Taco Bell joins Europe's Horse Meat Parade...

I really don't get it. Why is horse so much worse that chicken or cow?

---

It isn't. You eat meat or you don't. It should be disclosed, of course (I'm no fan of mystery meat), but if you want to eat horse, deer, duck dog, frog, whatever - what of it?

What makes horses so much more unworthy of eating than cow?

I can only assume its because Americans, in general, don't eat horse. We don't raise it to be eaten. Horses are raised for entertainment, gaming, and glue. Cows and pigs are raised to be eaten.

I don't see anything wrong with eating horse, as long as I know I'm eating horse.

And I love frog legs. Yum!

We all know what happens when a horse can't race anymore. They're put down without another word.

Who wouldn't want to bite into a blue ribbon steak?

Tempting!

Jane, muscle is what meat is. The general rule is that the further from the head you go, the more tender the meat. So hindquarter muscles, which are the most used, are the most tender.

I personally don't have a problem with eating horse or any animal. I'd even eat cat or dog. But I do think disclosure is absolutely necessary in any food.

---

Agreed. Cows seem so much squishier! I don't specifically know that horse or cow is more or less tender than the other as I've never had horse. I just know that meat is muscle and the other rule. But horse could be tougher for other reasons.

---

Plus, I'd guess that cows probably have more fat in between the muscle. So that adds to the tasty factor too. Though I've had ostrich which is VERY lean. And that was delicious! So you never know.

---

Horse was knowingly consumed in the UK until Anna Sewell wrote the first book to project human thoughts and feelings on to an animal. If Black Beauty had been about a pig we'd all be kosher/halal.

" Also when you consider that consumers buying hamburgers, beef tacos or burritos are expecting BEEF not horse meat. So when it's found out the meat used and consumed wasn't beef it's downright deceptive."

I know. That's why, in my post you responded to, the third sentence was " It should be disclosed, of course (I'm no fan of mystery meat), but if you want to eat horse, deer, duck dog, frog, whatever - what of it?". My use of the word "unworthy' was confusing, though. Sorry about that.

My point was, if you're eating meat (and I do, on occasion, especially when I hunt, which is not often), you're killing an animal to eat its flesh. What difference does it make what the animal looks like? I do agree on full disclosure of exactly what you're eating, even plants. All Monsanto products should be clearly marked.

Banned actually, but failing that, clearly marked.

Completely understandable. Dogs and cats aren't commonly eaten here but they are in other countries.

The difference is strictly emotional - and understandable.

They should ABSOLUTELY be clearly marked. Many are just responding to this with disgust and outrage. I have only eaten horse once, by accident, as it's called hamburger here and served in deli meat form. I assumed, wrongly, that it was beef. It tasted like beef, just quite lean. In retrospect, I reevaluated my attitude about it and no longer see a difference between that and any other animal, I guess. I personally don't want to eat it, but I see no problem with it being served and it doesn't outrage me. I wouldn't eat rabbit, dog or cat, either. As long as it's not an actual pet, I don't see the issue. Hell, I can't even bring myself to ear reindeer, due to the US Christmas traditions and it's sold here.

I would be a lot more concerned with harmful items not being labeled like Monsanto products and aspartame.

---