Sadly roadkill usually doesnt die quickly, which leaves plenty of time for the body to put out all sorts of chemicals like adrenaline and shit which makes the meat taste worse. Im no expert at all but ive heard a few tines from hunters that an instant kill is important for the quality of the meat.
The livestock industry has known since the 1970’s that animals experiencing stress prior to slaughter undergo metabolic reactions. These reactions can reduce the quality and taste of meat. The same principles apply to wild game killed in the field.
That means that big kills in the past by hunters where they wound the animal and follow it until it drops tasted terrible. But I guess bad tasting meat is better than not feeding the tribe at all.
But but but YOU said there’s no difference! Can’t trust ANYone these days… :(
🚗
Disclaimer: I don’t have a driver’s license and I’ve never seen roadkill that looked fresh and intact enough that I would’ve even remotely considered eating it. Just amused that people instantly reject the general notion of eating anything killed by a car.
One massive difference is that a hunter will have observed the animal for things like ataxia or chronic wasting (prion) disease. Don’t eat roadkill, it’s stupid.
It’s not a sickness on/off switch. You might spot a few cases but will happily eat all sorts of infected meat since you most likely won’t test for disease.
Inspect element, surely? See for yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadkill#Eating_roadkill
What’s the difference between eating fresh roadkill and eating freshly hunted animals? None.
Well, I’d argue that the meat from roadkill comes pre-tenderized, so there’s at least 1 difference
So you’re saying roadkill is even better than hunted.
Sadly roadkill usually doesnt die quickly, which leaves plenty of time for the body to put out all sorts of chemicals like adrenaline and shit which makes the meat taste worse. Im no expert at all but ive heard a few tines from hunters that an instant kill is important for the quality of the meat.
https://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/gear/hunting/can-better-shooting-lead-better-meat
That means that big kills in the past by hunters where they wound the animal and follow it until it drops tasted terrible. But I guess bad tasting meat is better than not feeding the tribe at all.
But but but YOU said there’s no difference! Can’t trust ANYone these days… :(
🚗
Disclaimer: I don’t have a driver’s license and I’ve never seen roadkill that looked fresh and intact enough that I would’ve even remotely considered eating it. Just amused that people instantly reject the general notion of eating anything killed by a car.
I meant morally speaking but yes, the internet is a big spooky place full of dishonest people o.o
deleted by creator
yeah the same applies to fish of course as well
you can outright taste when the fish was badly killed. it tastes like shit.
That’s why you gotta shoot deer from a helicopter
That’s what I said when the cops showed up asking about my neighbor’s cat!
One massive difference is that a hunter will have observed the animal for things like ataxia or chronic wasting (prion) disease. Don’t eat roadkill, it’s stupid.
It’s not a sickness on/off switch. You might spot a few cases but will happily eat all sorts of infected meat since you most likely won’t test for disease.
In my country every hunted animal is inspected. And hunter is a regulated job title.
That’s how it should be. Personally I don’t think hunting as it is now should exist, but at least it prevents people from getting trichinosis.
Toxins in the meat. Don’t eat roadkill, or meat from a bad hunter either, they can ruin a bunch of meat without knowing.
If trauma is bad then the difference is poo.