The Case for Cannibalism

      This year, in the United states, it is projected that 50 people will be put to death via capitol punishment, 7,000 will die in car crashes, 24,000 will be murdered, 150,000 will die from stroke, and 250,000 will die from heart attacks. At the modest estimate of one hundred and sixty pounds per person, this translates to over 68,880,000 pounds of wasted meat. At that, most of these estimated deaths are men, who on average weigh closer to one hundred and ninety pounds, on average, and given the general obesity of the American man, the average is probably closer to 200. That brings the total up to 86,000,000 lbs. 

      This year, we will spend countless millions relieving hunger in poverty or famine-stricken, over populated third-world countries, another million or so on figuring out what to do about the general problem of over-population, and untold millions on scientific research that will be done to find solutions to the increasing demand for food.

      This year we will waste acres of land burying our dead, when we could be eating them. 

      When famine hit Tanzania in 1997, the following plea went out: “The country will need an estimated 916,000 tones of foodstuffs, while the most pressing needs can be met with 92,000 tones.”

      To put that in perspective, with the bodies of those people killed in the above mentioned ways alone, discounting those that died in other types of accidents, or of “clean” deaths, such as cancer, or asphyxiation, we could have alleviated 92% of Tanzania's most pressing needs. Instead, we put those bodies into plots that could have been used for farm land, and sent them food that cost us money, and added to the national deficit.

      Despite what we might want to believe about ourselves, a human is a normal, mortal animal, with perfectly good meat on its bones. Over population and a world-wide stress on food supplies are both problems. Even if you live to consume, you can die charitably.

      Over population is a problem for the living as well as the dead. With the number of grave stones nearly outnumbering the living and more stores, business buildings, factories, apartments and houses being put up on a regular basis to accommodate the expanding society fast producing those dead, finding places to put people, whether living or dead, is becoming quite a problem. What is worse is that we are putting wood in the ground so that it can never again be recycled, which contributes to deforestation, and we are pumping our corpses full of chemicals that make them toxic to the earth into which they would naturally decay. 

      That eating human bodies prepared in a sanitary fashion is economical would be too plain to be discussed. Assuming that the body is cremated, the cost for internment would be something on the order of a two hundred dollars, including a flat plaque, rather than a tombstone to mark the site of burial. More often, Americans prefer the good old coffin: a box made of wood from non-recycled sources that can cost anywhere between five-hundred and two-thousand dollars. In some cases, total funeral costs can be as much as ten thousand dollars. This does not count the cost of feeding the bereaved after the services, which would normally add another ten or twelve dollars per attendee.

      On the other hand, the cost for preparing the departed for consumption, at most, would cost about one hundred and fifty dollars, assuming that you hire a catering professional to do the job for you. This need not be as gruesome as it sounds: the body could be prepared in such a way that it would be unrecognizable as the person in question, as luncheon meat, for example, or a fine pate. If one wanted to give the departed a good send off, they could, for another few hundred dollars, order vegetables, crackers, and even dessert to go with the meal. 

      While it may seem somewhat tacky to you to to grind the deceased into a well-seasoned pate, and serve them on a platter with Ritz crackers and a sprig of parsley, consider how much less of an eyesore such a display would be when compared to the usual open casket wake-- an experience which scars most children for years to come. It would be the difference between a dead cow on your lawn, and a hamburger cooking on your grill. If one wanted to get artistic, the pate could be molded into various shapes, decorated with icing, and could, in fact, make a rather attractive centerpiece. 

      One might argue, naturally, that promoting the eating of human beings who died of natural causes could lead to the consumption of people killed specifically for that purpose. However, most people today feel squeamish about watching someone else chop the head off of a chicken, a great many more people would feel uncomfortable doing this themselves. The only individuals who would hunt people to eat them would be those same psychopaths who would usually be prone to murder a person and not eat them. In the ideal situation, both the murder victim and the psychopath (should he be executed after due process) could become entrees for the murder victim's family for a month at least. In addition, the bones, once ground, would make an ideal calcium supplement.

      Others would argue that they would prefer to have some sort of permanent memorial made for the dead. They could, instead of wasting land and poisoning the environment, put that same amount of money into some more constructive and visible monument, such as an acre of rain forest adopted on behalf of the dead, or a plaque in a church or town hall to represent a donation to charity. Such things are likely to be visited and noted by far more people and provide the same sort of secular immortality that we, like the ancient Egyptians, seek by attempting to preserve our unused bodies for the rest of eternity.

      There are also the natural concerns about catching diseases from the dead. Properly salted and prepared, a human body would be no more likely to cause illness than a ham. Diseases such as Kuru (the human equivalent of mad cow disease) can be tested for before the meat is served in a simple autopsy and sampling of brain tissue. AIDS is far less of a concern, as the HIV virus dies at either excessively high or low body temperatures, and therefore cannot survive once the host becomes cold, and certainly would die once the host had been cooked. I would have my reservations about eating cancer patients, however, because cancer patients are frequently treated with radiation; radioactive residue could be left in the tissues which could cause cancer in the person consuming them. 

      To recap, human bodies which have died “clean” deaths could provide safe, economical, nutritious meals, and  and once consumed, do not take up valuable land which can be used for farming. It is only our squeamishness which prevents us from tapping into this easily accessible, renewable resource. 

      Bon Apetite.