesting to see how the animal right lobby is branching out to previously unheard depths of insanity. It's not really surprising, since they are clearly losing the argument.
"since they are clearly losing the argument"
The evidential and statistics-based argument, certainly, but not, I think, the political one. The animal rights crazies are right in there with the "passive smoking" loons and the "make alcohol so expensive only our friends can afford it" nutters. The only difference (so far) is that the animal rights crowd tend to be more physically aggressive (a la "offended" Moslems) than their fellow authoritarians.
Some people have to worry about lead shot in pheasant, deer and grouse. Ya don't say ?!
Scrubbing off tyre marks is a concern hereabouts.
(I'm joking....but how the other half live, eh...)
Hmm, personally, I don’t eat any lead shot I find in game, I roll it to the side of the plate.
Who shoots deer with a 12 bore?
Answer - no one.
Most shells are lead free nowadays, and shooting water fowl like geese and ducks with lead is illegal.
Just scaremongering, for the usual reasons.
What's the betting that most of the 'animal rights' gang are in favour of abortion?
In my opinon if you need a shotgun to hit a target you should not be shooting anything.The badger cull is a subject i am feeling strongly about the max distance from the badger is pretty close before you can shoot.the reason is the caliber of weapons and ammo used.the badger is a digger has a large bone structure in the front ie head and front legs.So a well aimed shot between the head and shoulder is needed.I as a former sniper can tell you the chances of a shot deflection are high the badger then bolts and dies a long painful death.Off topic a bit but friday night booze equals a little rant sorry love the blog
This appears to be yet another scare-mongering campaign by a single issue focus group - probably financially maintained by the taxpayer - who are unable to see any other person's point of view. They are paid a salary, stipend, or call it what you will, as long as they spout forth their one-sided arguments. You would almost think they were doing a form of internship for entering politics?
If yuou accidentally bite on shot (lead or otherwise) in a bird it will likely make your teeth unhappy.
Back in the very good old days - lead shot was swallowed deliberatly to treat 'rising of the lights'!
"The evidential and statistics-based argument, certainly, but not, I think, the political one."
Now that's a depressing thought...
"Scrubbing off tyre marks is a concern hereabouts."
"Who shoots deer with a 12 bore?
Answer - no one."
I'm guessing the modern poacher has access to better weapons?
"What's the betting that most of the 'animal rights' gang are in favour of abortion?"
Well, of course! They don't really love animals, they hate people.
"In my opinon if you need a shotgun to hit a target you should not be shooting anything."
Unless it's a burglar?
" They are paid a salary, stipend, or call it what you will, as long as they spout forth their one-sided arguments. You would almost think they were doing a form of internship for entering politics?"
Heh! Quite so...
There's some debate over the lead content in chocolate over at Mark Avery's blog
The Countryside Alliance have made a start on qualifying their claim, but not moved far enough yet according to Mark.
Post a Comment