Synthetic meat

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16972761

Out of interest, what do you think about our artificial-meat future? I think it's a pretty good idea, all things considered. Mainly because of the huge volumes of greenhouse gases that raising large numbers of animals creates.

Also interested as to what the vegetarians think? would you eat lab-meat or not?

Let me put it this way: crab dip, made from actual crab meat. Hell yeah.

Of course, since the muscle isn't actually being used like it would in a real animal, it's not going to be able to duplicate the experience of something like a steak. But for stuff where we currently mush up meat, here's an excellent role for it.

This is going to take quite a while to be developed, and even longer before people are comfortable with it.

Reasonable idea, though.

Now, could you make meat from unusual animals? Synthetic tiger burgers, for example? Or, yeah (the obvious one) humans?

Considering people won't even touch a vegetable with genetic enhancing, to say make it huge and cut down on world hunger. Calling it blasphemy and frankenfood. I don't think we'll be eatting artificial-meat.

I'm pretty wary of the idea of eating synthetic meat until it has undergone some pretty extensive and thorough testing on it's effect on human health.

We went down this road before genetically engineering wheat which has a much higher yield and grows faster to try and solve world hunger, then started producing it without any testing being done to see if it was safe to eat. Now 40-50 years later we've got a good amount of research indicating it's not only worse for us than the wheat our grandparents used, but that it's worse for human health than things like sugar (not by much, but still).

That's the thing Vivi, synthetic meat SHOULD (in theory) be identical to the real McCoy, since it's made from the same stuff.

Eve Charm:
Considering people won't even touch a vegetable with genetic enhancing, to say make it huge and cut down on world hunger. Calling it blasphemy and frankenfood.

I know, stupidest thing ever...

thaluikhain:
This is going to take quite a while to be developed, and even longer before people are comfortable with it.

Reasonable idea, though.

Now, could you make meat from unusual animals? Synthetic tiger burgers, for example? Or, yeah (the obvious one) humans?

VERY easily. Its basically allowing a few cells to grow in growth hormone over a template to form a slab of meat. If you could aquire a few tiger cells you could make a LOT of meat. Youd need an original clump of cells every so often (the originals and the new ones would all age) but a tiny amount would be fine. Swap a tigers cheek whenever you have to sedate it for the vets in a zoo and tiger meat is yours. Human is even easier.

I love the idea, sure it will never replace high quality meat but for MASS fast food, burgers and school lunches its an awesome idea! Testing first though.

FireAza:
That's the thing Vivi, synthetic meat SHOULD (in theory) be identical to the real McCoy, since it's made from the same stuff.

Not disagreeing with you, but I'd still want some extensive testing to be done to be on the safe side. Any genetic variance, or difference in how the synthetic meat processes nutrients and develops could potentially have an impact, good or bad, on the health of people who eat it. I see no reason not to play things safe before something like this ever hits the mass market, and I know I'd like to have some peace of mind that something is safe (or at least be fully aware of possible dangers) before I eat it. It just strikes me as being a fairly prudent approach to take since we're talking about a completely new type of technology being used to create food for people. I'd hate to find out 20 years down the road that everyone who eats it will die of cancer however unlikely the possibility may be. :D

Vivi22:

FireAza:
That's the thing Vivi, synthetic meat SHOULD (in theory) be identical to the real McCoy, since it's made from the same stuff.

Not disagreeing with you, but I'd still want some extensive testing to be done to be on the safe side. Any genetic variance, or difference in how the synthetic meat processes nutrients and develops could potentially have an impact, good or bad, on the health of people who eat it. I see no reason not to play things safe before something like this ever hits the mass market, and I know I'd like to have some peace of mind that something is safe (or at least be fully aware of possible dangers) before I eat it. It just strikes me as being a fairly prudent approach to take since we're talking about a completely new type of technology being used to create food for people. I'd hate to find out 20 years down the road that everyone who eats it will die of cancer however unlikely the possibility may be. :D

I'm with Vivi, if someone tells me I can eat my McDonald's hamburger and no cows died to make it, that's a win win, however I am still wary of anything untested, maybe I've just watched too many sci-fi movies, maybe I'm just paranoid, but I'd rest a lot easier knowing that someone was paid to find out whether or not my genetically engineered beef burger was gonna give me kidney stones or something equally unpleasant.

Vivi22:

FireAza:
That's the thing Vivi, synthetic meat SHOULD (in theory) be identical to the real McCoy, since it's made from the same stuff.

Not disagreeing with you, but I'd still want some extensive testing to be done to be on the safe side. Any genetic variance, or difference in how the synthetic meat processes nutrients and develops could potentially have an impact, good or bad, on the health of people who eat it. I see no reason not to play things safe before something like this ever hits the mass market, and I know I'd like to have some peace of mind that something is safe (or at least be fully aware of possible dangers) before I eat it. It just strikes me as being a fairly prudent approach to take since we're talking about a completely new type of technology being used to create food for people. I'd hate to find out 20 years down the road that everyone who eats it will die of cancer however unlikely the possibility may be. :D

Of course, you should properly test to see if something is safe before you send it out into the world. However, there's no need to be excessively paranoid just because it's "synthetic meat", just subject it to the same testing you would for any other possibly dangerous new food product.

Eh, if it's found to be healthy to eat, I won't mind eating it. Just, I won't touch synthetic human meat. To me, that'll always be a taboo.

I'll eat just about anything... and I'm sure their will be synthetic meat that is for all intensive purposes the same as real meat....

tho it will not bring me as much joy cutting into a steak if I know it didn't come from a slaughtered animal... we earned our spot at the top of the food chain and that includes the right to eat lower animals!!!!

Oh, good. More of the real stuff for me. I suppose I'll eat it if only you don't mess with the genes. Authentic cow seems to be the winning formula, and I don't trust humanity's current level of genetic knowledge to go and eat any of their experimental stuff without further research.

luke10123:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16972761

Out of interest, what do you think about our artificial-meat future? I think it's a pretty good idea, all things considered. Mainly because of the huge volumes of greenhouse gases that raising large numbers of animals creates.

Also interested as to what the vegetarians think? would you eat lab-meat or not?

nope. Bad idea, farmers loose jobs, cancer may be a side effect, might taste like shit, may be too expensive, and who knows what else.

Sorry but i like my meat like i like my life....real.

Jegsimmons:

luke10123:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16972761

Out of interest, what do you think about our artificial-meat future? I think it's a pretty good idea, all things considered. Mainly because of the huge volumes of greenhouse gases that raising large numbers of animals creates.

Also interested as to what the vegetarians think? would you eat lab-meat or not?

nope. Bad idea, farmers loose jobs, cancer may be a side effect, might taste like shit, may be too expensive, and who knows what else.

Sorry but i like my meat like i like my life....real.

Who cares if farmers lose jobs? If their job isn't needed, why artificially create a need? If I decided to go around in a coach with horses letting people hire me to give them lifts, should people stop making cars to save my job?

As for cancer, tasting like shit, being too expensive, those are nonsense excuses. They're all potential reasons, but you can't know if those are going to happen. That's why you test it out.

I think it's great! As long as it tastes the same and is just as healthy (hell, they could probably make it more healthy), this'll help the environment, meet increased needs, and shut up the nagging thought in the back of my head that vegetarians have somewhat better moral arguments than the rest of us omnivores.

luke10123:
snip

So long as they emulate the taste and texture of meat perfectly (this has yet to happen), I wouldn't mind changing to synthetic meat.

The only remaining question would be, what would we end up using livestock for?

GigaHz:
The only remaining question would be, what would we end up using livestock for?

We put funny hats on them and have them perform the works of Shakespeare.

FireAza:

GigaHz:
The only remaining question would be, what would we end up using livestock for?

We put funny hats on them and have them perform the works of Shakespeare.

What a glorious, golden age that will be...

I can't wait... HERE I COME FUTURE!

Mortai Gravesend:

Jegsimmons:

luke10123:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16972761

Out of interest, what do you think about our artificial-meat future? I think it's a pretty good idea, all things considered. Mainly because of the huge volumes of greenhouse gases that raising large numbers of animals creates.

Also interested as to what the vegetarians think? would you eat lab-meat or not?

nope. Bad idea, farmers loose jobs, cancer may be a side effect, might taste like shit, may be too expensive, and who knows what else.

Sorry but i like my meat like i like my life....real.

Who cares if farmers lose jobs? If their job isn't needed, why artificially create a need? If I decided to go around in a coach with horses letting people hire me to give them lifts, should people stop making cars to save my job?

As for cancer, tasting like shit, being too expensive, those are nonsense excuses. They're all potential reasons, but you can't know if those are going to happen. That's why you test it out.

well for one thing the farmers their families and the people that work in that industry would care if they lose their jobs. and for your example people still do ride in coaches

werewolfsfury:

Mortai Gravesend:

Jegsimmons:

nope. Bad idea, farmers loose jobs, cancer may be a side effect, might taste like shit, may be too expensive, and who knows what else.

Sorry but i like my meat like i like my life....real.

Who cares if farmers lose jobs? If their job isn't needed, why artificially create a need? If I decided to go around in a coach with horses letting people hire me to give them lifts, should people stop making cars to save my job?

As for cancer, tasting like shit, being too expensive, those are nonsense excuses. They're all potential reasons, but you can't know if those are going to happen. That's why you test it out.

well for one thing the farmers their families and the people that work in that industry would care if they lose their jobs. and for your example people still do ride in coaches

Yes, they would care. It's a rhetorical question, not a real one. My point is that we shouldn't stop from making them obsolete just for the sake of giving them a job. That's silly favoritism.

And as for my example, farmers will still exist so that works. It's just become an incredibly small market.

Mortai Gravesend:

werewolfsfury:

Mortai Gravesend:

Who cares if farmers lose jobs? If their job isn't needed, why artificially create a need? If I decided to go around in a coach with horses letting people hire me to give them lifts, should people stop making cars to save my job?

As for cancer, tasting like shit, being too expensive, those are nonsense excuses. They're all potential reasons, but you can't know if those are going to happen. That's why you test it out.

well for one thing the farmers their families and the people that work in that industry would care if they lose their jobs. and for your example people still do ride in coaches

Yes, they would care. It's a rhetorical question, not a real one. My point is that we shouldn't stop from making them obsolete just for the sake of giving them a job. That's silly favoritism.

And as for my example, farmers will still exist so that works. It's just become an incredibly small market.

it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

werewolfsfury:

Mortai Gravesend:

werewolfsfury:
well for one thing the farmers their families and the people that work in that industry would care if they lose their jobs. and for your example people still do ride in coaches

Yes, they would care. It's a rhetorical question, not a real one. My point is that we shouldn't stop from making them obsolete just for the sake of giving them a job. That's silly favoritism.

And as for my example, farmers will still exist so that works. It's just become an incredibly small market.

it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

Yes, it does. Why should those people get jobs for something we don't need them for? If we can do it in a cheaper fashion, why should we do it the hard way and pay more of our money for their less efficient ways? Why shouldn't we allow them to lose their jobs if we don't need their job? They can go and learn to do something that we do need. Just like everyone else in the world.

I can see synthetic meat being sold but I don't think it will really catch on much especially now with the whole "organic"thing going on

werewolfsfury:

Mortai Gravesend:

werewolfsfury:
well for one thing the farmers their families and the people that work in that industry would care if they lose their jobs. and for your example people still do ride in coaches

Yes, they would care. It's a rhetorical question, not a real one. My point is that we shouldn't stop from making them obsolete just for the sake of giving them a job. That's silly favoritism.

And as for my example, farmers will still exist so that works. It's just become an incredibly small market.

it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

Here's a wild and crazy idea:

They could...

FIND A NEW JOB!

Mortai Gravesend:

werewolfsfury:

Mortai Gravesend:

Yes, they would care. It's a rhetorical question, not a real one. My point is that we shouldn't stop from making them obsolete just for the sake of giving them a job. That's silly favoritism.

And as for my example, farmers will still exist so that works. It's just become an incredibly small market.

it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

Yes, it does. Why should those people get jobs for something we don't need them for? If we can do it in a cheaper fashion, why should we do it the hard way and pay more of our money for their less efficient ways? Why shouldn't we allow them to lose their jobs if we don't need their job? They can go and learn to do something that we do need. Just like everyone else in the world.

Then by the same reasoning, why should we bother creating something fake to replace a product that already exists naturally? We don't NEED synthetic meat, we have the real thing. Having said that, I doubt too many farmers would lose their livelihoods. There will always be people that will refuse to eat anything but the real thing. Who knows, I may be one of them. Plus, there are always other crops to farm.

Personally, I'd be interested to see how far they could take this. Could they create the perfect blend of protein, carbs, fatty acids and aminos and still get it to taste as good as a prime cut of beef? Could this eventually become some sort of super food with every vitamin and nutrient the body needs to function at peak efficiency? Why not make various types of meats targeted and various diseases? Have a synthetic insulin stabilizer for diabetics. Cholesterol reducers for those with heart problems. Viagra for the poor blokes that have an ugly missus.

Redweaver:

werewolfsfury:

Mortai Gravesend:

Yes, they would care. It's a rhetorical question, not a real one. My point is that we shouldn't stop from making them obsolete just for the sake of giving them a job. That's silly favoritism.

And as for my example, farmers will still exist so that works. It's just become an incredibly small market.

it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

Here's a wild and crazy idea:

They could...

FIND A NEW JOB!

because it's always so easy to get a job. all you have to do is walk in and ask for a job! you don't have to go to college for 2-4 years to get a high paying job either! and so what if someone else gets it instead of you? just go and ask for another one somewhere else! I can't believe that there are so many jobless people out there they're just being lazy.

Fatboy_41:

Mortai Gravesend:

werewolfsfury:
it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

Yes, it does. Why should those people get jobs for something we don't need them for? If we can do it in a cheaper fashion, why should we do it the hard way and pay more of our money for their less efficient ways? Why shouldn't we allow them to lose their jobs if we don't need their job? They can go and learn to do something that we do need. Just like everyone else in the world.

Then by the same reasoning, why should we bother creating something fake to replace a product that already exists naturally? We don't NEED synthetic meat, we have the real thing. Having said that, I doubt too many farmers would lose their livelihoods. There will always be people that will refuse to eat anything but the real thing. Who knows, I may be one of them. Plus, there are always other crops to farm.

Don't be stupid. I didn't say to create it for the sake of creating it. That isn't the same reasoning if you thought about it for a half second. I'm saying it doesn't matter if farmers lose their jobs to it. Just like I wouldn't tell farmers to quit just so synthetic meat could get on the market, which would be the equivalent. Think before posting, it saves trouble.

werewolfsfury:

Redweaver:

werewolfsfury:
it doesn't matter if it's favoritism or not hundreds of people would lose their jobs. and why should we allow for them to lose their jobs anyways? what will they do then?

Here's a wild and crazy idea:

They could...

FIND A NEW JOB!

because it's always so easy to get a job. all you have to do is walk in and ask for a job! you don't have to go to college for 2-4 years to get a high paying job either! and so what if someone else gets it instead of you? just go and ask for another one somewhere else! I can't believe that there are so many jobless people out there they're just being lazy.

Yeah, so instead of rolling up your sleeves and getting started with the hard work, just whine about it and fight tooth and nail to keep our society in the dark ages so you they can keep their paycheck.

Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and it's beyond time for progress, just like in the oil industry. I'm sorry some people, hell, even a lot of people, will loose money/jobs. Life is harsh like that.

If it tastes like meat and causes no health problems then I'm all for it. Those big corporations that have large amounts of livestock in crapped slaughter houses should consider going this route, as it would be less expensive and it would get all those animal activists out of their face (and into a synthetic cheese burger).

edit

The best thing about the advent and eventually consumer adaptation of synthetic meat will be the major environmental benefit. If we can mass produce the synth-meat, it means we can stop having needlessly large ranches in South America and the like. I mean, those Smithfield plants are a toxic hazard, and don't get me started on the methane produced by hundreds of cows on a feed lot being fed the bovine equivalent of government cheese.
With the widespread use of synth-meat we can cut the Pig/Chicken/Cow population back by 3/4th's, leaving behind only a small number of dedicated, legitimate, ranchers and the free range variety.

I personally prefer tofu and/or vegetables. It is just that I am stuck in rural Minnesota with a house full of carnivores, so tofu is hard to find. I do not mind meat, but I would not be distressed if the world's meat production stopped. Also, farmers would not lose jobs if they would grow plant based food (which actually takes less energy, believe it or not).

Mortai Gravesend:

Don't be stupid. I didn't say to create it for the sake of creating it. That isn't the same reasoning if you thought about it for a half second. I'm saying it doesn't matter if farmers lose their jobs to it. Just like I wouldn't tell farmers to quit just so synthetic meat could get on the market, which would be the equivalent. Think before posting, it saves trouble.

You say we won't need farmers because we'll have synthetic meat. I say we don't need synthetic meat because we have farmers. Seems pretty similar to me. But that's not really the point I wanted to make. I truly think the number of farmers that went out of business would be minimal. Yes, they may have to cut prices to stay competitive, but not shut up shop entirely. The "organic" and " natural" craze has been setting in for a whole now and people already pay premium prices for those products. I think synthetic meat would simply be viewed as a cheaper alternative, but not a complete replacement.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked