PDA

View Full Version : New Breed of Guinea Pigs



kurzon
10-23-04, 09:24 am
Well, it appears that scientists have developed a new breed that is supposedly larger and heavier. It's touted as a super guinea pig created specifically for consumption in Peru. Here is the news article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3946771.stm

I don't mean to make anyone queasy but I thought it was a relevant info. It makes me sad knowing that guinea pigs are still being used as..."guinea pigs" but I love my pigs even more.

loves2travel
10-23-04, 10:10 am
a similar article was brought a few days ago and the thread ended up being locked.

My Baby Mu
10-23-04, 10:13 am
That is gross that they eat them. It would be fun to have a super-sized pig.

CritterLuver419
10-23-04, 11:57 am
:( that's so sad... I think people should join together and protest!

pebbles
10-23-04, 12:10 pm
I don't like that they eat them either but we could say the same of any animal. they are all wonderful.

cinn&sprinslave
10-23-04, 12:11 pm
That is sooo sad =0(

kurzon
10-23-04, 12:31 pm
What do you all think of these new, bigger guinea pigs? Pebbles is right, most of us eat animals, some of them just happen to be other people's pets.

I just hope the new breeds they create don't make the animals more burdened than if they were wild. For example, some 'real' pigs are bred to have such large amounts of lean meat that they often have heart attacks and die during handling and transport. (Imagine if someone purposefully engineered you to be overweight or fat before you were born).

mncavylover
10-23-04, 05:14 pm
I think that's the point, sad as it is, kurzon. It's just like genetically engineered pigs or chickens... that's why I'm a vegetarian. Yuck.

loves2travel
10-23-04, 05:18 pm
yuck. yuck. yuck.

Starbucks
10-24-04, 04:41 am
i wonder how big they are compared to our little guys. the article didnt really say.

it is a shame that they are being made JUST for the food industry... but that would be neat to have a big one as a pet. i just hope they are as healthy as regular piggies because of the experiments. poor guys. we should protest it.

mncavylover
10-24-04, 12:52 pm
Yes, I hope they are healthy and not just overgrown. A fat little pig would be cute, but not if they're only bred for food. Thanks for bringing this up, kurzon, it's an important topic.

loves2travel
10-24-04, 12:55 pm
starbucks, we SHOULD protest, but it wouldnt be right. Unles you're a vegetarian, it would be wrong to protest the consumption of one animal while we happily chow down on others. My first intinct when i read your post was "yeah! we should do that!" thn i thought about it....... good idea though.

mncavylover
10-24-04, 01:11 pm
Well, I think some of us could protest--I'm veggie now, yay!
I totally agree though, that if you're eating one you can't charge anyone with eating another. Speciesism sucks, like peta says.

loves2travel
10-24-04, 01:26 pm
yea, lol, mncavylover can protest. I can protest on mondays, thursdays, and fridays. LOL

mncavylover
10-24-04, 01:33 pm
Yeah, I remember that! That's funny, l2t. Sounds like a schedule...

Starbucks
10-25-04, 02:38 am
starbucks, we SHOULD protest, but it wouldnt be right. Unles you're a vegetarian, it would be wrong to protest the consumption of one animal while we happily chow down on others. My first intinct when i read your post was "yeah! we should do that!" thn i thought about it....... good idea though.
oh i meant about the experimentations. it seems like animals have no rights in this world.

im sorry to confuse everyone, i didnt mean about the food consumption. i mean although we are all against it (eating cute little piggers) i totally agree with what everyone said about protesting one animal if you eat another. that wasnt what i meant.

hope this clears it up.

jennz11
10-25-04, 01:56 pm
How cruel!! I can't believe some people would create a guinea pig just so people could eat them!!! How could they do that??!!! its absouletly horrible!!

CavyCrazyMom
10-25-04, 06:11 pm
How cruel!! I can't believe some people would create a guinea pig just so people could eat them!!! How could they do that??!!! its absouletly horrible!!
Kinda the same thing as cows. They are kept in small areas so they can't move around a lot. That way the meat is more tender. (do you think that's terrible? Do you eat beef??) The thing that I think people aren't looking at is that in some countries that's what they eat. And it's acceptable there. And although I think it's revolting, I'm not going to say that they are wrong. It's a different culture, and you have to be open minded even if you don't agree. Maybe they think eating chicken is revolting...you know what I mean?? I would NEVER allow that to happen here in America...but if I grew up in a country where we don't have a McDonalds on every corner and any kind of animal would be my next meal or I starve...

And I'm sorry if the above offended anyone, but I tend to look at the reality side of it. I love my pets...but some people aren't lucky enough to grow up as we did with pets and fast food. And obviously I would never think about trying that meal seeing as I did grow up fortunate enough to be able to distinguish pets and 'food'.

roosterboy
11-12-04, 08:17 pm
Cavies were originally domesticated as a food animal. It is because of this that we now have them as pets, and they are so common. I've read they eat 60 million a year down there. Compare that to the chinchilla which is not eaten and is all but extinct.

As with any farmed animal, it is only natural that it be cared for, and played with by the young members of the group. My uncle had a pet chicken when he was young. When I grew up, we had a swimming pool full of bass. We all grew up reading stories about friendly farm animals. There is a symbiosis where we do eat animals, but we do care very well for them.

hoispoer
11-12-04, 09:24 pm
Even though it is sad they eat them. That is their culture from way back. Protestors should probably back down on this one and just enjoy the ones that are here and not there. Overthere that may be like our Chicken.

AngelsCavies
11-13-04, 01:07 am
im sorry but experiments. thats messed up. It would be cool to have a big piggie but that made me sad and by looking at the little inocent faces makes me more sad too. :(

agpiggy
11-13-04, 01:22 am
im a veg and its mainly only because i grew up with cows and sheep etc. i used to have a pet cow called daisy and a lamb called snow white!!

jhoban
11-13-04, 03:26 am
I dont understand vegetarians. I have one argument to that whole subject, and if it could be explained, then I would let my complaint go with ease.

People usually become vegetarians because they realize they are eatting a poor defenseless animal. What I dont get is that plants are living breathing things too. Why is it ok to eat one living thing, but not another. Thats like saying I dont eat meat, but I will eat fish. Why?

critterlover
11-13-04, 04:31 am
The answer to your complaint is 'needless suffering'.

People don't necessarily become vegetarians because they don't want to eat another living being. I think it's because they object to the way animals suffer before and during their death. Needlessly. We don't need meat to survive. Plants don't have the higher brain functions to suffer the way animals do.

Most animals have a lot in common with us, having eyes, a nose, a mouth, a similar digestive system, pain receptors etc. So because we've experienced pain ourselves, we can understand what they're feeling when we see them suffering. It's obviously hard for us to relate to plants in the same way.

Have you seen the 'Meet your Meat' video? The reason people eat fish and not other meats is because the conditions fish live in (for instance, wild salmon) causes them far less suffering than the conditions veal calf (for instance) live in.

jhoban
11-13-04, 05:28 am
We have only begin to touch on all the ways that our world works. How the heck does anyone know the a tree does not suffer horribly when a saw passes through it. How do we know that a blade of grass cant think for itself. Many plants resond to the environment in order to survive. That there tells me there is some level of intellegence. What is the difference if chickens or corn are kept in horrid conditions. It is all living things that we need to survive. It is the way of the world.

Sorry if I sound like a jerk. I am not meaning to be. I just have a hard time seeing how one life can be considered more important than another, no matter what life that is.

mom to cujo
11-13-04, 07:11 am
I work with a woman from Ecuador who grew up eating guinea pigs and was surprised I have them as family members. Many latino cultures do eat them and even though it bothers me and I can't imagine doing it, like was said previously, that is just the way it is there.

A few months ago there was an Ecuadorian festival in my area and on the local news they actually showed roasted guinea pigs which I felt was totally unnecessary and actually complained to the station. They could have mentioned it but not actually shown a platter of them. Now THAT really upset me.

aqh88
11-13-04, 12:28 pm
Well I can't say plants don't feel cause I don't know but how do you keep a plant in a horrid condition? Animals require more than plants. Corn in a field is just growing like the grass and is fertilized, sprayed for pests and weeds, and sometimes even watered. I guess if you just forget to water your house plants that could be plant abuse. You can grow a plant easily in a pot and it shows no ill effects but an animal requires space. You can't keep a guinea pig in a 1x2 cage without it showing some behavior and health changes. I do see your point since in many cases animals can't tell us how uncomfortable they are anymore than plants can. Fish being 1 example that is often kept in very bad conditions but noone calls abuse on it because they don't really show pain. Still plants don't seem to suffer more being raised for food than they would just growing wild unless you count the weeds killed to save the corn.

lilouisianagal
11-13-04, 01:22 pm
Their weight doesn't seem that much. "super-guinea pig is almost twice the normal size, weighing just over 1kg (2.2lb)." I assume that they are saying that the normal one is 2.2lbs so the super is probably about 4 1/2 lbs.

critterlover
11-13-04, 02:27 pm
Since when does debating intelligently make you a jerk?

Maybe plants can experience suffering in some way, obviously we have no way of finding out for sure. The point is we need plants to survive, but eating meat is a lifestyle choice. That's the difference. That's why cock-fighting, for instance is cruel. People do it because it gives them pleasure even though it is not necessary to their survival.

DigitalVixen
11-13-04, 04:17 pm
Actually meat is necessary for healthy human life. Meat is not some life choice it offers proteins and other nutrients that make humans healthier. You may argue that Vegetarians live healthy lives... not true it is proven that vegetarians get weaker in some areas. We need both, look at some animals it is not a choice it is instinct and humans have them too. Since the dawn of time we have eaten meat. I am not saying vegetarians are wrong I believe in free choice just don't look down upon meat eaters its in our blood. If God didn't mean for it to be ate he would of made bad things happen to us ( or what ever you believe in). Just like incest is wrong thus the babies get disformed or turn out wrong.

Piglet
11-13-04, 04:22 pm
Humans do not need meat to survive

mncavylover
11-13-04, 06:20 pm
AngelsCavies: I agree on the animal testing, it's just wrong.

Agpiggy: Cute! I would have loved pets like that when I was younger. I have allergies, though, so that's not really possible because of the mass quantities of hay needed. I can take the bit of hay to feed cavies, just not that much!

jhoban: We know that they have no nervous system, and therefore they cannot feel pain. They have a reaction, yes, but so does every living thing. It is part of the classification of living things, scientifically. Plants do not have any use for feeling pain. Humans and animals feel pain because it tells us that we should not be doing that particular activity (ie touching a hot stovetop). It allows us to learn that these are not good things to be doing, and motivates us to learn from our experiences. We can get out of these situations because we can move. Plants, however, not being mobile, have no need for such a system. They are stuck where they are, no matter what, so this type of learning means nothing to them.

DigitalVixen, your arguments are irrelevant. We don't need meat to survive at all. In fact, it's been proven that meat is a carcinogen, and that it has been linked to heart disease, blood clots, high blood pressure, diabetes, etc.

And as for proteins? Hah! That's a laugh. The average human eats lots more protein than what they need, even vegetarians. It's a proven fact. It's even true that too much protein is linked to osteoperosis.

Also, what nutrients can't we get from plant sources that we got from meat?

Studies have also shown that people who go vegetarian have stronger immune systems. Impotence, asthma, heart disease, arthritis, osteoporosis, clogged arteries, and other diseases are known to be helped along by eating meat.

DigitalVixen
11-13-04, 07:07 pm
Just to let everyone know - the last thread with my name on it that talks about humans needing meat in order to survive was posted by my fiancee, (hoispoer) thinking he was on his name - but my account was the one signed in. In most cases, health websites say that we do, in fact, need some source of meat to survive but I know of 100% vegetarians as well. He's very open about his opinions as anyone should be, please don't take offense to him as he's not trying to be rude - just get his opinion out there like the rest of you :)

roosterboy
11-13-04, 07:16 pm
Without farmers and science, we might not have our pets. The dwarf hamster in the American pet trade came from descendants of lab hamsters from England. The cavy as we know it came from the food trade of South America. Every other non exotic pet animal is a food animal somewhere.

The super cavy is supposed to be about seven pounds. It is not raised for experiments, it is raised for food. One day we will have them as pets.

Plants studied in electrographs went signal crazy when a plant was destroyed in the room they were in. They do have "feelings".

Next people will be saying we should not have houseplants and pets because it is cruel and unnatural for them. So many of them do die. We wouldn't have a need for a single shelter or SPCA, if we just banned having pets, right? Perhaps it is the pet trade that is responsible for the cruelty to the animals? Isn't that the meat argument? No meat, no cruelty? No pets, no cruelty? The reason plant nurseries sell so many plants is because that many are dying somewhere. Stop the killing. Ban plant nurseries? A little perspective goes a long way.

Predators are not the end of a species. Predators are the reason animals stay healthy. Science with animals keeps us healthy, and in turn we learn about the animals to keep them healthier.

Go organic and free range. Stop eating mass produced meat and produce. But it is still okay to eat. There has got to be a balance to the equation.

DigitalVixen
11-13-04, 07:57 pm
I have to salute you, roosterboy. You had a great opinion about this.

critterlover
11-13-04, 08:23 pm
It's true that some vegetarians have health problems. One of the common problems is anemia: they don't get enough iron in their diet. That's caused by lack of information, not because they need meat.

roosterboy, I totally agree with you about going free range if you feel you must have meat. I think we as consumers are way too removed from how our food gets to our plates. I wonder how much meat people would really eat if they had to catch it and kill it themselves.

BTW, when you read studies about the 'necessity' of eating meat, be sure to check who sponsored the study. The studies that say eating eggs won't raise your cholestrol are designed and run by the (guess what!) egg producers. The same with dairy. You see commercials on the t.v. all the time suggesting strongly that if you don't drink milk, your bones will turn to mush. Guess who paid for that commercial? Why is it that India has a much lower rate of osteoporosis that in North America and yet we eat way more dairy products than they do? And isn't it interesting that just before Easter, someone always comes out with a study saying chocolate is good for you. Don't believe everything you read or see on t.v.

GuineaTV
11-13-04, 08:36 pm
Everyone watch the hilarious www.thmeatrix.com and then click to find humane alternatives to your current sources of animal products, including milk, eggs, and meat. You don't have to buy meat that was raised through animal suffering if you choose not to. I've been buying organic milk and eggs for a while because of the hormones and antibiotics in everything.

lilouisianagal
11-13-04, 11:59 pm
::after regaining composer from nearly dying of laughter:: dat der was funnnnnny!

Correction: www.themeatrix.com (http://www.themeatrix.com)

mncavylover
11-14-04, 03:26 pm
Without farmers and science, we might not have our pets. The dwarf hamster in the American pet trade came from descendants of lab hamsters from England. The cavy as we know it came from the food trade of South America. Every other non exotic pet animal is a food animal somewhere.
It may be true that these were bred by labs etc. However, I still do not think that is right at all. If that's where they came from, it's done and voer with. Nobody wants to give up their pets now. However, if there was a way to prevent the lab from making these creatures, then we wouldn't even know about them today, therefore we would not miss them at all.


The super cavy is supposed to be about seven pounds. It is not raised for experiments, it is raised for food. One day we will have them as pets.
However, they were made in a lab. See above.


Plants studied in electrographs went signal crazy when a plant was destroyed in the room they were in. They do have "feelings".
They react, yes, because that's one of the characteristics of life. However, they do not actually feel pain like we do.


Next people will be saying we should not have houseplants and pets because it is cruel and unnatural for them. So many of them do die. We wouldn't have a need for a single shelter or SPCA, if we just banned having pets, right? Perhaps it is the pet trade that is responsible for the cruelty to the animals? Isn't that the meat argument? No meat, no cruelty? No pets, no cruelty? The reason plant nurseries sell so many plants is because that many are dying somewhere. Stop the killing. Ban plant nurseries? A little perspective goes a long way.
Having pets is debatable, but that's a whole new topic that I'm not getting into here. We aren't saying that there should be no meat. That is some peoples' belief. We just want the cruelty to end in how they are treated. This does not mean that there will be no meat at all, just not the awful treatment and death.

roosterboy
11-15-04, 11:47 am
(Russian dwarf hamsters are the same as the original ones collected on the stepps of Russia and Siberia. They are merely descendents and have not been altered.)

As for the cavy, just breeding the larger ones together will produce larger ones. The breeding was done by students at a university, with records, yes, but that doesn't mean the super cavy is anything created unnaturally. The "super cavy" title is just media sensationalism to get us to read the story. The genetics were always there. If left to breed on their own, in their natural habitat, the size would revert back on its own, to the regular size.

But check this out. Their natural cousin, the capybara, lives in swamps down there in South America. Preyed upon extensively by anacondas, the world's largest snake, the population has bred itself up to 100 lbs! This was in nature's lab, where the same selective breeding program has happened because the small animals were eaten first.

I agree with you guys here. I am definitely a full supporter of free range, no hormone, and organic foods, and we do eat those in our home, heck yeah, as much as possible. That Meatrix movie is a true picture of corporate farming, which is truely gross and cruel. I have passed that link on, for others to see.

But keep in mind that merely with selective breeding, not genetic altering or hormones, the 65 million cavys that are now eaten yearly, could soon become only 20 million cavys. That is alot less death, isn't it?


if there was a way to prevent the lab from making these creatures, then we wouldn't even know about them today, therefore we would not miss them at all. We aren't saying that there should be no meat. We just want the cruelty to end in how they are treated.

mncavylover
11-16-04, 08:03 pm
I see your point, and I wish that things were left to their own devices that way, instead of being accelerated by lab procedures.

I agree that it is a lot less death, but are these large cavies like the hormone-ridden chickens, just growing at an accelerated rate? Or, are they just that--large cavies?

The logic depends on which one it is.