Lab Grown Meat gets closer to see consumer plates

[Crunchy Dragon]

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

Farming is not natural at all. Humans were hunter-gatherers for the great majority of our existence.

I'm a Christian, so I can see how we'd differ on that.

 

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

You were mocking animal welfare activists earlier in this thread. And someone getting a product they want isn't forcing anything down your throat.

As a whole? No. Just the ones that force it down my throat, like I had said.

 

Again, I don't care for lab-grown meat. That's my opinion.

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

I'm a Christian, so I can see how we'd differ on that.

 

As a whole? No. Just the ones that force it down my throat, like I had said.

 

Again, I don't care for lab-grown meat. That's my opinion.

You're entitled to that opinion. Just don't go advocating a ban on the lab-grown meat then.

[Crunchy Dragon]

Just now, Sakkura said:

You're entitled to that opinion. Just don't go advocating a ban on the lab-grown meat then.

I wouldn't do that.

 

I try not to get mixed up in that kind of stuff.

[LAwLz]

22 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

It's not natural. Do I really need any more?

Well, if you want to be seen as a logical and rational person you kind of do.

There are plenty of things which are not "natural" (whatever that means) which are very good. For example, ,medicine, houses with heating, refrigeration, computers, glasses, and so on.

There are also plenty of natural things which are not good. Cyanide for example is natural, yet extremely deadly.

 

 

Lab grown meat could be revolutionary.

It might be possible to make it taste better than regular meat.

It might be possible to make it more nutritious that regular meat.

It might become cheaper than regular meat.

It will most likely dramatically reduce the environmental impact of the meat business (which is a massive contributor to green house gasses).

It is more humane.

 

On top of that, one benefit I don't think I've seen mentioned before is the spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria.

Animals bred for slaughter is often pumped full of antibiotics in order to keep them from getting infested with bacteria. The problem with this is that it has lead to rapid development of antibiotic resistant bacteria, which is a VERY serious threat to humanity. There are already over 20,000 people dying each year in the US from antibiotic resistant bacteria, and that number will only increase as the number of resistant bacteria increases (which it will, it's evolution).

 

So there are tons of benefits from this, including possibly saving millions of human life or crippling illness, and government money too.

[Guest]

I wonder if this can beat the meat

[illegalwater]

44 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Agreed.

 

Why is this a thing? So people can eat meat without hurting the poor, precious animals?

No, so people can eat meat without destroying the environment and our ability to use antibiotics. Factory farming is unsustainable and has done major damage to the planet and is by far the larger contributor to the rise of drug resistant bacteria.

 

P.S. Mocking people for caring about the well-being of animals is childish.

[MoonSpot]

Call me when they've got a slab of lean meat and not that fatty greasy liquid paste for ground beef.  Been sick and tired of excessive fat in meats and chicken, not remotely looking for a lab replacement for that, but leaner meats I'm game.  I'm not opposed to the prospect of lab grown, but if they try to unload a sorry excuse of a replacement like how horrid the first rounds of artificial chicken were a few years ago on the public, the field will be crucified for decades.

 

Seeing @Crunchy Dragons avatar has got me salivating for a horse haunch the way Lidia used to make :licks and smacks lips:

[Brooksie359]

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Well, if you want to be seen as a logical and rational person you kind of do.

There are plenty of things which are not "natural" (whatever that means) which are very good. For example, ,medicine, houses with heating, refrigeration, computers, glasses, and so on.

There are also plenty of natural things which are not good. Cyanide for example is natural, yet extremely deadly.

 

 

Lab grown meat could be revolutionary.

It might be possible to make it taste better than regular meat.

It might be possible to make it more nutritious that regular meat.

It might become cheaper than regular meat.

It will most likely dramatically reduce the environmental impact of the meat business (which is a massive contributor to green house gasses).

It is more humane.

 

On top of that, one benefit I don't think I've seen mentioned before is the spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria.

Animals bred for slaughter is often pumped full of antibiotics in order to keep them from getting infested with bacteria. The problem with this is that it has lead to rapid development of antibiotic resistant bacteria, which is a VERY serious threat to humanity. There are already over 20,000 people dying each year in the US from antibiotic resistant bacteria, and that number will only increase as the number of resistant bacteria increases (which it will, it's evolution).

 

So there are tons of benefits from this, including possibly saving millions of human life or crippling illness, and government money too.

I mean organic food is a trend for a reason. Some want things to be more natural. I don't see how there reason isn't sufficient. 

[Velcade]

As long as they continue to let me hunt my own land you guys can have the lab meats.

[MoonSpot]

Just now, Velcade said:

As long as they continue to let me hunt my own land you guys can have the lab meats.

Adding any lab grown fat when you make your venison burgers for the annual BBQ(Which you've repeatedly neglected to invite us to)?

[Monkey Dust]

If it tastes like proper beef I'm on board.

 

But will they grow more than muscle tissue? I'm partial to liver and kidneys. Proper sausages require intestines, black pudding requires blood. Haggis needs the heart, liver, lungs, and if you're doing it properly, stomach. And there is suet, the fat from around the kidneys, and beef dripping or goose fat to roast your potatoes in, rennet for cheese making. The bones, both for stock and the marrow.

 

I may have made myself very hungry typing this      

[ignaloidas]

I've seen quite disagreeing opinions here. I think that this is neither good, neither bad development. Lab grown meet is cool and all, but if all the meat becomes lab-grown, then who's going to use the "lover lever" crops, that make up up to 50% of all grown crops? Currently such crops are used only by farms and considered not suitable for human usage. If farms cease to exist, then no one be around to use such crops. So who is going to eat them? You? Or should we just burn it? Currently farm sizes are mostly limited by the amount of feed it can get. If no one is going to use that feed, who's gonna pay to farmers for they crop, now that only 50% of it is usable and other goes to waste? There are a lot of questions about this stuff, and if we don't find answers, it's not going to end well. /philosophy

 

Still pretty cool.

[Monkey Dust]

8 minutes ago, ignaloidas said:

I've seen quite disagreeing opinions here. I think that this is neither good, neither bad development. Lab grown meet is cool and all, but if all the meat becomes lab-grown, then who's going to use the "lover lever" crops, that make up up to 50% of all grown crops? Currently such crops are used only by farms and considered not suitable for human usage. If farms cease to exist, then no one be around to use such crops. So who is going to eat them? You? Or should we just burn it? Currently farm sizes are mostly limited by the amount of feed it can get. If no one is going to use that feed, who's gonna pay to farmers for they crop, now that only 50% of it is usable and other goes to waste? There are a lot of questions about this stuff, and if we don't find answers, it's not going to end well. /philosophy

 

Still pretty cool.

A lot, if not all, could be used for biofuel.

[ignaloidas]

Just now, Monkey Dust said:

A lot, if not all, could be used for biofuel.

Salads that are currently fed to rabbits don't burn that well...

[Monkey Dust]

26 minutes ago, ignaloidas said:

Salads that are currently fed to rabbits don't burn that well...

Fermented to produce ethanol they will

[thorhammerz]

This is really good step towards sustainable (and scalable) meat production in the medium and long term future: considering over half the water in the mainland USA is used solely for the purpose of raising and maintaining farm animals, and all for a measly 3%-20% caloric efficiency (see this article for a more detailed overview of how disgustingly inefficient growing meat is, particularly beef). 

 

Moving production of said meat into a production line might just be enough to reduce the cost (and associated resource drain) our modern diets demand. If the results are not-as-stellar (taste-wise)... that few pay attention to what goes into burgers / ground-meat is a rather convenient circumstance .

1 hour ago, ignaloidas said:

then who's going to use the "lover lever" crops, that make up up to 50% of all grown crops? Currently such crops are used only by farms and considered not suitable for human usage. If farms cease to exist, then no one be around to use such crops. So who is going to eat them? You? Or should we just burn it?

Right, which goes back to the question of "why are we even growing garbage crops in the first place": If such farms are no longer economically viable (because nobody buys their yield anymore), then they will either grow something else of value, or shut down & have their land re-purposed.

[InertiaSelling]

43 minutes ago, Monkey Dust said:

A lot, if not all, could be used for biofuel.

Or to feed the poor. Let's not forget that we've got entire countries whose lands have been diverted from subsistence farming to producing the cereals we use to feed our cattle. That's another reason why proper lab-grown meat could be a step in the right direction.

[bcredeur97]

1 hour ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

It's not natural. Do I really need any more?

I was mainly just curious. I'm personally against it.

to me it makes sense for this to be used for like fast food and such and just other, real cheap foods. (that you probably shouldn't be eating anyway)

But at home or if I go to a nice restaurant, I want a real steak. plz.

 

nothing like a fancy, perfectly cooked filet mignon that you paid way too much for

[Brooksie359]

12 minutes ago, bcredeur97 said:

to me it makes sense for this to be used for like fast food and such and just other, real cheap foods. (that you probably shouldn't be eating anyway)

But at home or if I go to a nice restaurant, I want a real steak. plz.

 

nothing like a fancy, perfectly cooked filet mignon that you paid way too much for

I prefer a good budget over a good steak. 

[asus killer]

mortality is really amazing, i don't look forward to a future with lad meat and a planet on the brink of destruction from climate change.

 

 

 

[suits]

Ah more cancer. good...

[Syntaxvgm]

8 minutes ago, suits said:

Ah more cancer. good...

He says, checking the hours of the local super market on his cancer brick, buying the meat in cancer-foam and wrap, cooking it after cleaning the grill with cancer cleaner, and later microwaving the leftovers in cancer-ware. 

 

(we need to cure cancer, not prevent it.) 

[Tristerin]

3 hours ago, dizmo said:

I'd rather pay more for naturally raised meat. Rise up, small farmers.

100%

[NumLock21]

More choice is good, but what about population control? If would be scary, where the number of cows outweighs to the number of humans. For every human on this planet, there is 100 cows.

[suicidalfranco]

meh, will still keep hunting