Should the consumption of newborn animals be banned?

Consumption of newborn animals: tradition versus ethics

Consuming newborn animals is one of those practices that, upon closer inspection, proves difficult to justify. Yet, it is the pocketbook and tradition that sustains it. The discovery of tiny, almost embryonic chicken thighs in a frozen bag has peine the controversy over sacrificing young livestock. Is it sarracena acceptable to eat creatures that have not enjoyed a single week of life? The debate pits those who defend respect for animal life against those who view it as a cultural and economic matter.

The economics of the piglet: why sacrifice at 4 kilos

To understand why these animals are consumed, one must look at the production system. In small ruminant farming operations, ewes must be pregnant regularly to continue producing milk. From these births come lambs that, in the case of males, are not suited for dairy production. The most profitable alternative is to sacrifice them while still nursing, often only days old. A piglet sells for 4 kilos, whereas raising it until it reaches 100 kilos drives up feeding costs over months. The math is simple: for the producer, selling the newborn piglet is extra income that compensates for the cost of milk. Something similar happens with young lambs, which are sacrificed shortly after birth.

The paradox of the 'adult' chicken

The chicken we commonly eat is also not an adult animal. Those sold in trays are sacrificed between the sixth and eighth week of life. In other words, if compared to the natural lifespan of the species, it is still a newborn. The 'cherry' chicken, being smaller, takes this to the extreme. In intensive farming, a broiler chicken will never see the outdoors or grass.

The question is therefore not just age, but also the conditions under which they lived.

Nature is not Disney: the counterargument

Those who defend the consumption of young animals appeal to biology. In nature, predators preferentially hunt young creatures, which are easy prey. Some species barely reach their first year of life; survival rates can be 50%, 10%, or even 0.1% in extreme cases. Nature is a farm where young animals are the main course. If humans do not consume them, other animals will.

As a curiosity, in the Philippines there is *balut*, an egg fertilized with a duck embryo, considered an aphrodisiac. It is another way of consuming what is about to be born, although in this case it is an egg.

Towards a more ethical consumption?

Amidst all this, there is a third way: not banning animal consumption, but improving the conditions in which they live and are sacrificed. It is argued that compassion distinguishes us from other animals. We can eat meat without causing unnecessary suffering by improving farms and slaughterhouses. But human empathy is selective: we are moved by fat piglets, while crushing insects or not considering the pain of plants.

In recent years, activists like Gary Yourofsky have popularized the idea that meat consumption is a form of violence. His videos circulate online and have inspired a generation of vegans. Although his discourse is radical, it raises an uncomfortable question: why does a dog deserve protection and a young lamb not?

Therefore, a total ban seems unlikely in the short term. Gastronomic tradition and production economics will continue to put piglets and young lambs on the table. But awareness of animal suffering is advancing. Perhaps in a decade, consuming newborn animals will be as niche as fur. Or perhaps reality will remain too unpleasant.