Amusing headline and all that, but from another perspective...
What the government is saying here is "far better that these people go hungry than be exposed to a very small risk of getting sick." Instead of providing the information on the risks to the shelters and stressing how absolutely vital proper cooking and sanitation is, they tell the homeless to starve.
Plus, y'know, wild game may not have been injected with hormones, artificially fattened with grain-heavy diets, sprayed down with insecticides, and so on to a great enough extent to be declared "healthy".
All this, by the way, is for the good of the homeless, and they should be grateful that everybody is so concerned about their health.
Instead of providing the information on the risks to the shelters and stressing how absolutely vital proper cooking and sanitation is, they tell the homeless to starve.
It's pathetic, isn't it? If we didn't laugh at the headline, we'd be crying at the article. (Or angry. Me, more the angry.)
no subject
What the government is saying here is "far better that these people go hungry than be exposed to a very small risk of getting sick." Instead of providing the information on the risks to the shelters and stressing how absolutely vital proper cooking and sanitation is, they tell the homeless to starve.
Plus, y'know, wild game may not have been injected with hormones, artificially fattened with grain-heavy diets, sprayed down with insecticides, and so on to a great enough extent to be declared "healthy".
All this, by the way, is for the good of the homeless, and they should be grateful that everybody is so concerned about their health.
no subject
It's pathetic, isn't it? If we didn't laugh at the headline, we'd be crying at the article. (Or angry. Me, more the angry.)
no subject