Was the substance the problem?
Was the man praised for getting rid of what the chicken’s ate?
Embedded.
Okay, I’m a little lost in the weeds here, -apologies if this has already been covered. Did the birds eat something that turned out to be radioactive?
No.
Was the substance a growth hormone?
Was there more than one substance?
Did all of the chickens who ingested the substance(s) die?
Embedded
Is liver pate relevant here?
No.
Did the man feed the substance to the chickens for purpose of finding out what would happen when the chickens ate the substance?
Did the man feed the substance to the chickens for purpose of getting rid of the substance?
Did the man know in advance that the substance would kill the chickens?
Lemme summarize:
A prominent man killed a bunch of chickens by causing them to ingest a substance. Not all the chickens who ingested the substance died. The man got them to ingest the substance so he could learn whether the substance was dangerous. Whether the substance is plant matter or mineral is unclear; he didn’t think it could be used as human or chicken food, or as fertilizer. It wasn’t irradiated, nor was it a hormone; but it was “the problem.”
- Good?
- Is determining the substance important? (I’m a little confused at the lack of knowledge of whether it’s vegetable or mineral).
- Is the substance a nonspecific thing with a functional label (e.g., “garbage”) instead of a substance with a specific composition?
- Was the man confused as to the substance’s composition?
- Were folks in general confused as to the substance’s composition?
K.
If you want to give up, you may and I will reveal the answer. It’s hardly the most intriguing situational puzzle we’ve had and they answer will not stun everyone.
I’ll provide a hint, which may give it all away(I’m terrible at hints):
He never intended to kill/harm the chickens…K?
Can the substance be bought in stores, without any special licensing, background checks, or the like?
Would typical purchasers of the substance buy it repeatedly on a regular basis? (as opposed, for instance, to buying it only when some emergency comes up)
Is the substance typically used on, with, or for human bodies?
Is the substance typically used on, with, or for other living things?
Is the substance typically used on, with, or for nonliving machinery?
Is the substance typically used on, with, or for nonliving, nonmechanical objects?
Did the man have some hope that feeding the substance to chickens would result in them producing more of the same substance?
Did the man have some hope that feeding the substance to chickens would result in them producing some other substance of interest?
The fact you have mentioned “K” twice leads me to think the substance is either potassium or Vitamin K. But neither seems to be especially harmful to chickens (well, any more than elemental potassium is harmful to any animal that ingests it!).
K.
Or the chicken are aliens. Or eating aliens. Or really like Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith movies.
Hint #2: He was hailed, but his actual accomplishment was partially accidental.
Did he feed the chickens mouldy bread or similar and thereby prove the effectiveness of some medicine?