You might want to look into your source if you wish to know for sure what you're getting. Apparently "free range" and "free run" has no legal definition in the U.S. Some farms will apply that label simply because the shed has a window, or maybe the cages are a few inches larger than average. There is no standard. Look for a farm that markets their eggs by offering information about how their hens truly to get to roam around in the way you envision. I've seen some farms at markets offer photos and histories of their operations to show you what they're about. Especially since the issue is becoming more widely known, some farms have positioned themselves as the true alternative.

* * * * *

EDIT: And I've always found it a bit funny to hear the "fish aren't animals" and "fish don't have any feelings" statements.

Fish have muscles (ie. meat...flesh....) and they have nerves, which means they can feel pain. How is this different from cows, chickens, pigs, etc.?

I've read a BBC article reporting on findings by Oxford University researchers who say that lobsters don't feel pain when they're boiled alive. They have nerves but the scientists (biologists who are paid to understand things I don't,) say that the peripheral nervous system doesn't really interpret pain, just provoke a fight-or-flight response in the few seconds it takes for them to succumb to the high temperature. I'm pretty sure that fish are more highly evolved than lobsters, but I can't say for sure that they feel pain in the same sense that we do. They're still animals and meat in my mind.

If it smells like fish, and tastes like chicken,...it's meat

I hear this one all the time. Though, I've never had it start an argument.

There's a breed of pesky pescatarians who like to call themselves vegetarians.
Heck, I even have a "vegan" friend who eats fish but not dairy, eggs, etc.

Many people don't consider fish or poultry "meat", just beef. I don't entirely understand.

Edit:
Aha! Looks like Jewels pointed out it's a cultural understanding. Now that seems to make more sense.

As for those people who told her she misunderstood the word "animal" - that's just harsh. If it's cultural, it was lost in translation a generation or two back. Kudos to her for standing up and saying why she learned to classify things differently.

This thread is proof that TFPers will post about anything.

The title may have well been 'is water wet'. Odds are we would have 3 pages of responses just the same.

Hey, that's pretty cool. Either way, I'm sure lobsters would rather not be boiled. Provoking a fight-or-flight response is enough to convince me.

Yes, even down to the Jews saying that water is wet except when Moses parted the Red Sea.

Nice observation.

My ethnicity has everything to do with it. The rule as I grew up was that meat and dairy were not allowed at the same table. But when we had fish, dairy was okay. Cattle and chicken have legs and live on land, fish don't. Maybe it's the Hebrew translation, but I'm fairly certain these thoughts (right or wrong, according to who?) have been around for at least a couple of thousand years.

Secondly, I stated my opinion. Period. Yes, it is definitely open to interpretation. I'm surprised that the dictionary definition is the end-all for TFPers. :orly: Here's another different opinion.

The OP asked for opinions (poll) and I stated mine.

This is true. Every lobster I have come aross would rather be steamed!!:thumbsup:

Either way, that's how you turn lobsters into meat.

3 pages of semantics.

I became too staggered to realize the true porpoise of the argument.