Bravo Bourdain! Sooner or later someone takes the gullible public by the hand and leads them back to reality. When in doubt, assume that EVERYTHING PeTA OR H$U$ says are carefully crafted lies meant to advance their agenda of no more animals used by humans FOR ANY REASON! Everything animal right groups do is designed to remove human rights, undercover or "animal advocacy" - for the purposes on fundraising only. Remember, PeTA kills more animals everyday than Michael Vick, H$U$ owns no "humane socities", ASPCA wants to strip your constitutional property rights and American Humane wants to put everybody that the others accuse into a special FBI database...

Posted by: Jade at December 11, 2007 7:57 PM

Wow - so the foie gras industry found a shill veterinarian who they could put on their payroll to say that foie gras isn't abusive. How exciting.

Foie gras is the most hideously abusive food ever made. Google "foie gras" and check out some of the undercover videos taken inside these places by animal protection group and decide for yourself. If you have a shred of decency you'll never touch the cholesterol-packed blob of cruelty known as foie gras.

Posted by: Ctrain at December 12, 2007 10:00 AM

Ctrain
Get over it. You are a limp, spineless grass eater, and need to get your silly concerns in check.

Posted by: bpurmell at December 12, 2007 10:49 AM

Ctrain, sweetie, have you ever noticed there are no time/date stamps on those "horrible" videos? There's a reason for that. The ones which aren't faked outright are tape transfers of 8mm FILM FOOTAGE shot in the '50's and '60's, usually in OTHER COUNTRIES. The Veganist Jihad use many of the same tactics as their counterparts in the Intefada, up to and including convincing gullible morons like you to spread their lies. Congratulations, you're a USEFUL idiot.

Posted by: BadKarma at December 12, 2007 10:59 AM

I wonder what famed chef Wolfgang Puck would think of this? After all, after learning the truth behind what actually goes on when the livers of duck and geese are enlarged 10 times, giving them them the disease known as "hepadic lipidosis," (sounds appetizing) which then becomes the "delicacy" known as foie gras (literally translated as "fatty liver"), he stopped using it. So did Trader Joe's and Whole Foods, to name just a few tiny grocers you may have heard of. Oh right...and the entire city of Chicago has banned the sale of foie gras. And by 2012, the state of California will no longer produce or sell it, leaving Hudson Valley Foie Gras as one of just a couple producers in this country. Interesting how given that information, and seeing the trend overseas where 14 countries have banned force-feeding (including Israel), the owner of HVFG is so vocal about how well his ducks are treated (his workers--many of whom are illegal--are assigned 352 ducks each, to force-feed 3 times a day, and we won't even get into the other working conditions at this plant). I would imagine that given the fact that a recent poll showed that 80% of Americans are opposed to foie gras production, Manager Izzy would be smart enough to cover all his bases...including the media. Personally, if the color blue were banned by 14 countries and establishments and people within my country, even my city, were so vocal about the horror associated with the color blue, I would take that opportunity to do my homework before I believed what Mr.Blue and his posse say. Shame that a reputable newspaper wouldn't think to investigate this before publishing something that so obviously quells one writer's empty rationalization to support such egregious cruelty--because it tastes good. The good news is that in a country where so many animals--both human and non--are oppressed, we still have the power to vote with our dollars--and given the information we learn, to live up to our own ideals, not anybody else's.

Posted by: Jasmin at December 12, 2007 11:19 AM

ummmm....meat butter. love it

Posted by: foieluv at December 12, 2007 11:49 AM

I am an animal lover and do not care about seeing animals misused but i do not run around telling others how to treat there animals. It has become fashionable to treat animals better than human beings.

God Word says in Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

From Websters 1828 dictionary:
DOMINION, n - Power to direct, control, use and dispose of at pleasure; right of possession and use without being accountable; as the private dominion of individuals.

Posted by: Jay at December 12, 2007 3:02 PM

I eat foie gras maybe 2-3x a year. It is such a treat, and no one, I repeat NO ONE, including the aforementioned "PETA types" and "grass eaters" will reuin it for me. Go eat some miso and leave us alone.

Posted by: EssexHound at December 12, 2007 3:24 PM

Foieluv, you say that Hudson Valley employs illegal workers -- any links you want to provide to back up this charge?

Sorry, Wolfgang Puck and Chicago politicians don't hold much water with me. If HVFG is breaking the law in how it conducts its operations, that would be another story. But you'd better supply some proof.

Posted by: visitor at December 12, 2007 4:55 PM

Who knows who is right about the "cruelty" of the situation - a duck has never spoken up to me. All I know is that foie gras is delicious - i'll take as much of it as I can, thank you. As for other regions banning it - the more for us here in NYC! Fantastic!

Posted by: JD68 at December 12, 2007 5:07 PM

um...if animal rights people were just money grubbers, they'd probably go do something actually lucrative. i work at an environmental organization, and I can promise you there is no one here who couldn't make more in the for profit world. why is it so difficult to believe that there are people that work for causes bigger than making money to buy more flatscreen tvs and hummers? have you asked where the money comes from to fund the a studies claiming the opposite point of view? industry. industry has a motive. profit.

duh?

Posted by: wowza at December 12, 2007 5:16 PM

can we ban any thing associated with jasmine.. oh wait.. love the flower.and the rice..and the perfume.. squeeze those little jasmine flowers unitl they squeal.. poor things..LOL .. ban anything named jasmine... and bring on the foie gras.. the more produced ..the more for the masses.. FOIE GRAS in every pot...YUMMMMMMM
thanks Antony for your show.. LOVE IT.. and you.. for showing that not everyone in the world is a vegan idiot..

Posted by: pork chop at December 12, 2007 6:01 PM

Who cares what Puck thinks.. he has sold out long ago.. ever have one of his cardboard frozen pizzas.. yuk...as for Chicago.. they should think about banning lots of thing made in that city before foie gras.. like the politicians.. Stole Foods well.. they "banned" selling live lobsters too.. except of course in Maine.. where the lobster fishing indusrty put them to the test.. HYPOCRITES.. Trader Joes.. never had foie gras to begin with.. so moot point there..and hey Jasmine.. where was this "poll" taken.. in some vegan outpost? FOIE GRAS forever.. a National food of FRANCE

Posted by: pork chop at December 12, 2007 6:09 PM

I can't believe I missed it. Does he give any hints on how to raise your own at home?

Posted by: James Van Dyk at December 12, 2007 9:21 PM

It is absolutely impossible to gauge the relative suffering of animals when they are used for their body parts or products. If you fundamentally have no problem with eating animals, I can see how the process of procuring foie gras is of no particular ethical consequence. So I can buy that it's no more wrong than eating meat.

More importantly, I find the infantile level of discourse on these matters appalling. The idea that animal rights and human rights have mutually exclusive agendas is ridiculous. I have as many issues with PETA as anyone else, but this doesn't color the entire movement.

As a vegan, I am presumably Anthony Bourdain's polar opposite. But he is also perhaps the only entertaining foodie on the air and the whole pottymouthed chainsmoking shtick is adorable. Eat what you will, and keep a friggin sense of humor.

Posted by: LK at December 13, 2007 1:37 AM

Diseased liver - how delicious. Compassion is the sexiest, most delicious thing there is. Go on and eat all the diseased liver you can muster -- and us vegans will live til 100 while you die at 50. No great loss for us. As for you Jade, who claims HSUS, Peta, and all the AR organizations spread "lies" and "propaganda" - that's exactly what everyone thought about the Holocaust camp footage. It was too inhumane and brutal to be REAL! How could anyone do this? This stuff is REAL. I've been to factory farms and seen it with my own two eyes, have you? Do you know what it's like to look into the eyes of a baby calf and feel its desperation and pain (much like your dog -I'm taking you for a yorkie type - would). What a delicious meal! Clearly you haven't been to Candle 79 - where nothing has to die for gourmet eats. Luckily my gorgeous bod is the best advertisement for not consuming the diseased, fatty flesh of animals.

ps
of food several times a day. A farm worker grabs each duck and, one by one, thrusts a metal pipe down their throats so that a mixture of corn can be forced directly into their gullets. In just a matter of weeks, the ducks become grossly overweight and their livers expand up to 10 times their normal size. There is no “free range” or “humane” foie gras available. Even the Pope has spoken out against the atrocious brutality of foie gras “production.”
As a result, ducks raised for foie gras have difficulty standing, walking, and even breathing. Many of them die before the end of the force-feeding cycle, and the mortality rate for ducks raised on foie gras farms is among the highest in the farming industry. Necropsies performed on foie gras ducks have shown extreme obesity, impaction of undigested food in the esophagus, lacerations in the throat, and a proliferation of bacterial and fungal growth in their upper digestive tracts.
Scientific research on foie gras ducks has shown, among other things, that "because normal liver function is seriously impaired in birds with the hypertrophied liver which occurs at the end of force feeding, the level of steatosis should be considered pathological" and that "it is clear that steatosis and other effects of force feeding are lethal when the procedures are continued."

Posted by: Chloe at December 13, 2007 9:56 AM

foie gras is indeed cruel, these animals do get sick and experience great pain until death and it is just without question WRONG to eat the livers of animals prepared for food WHILE THEY ARE STILL ALIVE.

Posted by: chris at December 13, 2007 10:40 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IWN8UGDyC0

my friend was BEHIND THE CAMERA of this footage. oh sorry, i suppose they forgot to include the time date stamp. that means it must be from the '50s and '60s. oh and man, it's in canada, i guess canada isn't a real country or similar enough to the US that we should disregard what is going on in the video.

the term Vegan is far off from any type of the definition of "idiot".

TRUTH: the majority of animal rights people DO NOT want to diminish human rights. we are for both human AND animal rights.

TRUTH: foie gras is cruel and unnecessary, and the only individuals who disagree with this are people who either don't care about animals at all (except maybe their beloved pets.. who are no different from animals we use for food) or people who just refuse to give a crap because their taste buds are too important to them. sad and weak.

Posted by: molly at December 13, 2007 11:14 AM

Seriously, let's hear it for the vegans. You guys who claim to be so in love with animal abuse need to wake up and smell the 21st century. Racism? Not cool anymore. Sexism? Not cool anymore. Cruelty for money and gluttony? Not cool anymore! And by the way, the Bible apparently endorses slavery too, so I wouldn't rely on that alone to set my moral compass. And if you want to take the Bible literally, don't go looking up its words in the dictionary, unless you're reading the passages in their original language and using your Aramaic dictionary.

Posted by: Jack Bronson at December 13, 2007 12:15 PM

I too recently saw a show on Food Network claiming that foie gras is produced from healthy ducks raised in green pastures and eating grass freely until 12 days before their slaughter in which they return to the cozy barn and are force fed (very delicately) two to three times a day until being trucked off to the friendly slaughterhouse where they are humanely killed for their meat.

Bull. Shit.

The truth is, 90% of the world's foie gras is produced in France, with about 10% coming from North America (which an overwhelming proportion coming from Quebec, Canada). I suggest all naysayers check out www.gan.ca which conducted a foie gras investigation THIS YEAR (2007) in a small town just outside Montreal. It is simply absurd to deny the truth of the matter. Ducks can be seen being force fed while vomiting up the food-substance as it is going in. Often, the pipes for force feeding (which, as we all should know, is of utmost importance in the production of foie gras and is in fact the only way to produce the rapid, unnatural growth of the livers of ducks and geese) often (upwards of one of 5 ducks) punctures their necks and/or oesophagus causing the ducks or geese to suffocate slowly in their crates (which are no bigger than their bodies). Might I add that ducks that die during the process are DISCARDED and may not be used for their meat or their livers. Not very sustainable is it? The footage also shows a young Foie Gras factory worker "trying out his new knife" on the neck of one of the ducks; he holds the fully conscious duck upside down while he hacks away at the neck two or three times before the duck falls limp. IF one wants to go on eating foie gras after viewing the footage that's out there, that's one thing, but don't deny it's existence!

Posted by: Allie at December 13, 2007 12:16 PM

I'm sorry, the food is just freaking gross to begin with. Why the ends justify the means to you so called foodies is beyond me. I'm not a vegan; hell I'm not even a vegetarian, but the inherent cruelty and the underlying concept of such a food is too much even for me to swallow.
The French also tested their bombs in Tahiti--paradise--because they just don't give a rat's.

The point is that in a modern 'civilized' society, there is a level of consciousness required on our part on where and how our food is produced.
1) Because it is so heavily industrialized and done on such a large scale, something is BOUND to go wrong there. I don't need to remind you of all the e. coli contaminations, salmonella poisonings, mad cow disesase, and avian flu (among other things) to make my point. We all know that it happens.
2) Food is a justice issue on many levels. Some people have it, some don't. Some have so much of it that they throw it away in mass quantities--so much so that their garbage could feed the people who don't have it.

It's a sense of entitlement and luxury that makes little, unimportant, vulgar people such as yourselves feel proud to be able to eat this kind of crap.

I'm glad you think it's ok because the French do it. Go visit Paris, see if they return the noble sentiment.

Posted by: chrissie at December 13, 2007 12:48 PM

History repeats itself. It sounds cliche' because it is a cliche'. EVERY SINGLE social justice issue ever brought into the public sphere, be it abolition, civil rights, womens' lib, gay marriage, etc... is ALWAYS met with contemptuous resistance. Why? Because if the horrors being addressed are real, it means we have to make a change, and concede that our personal gain has resulted in another's suffering.

Do unto others...

Are animals others? Does the fact that they have complex brains and nervous systems and the ability to suffer give us enough reason to - at the very least - avoid inflicting avoidable suffering on them?

The arguments presented to defend the institutionalized force-feeding of ducks (they are so happy and live longer, and they TASTE SO GOOD) is the same mode of justification that people who want to excuse any oppression use. Infantile self-gratification at any cost: "The economy will crash without them. We take care of them. They are better off with us. They are sub-human. They were put here for our use. How will I continue to make money without them? How will I enjoy life without using them for my personal gain?"

History repeats itself - and if you don't think you would have been one of those people who stood idly by - who was part of the 'norm' that accepted terrible things again and again at any point in history - then the lesson for you is that hindsight is 20/20, so learn to avoid accepting the status quo as reasonable.

The big difference here is that animals can't learn English, organize, and speak up for themselves. They can only physically resist, and cry.

I believe more and more that those of us who are unable to empathize with suffering - who will defend the most brutal behavior for a pleasurable taste, are the same people who stood by and said nothing - and DID nothing at any other point in history where those who suffered were ignored and marginalized.

Animal advocates continually have to point out that these issues are not 'personal-choice' issues. it is not about you and your preferences. It is about each individual animal, and his or her interest in avoiding suffering. It is a social justice issue.

Now I will turn the question on you. Why is it us that have to prove that Foie Gras is cruel? The evidence (the common sense!) is there. How about this: You prove to us - prove to the duck with a metal tube down it's throat - that it is not cruel.

Posted by: Oshua at December 13, 2007 1:04 PM

This is good news... my mouth waters every time I read the words 'foie gras' in a restaurant review on JuliB.com... but I often feel too guilty to order it. No more feeling guilty! Next time I go to Allen & Delancey, I know what I'm ordering. This isnt Chicago, for God's sake, it's NYC!

Posted by: rachel at December 13, 2007 1:10 PM

@Jay: "Dominion" is not a euphemism or an excuse for cruelty. The Queen of England has dominion over her subjects, but that does grant her the right to force the kinds of conditions on her subjects that ducks raised for foie gras face. It's not a viable explanation here.

Posted by: agentk at December 13, 2007 1:38 PM

Important (obvious) edit to my above post: I meant to type that dominion does NOT grant the Queen of England the right to inflict cruelty! Excuse the error.

Posted by: agentk at December 13, 2007 1:59 PM

Rachel--
That's right. This is NYC. We're the capital of the world. We should be setting a better example.

Posted by: Chrissie at December 13, 2007 3:28 PM

Has anyone read "A Modest Proposal" by Johnathon Swift?

http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html

You can justify anything if you like it enough. Even eating babies.

Posted by: Oshua at December 13, 2007 3:40 PM

Jeffrey Dahmer had a penchant for the flesh of young boys. Richard Trenton Chase prefered the taste of women. Jade, Jay and Anthony crave diseased, choleesterol laden, grotesquely enlarged livers from ducks and gesse - Yum , the liver - the organ which produces urea (the main substance of urine.) Bon Appetit savages!

Posted by: karliin at December 13, 2007 3:40 PM

After a bunch of years of tearing my hair in dismay at what strikes me as a total lack of ethics among most of the meat eating world I've learned an important lesson: if a person doesn't care about animals, no amount of conversation is going to change that person's mind. That being said, I've more or less given up on appealing to reason or compassion with such folks. What I now find so galling, is the view of animal rights activists held by meat-eaters. It never ceases to amaze me how ready meat eaters are to see avarice where there is only a desire to do good; see lies and schemes where there is simply evidence of how things are done. Even if you love foie gras and see animals simply as another resource for human consumption, why have such hatred for people who don't? I've heard people say they feel their rights are being infringed upon when someone asks them to use a different ingredient in their dinners... I have to wonder, for all the talk of animal rights activists not showing enough concern for humans (a baseless accusation) which human rights are being furthered by the consumption of a luxury food item like foie gras? What gives?

Posted by: Tinterhook at December 13, 2007 8:41 PM

Being kind to vulnerable creatures has nothing to do with rights. Despite the concept of human rights the majority of people in the world live in horrifying poverty.

I don't eat foie gras because I choose not to harm a creature more vulnerable than myself - even if I have the right to.

Whether we admit it (or not) there is a pecking order on this earth - things will get better ONLY when enough of us stop harming those that have had the misfortune to end up below us on that ladder (the poor, the weak, the sick, and yes, the animals).

One right we all do have is the right to be kind and merciful -be kind to a vulnerable creature this holiday season, not because someone tells you to, but just because you can.

Posted by: Kelly Overton at December 13, 2007 10:25 PM

Ay. Foie gras is good.

Posted by: Jevikq at December 13, 2007 11:19 PM

There isn't much to say to people who attack others for their views to get them to change their minds.

Just ask yourself, when any person seems to be speaking on the side of compassion, whether you agree or not, perhaps it is worth taking a moment of your time to ask why they care so much; perhaps there are elements you think you know but are mistaken on.

If that doesn't do anything for you then eat as much foie gras as you can afford and die a painful fat persons clogged heart death that such ignorance merits.

Much love people.

Posted by: Jamey E at December 14, 2007 12:39 AM

These objections are the same as ones used to defend any kind of abuse: slavery, subjegation of women, children, the poor. "They want to limit our rights." "They aren't treated so badly." "They aren't the same as us." Your rights end where another's begin– a child of six can understand that. Cruelty to animals is morally indefensible, the fact that the result "tastes good" isn't a defense.

Posted by: dan at December 14, 2007 9:38 AM

One last bit of food for thought;

People often say that humans have always eaten animals, as if this is a justification for continuing the practice. According to this logic, we should not try to prevent people from murdering other people, since this has also been done since the earliest of times.
--Isaac Bashevis Singer

We are the living graves of murdered beasts, slaughtered to satisfy our appetites. How can we hope in this world to attain the peace we say we are so anxious for?
--George Bernard Shaw

A man of my spiritual intensity does not eat corpses. --George Bernard Shaw

To my mind, the life of a lamb is no less precious than that of a human being. I should be unwilling to take the life of a lamb for the sake of the human body. --Mahatma Gandhi

"Thou shalt not kill" does not apply to murder of one's own kind only, but to all living beings; and this Commandment was inscribed in the human breast long before it was proclaimed from Sinai. -- Leo Tolstoy

Truely man is the king of beasts, for his brutality exceeds theirs. We live by the death of others: we are burial places! I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men. --Leonardo da Vinci

Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet. --Albert Einstein

By insulting vegetarianism you are insulting you own divinity. Who are you worshipping? -- Rosa Ena

Posted by: Chloe at December 14, 2007 9:54 AM

By the looks of this discussion, the reasons to stop consuming artificially enlarged duck liver are numerous. The reasons to continue the practice, few. it seems to come down to this: 1.) It's a habit (so is heroin) or 2.) You like the taste. Add it up, there is no real comparison ... unless, of course, you like being a selfish prick.

Posted by: PosterBrat at December 14, 2007 11:21 AM

Still no backup to your mudslinging about illegal workers at HVFG? I thought so.

You're comparing foie gras to the Holocaust? Meat-eaters to the Nazis? Shall we flip the coin and explore comparisons between fanatics of the animal rights movement and "fanatics" of other stripes, like religion, for instance?

How tiresome you people are. PETA "campaigns," even those with initally good intentions, always warp into carnivals of lies. Folks, no one will take you seriously unless you start conducting yourselves with a little integrity.

Posted by: Animal lover and meat-eater at December 14, 2007 12:48 PM

Animal lover and meat-eater - you clearly have no integrity. Are you so confused about eating your friends whom you claim to love that you can't stand the thought that some people ACTUALLY say they love animals and choose not to eat them? Why so much hate? Because you inately know you are wrong. Overall - people want to know more about Factory Farming. They want to do what's ethical and what is correct and what is right. They don't care to see pain for a full belly. Lord knows I eat gourmet food constantly - and no creature has to die for it. I've got a lovely clean colon to prove it. I'm sure yours is covered with the rot of stinking flesh - YUM!! You must be pretty foxy.

Posted by: Chloe at December 14, 2007 3:30 PM

Okay to all you people who want to tell yourselves foie gras is humane and perfectly ethical to eat. If that what makes you feel better about your part in the cruel tourture imposed on these innocent animals. Ignorance is bliss

Posted by: Meghan at December 16, 2007 7:45 PM

If you want to know the sad truth behind foie gras, please watch the 11 minute short entitled "Delicacy of Despair":

Part I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbLMZWiARkI
Part II
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T47l1ROKcg

Warning: Very disturbing and graphic, yet true footage.

Posted by: Geoff at December 18, 2007 1:07 AM

Thanks, Geoff, for posting the link to "Delicacy of Despair".

We can debate all day whether or not it is cruel to shove pipes down the throats of innocent animals, and we can debate whether or not we can trust the "un-cruel" label assigned by a veterinarian whose paycheck depends on a public support of the practice, but the video speaks for itself.

Foei gras is cruel. And if cruelty weren't enough, it is unhealthy, it is substitutable, and it is unnecessary. Any vegan, vegetarian, or meat-eater can plainly see that and has no excuse to support the product. If you wouldn't let your cat or dog be treated in such a way, why allow it for another innocent animal?

Posted by: Cassandra at December 18, 2007 6:53 PM

Yummy bring on the Foie Gras. Fuck all of you prissy little pussies that are afraid to even try and produce a perfect Foie Gras. The ducks are happy. For fuck's sake they are being overfed and aren't hating a bit of it. Foie Gras ducks are treated with special care. I am going to go pan sear some right now.

Posted by: Miss Wes at January 14, 2008 11:12 PM

I love foie gras. I eat it often. Foie gras is a big part of french cuisine and I care more about french cuisine than ducks. Getting rid of foie gras would be like getting rid of hot dogs and hamburgers. So if you don't like it feel free to just eat plants but don't try to stop other people from eating it.

Posted by: chef at February 24, 2008 10:13 PM