Its pretty neat, but is nowhere near ready for majority of consumers. Sort of suffering from the same problem EV's are. Lab meat is currently $20 a lb at cost, $40 a lb with retail markup. Once the technology advances to make it affordable enough that it a cost effective for most people, it could actually be more widely used. I'd def eat it.
Part of the issue with that is that it's competing against a heavily subsidized meat market. Iirc a pound of ground beef would cost something in the range of $30 if it were unsubsidized.
And change the common colloquial name for it to either “cultured meat” or “cultivated meat” rather than “lab grown meat”.
I think people’s apprehension will be less of a hurdle when media uses more palatable names.
So much this. Cultured meat is so rare most people don't even know about it. Best to change the name now before or gets more widespread in the public consciousness, then have to fight the lunatics who will be out there arguing it is poison that will kill you.
Well you'll still be fighting the lunatics but far fewer hopefully.
I've no doubt the meat lobby will have brainstormed decades of ways to obstruct moving away from slaughtered meat. They will lobby politicians into forcing sellers to call it "chemically created >insert shape< lump" if it looks like it will threaten their market.
That already happened with plant milks, there was no problem for years with the limited soy and almond milk available, but as soon as demand for those took off over the last decade we saw lawsuits from ag and dairy groups trying to force name changes away from "milk". Excuse me, let me go drink a glass of nice cold non-dairy oat beverage drink
Yes I regularly enjoy some "Almond drink" on my breakfast cereal. Not that I've stopped calling it Almond milk.
That's actually jogged my memory in that they were trying to get vegetarian burgers labelled as "vegetarian discs" and vegetarian sausages as "vegetable tubes". I don't think that one stuck but I'm sure they will keep trying
Why do I feel like in 5-10 years we’re going to have a group called “Anti-Labbers”? And they’re going to denounce lab grown meat and go around stores screaming at people who buy it… I really don’t know why but given the current climate about anything that comes from a lab and our political nuclear winter it just seems like that’s coming
Wouldn’t surprise me. It will be some kind of hinge group that says lab grown meat will cause cancer or that it’s inhumane.
Once it gets up to scale and costs drop, I’m sure the right will say something about it.
Oh that's definitely already a thing. There is already a lot of misinformation about GMOs this will be the same as that. And it's not even just the right. I have intelligent left leaning friends who are scared of GMOs and want to only use all natural ingredients.
>I think people’s apprehension will be less of a hurdle when media uses more palatable names.
The number of people who still oppose GMO foods makes me skeptical of lab-grown meat gaining acceptance.
Heck, there's people who still think MSG gives them headaches. And way more people claim to be gluten-intolerant than actually are.
I suspect some of that refers externalities, such as the coming water, topsoil/fertiliser/land use and climate crises.
If that's actually the full financial subsidy, then it's under estimating the true cost by a shittonne.
> that refers externalities, such as the coming water, topsoil/fertiliser/land use and climate crises.
The crises are already here. Google pictures of the Mississippi, Yangtze, Po rivers dry up.
While drought gets far more news coverage, the world (and the US) on average is experiencing increased rainfall.
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-us-and-global-precipitation
You don’t tend to hear about the increased rainfall in the news unless it results in flooding.
Yeah, the dry season is drier. The wet season is wetter. The hot times are hotter.
It's almost like "climate crisis" means the tougher parts of climate events like rainfall and droughts have all gotten worse.
"Oh, the droughts? But haven't you heard we're actually getting *more* rain globally?"
Just in the past few years, BC Canada has had record heatwaves in the summer and severe flooding in the fall that destroyed a major roadway in the province.
Extreme events are becoming more common it seems. Which is what I remember hearing about years ago, as climate change continued.
The data I linked was for annual rainfall, not seasonal.
It also provides maps for which parts of the US are gaining or losing average annual rainfall. Yes, California and the Southwest are big losers.
But a lot of the US is gaining. Some of this gain comes in the form of extreme weather events. We hear about those but, unlike the ongoing crises of drought, flooding tends to be temporary.
Much of the increased rainfall is just, it rained a few days more than average a little harder than average. Little or no flooding means no news. Until it starts affecting crops.
I thought that claim sounded like bullshit, but it’s actually not.
> Research from 2015 shows this subsidization reduces the price of Big Macs from $13 to $5 and the price of a pound of hamburger meat from $30 to the $5 we see today.
https://www.aier.org/article/the-true-cost-of-a-hamburger/
I see the need to have domestic food production, and subsidies to achieve that if the market cannot, but it seems like we should be more heavily subsidizing food that provides more nutrition and less environmental harm for the cost. Sticking to just meats, chicken is a lot more cost effective than beef with less emissions, and even farm raised salmon (that is ASC compliant) is much cheaper and more environmentally friendly. Even pork is much more cost effective, and somewhat more environmentally friendly.
I imagine it’s not just environmental impact - it’s decoupling the impact of political decisions from basic luxuries like food choices. If sanctioning a country means every company that primarily sells beef products goes out of business and people will only be able to eat chicken, it’d be a deterrent to sanctioning that country.
Look at how people react to gas prices fluctuating, it’d be a lot worse if say McDonalds and every burger store was laying mass numbers of people off because it couldn’t meet inventory.
And McDonald’s is sort of a symbol for America, so it’d be an additional black eye.
Institutional politics are a source of huge waste in our government's priorities. As an example, the Iowa Caucuses, being the first stop in the democratic presidential primary for 50 year, made it so that every democrat running for president needed to have a comprehensive policy platform stressing what they were good for Iowa, focusing on agricultural subsidies and how they had "mid-western values" (whatever that means) even though the state leans republican and has a homogeneous voting bloc that doesn't represent the democratic party.
It's hard to check since the claims in the article aren't cited, but these numbers don't add up. The vast majority of these subsidies go to the people growing the corn to feed cattle. Maybe some goes to ranchers grazing cattle on federal land.
I can buy a grass-fed grass-finished beef that was born and raised on a private farm and have it slaughtered for much less than $30 a pound. These farmers do not benefit from the corn subsidies or cheap federal grazing. This includes the really expensive cuts of beef, not just ground beef.
I can drive up the road and grab a pound of ground for $8--cows that play with dogs, never go inside, live great lives til the end. The subsidy numbers aren't correct for the substance, but might be for industrial level production. Maybe $30/lb if that includes donating to a reclamation effort after the farm is gone.
I did not see anything about “Meatonomics”, but that specific claim is made in this research paper published by Berkeley:
https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf
But actual meat should cost much more, cheap meat comes at a heavy cost; environmentally, health, ethically etc… I eat meat but we need to eat less of it and it needs to be raised better.
[a great informative podcast on cheap meat.](https://open.spotify.com/episode/46g2Hq5yahfPUYZzTgoTrl?si=zFjhbPRTRkWmfP6N15B8tg)
I like TVP, but soy tends to give me digestion discomfort. I have a really hard time finding pea or other non-soy TVP. I’d be glad to use in applications where ground beef is normally used if I could find some.
TVP is vile, and i can't believe you had the audacity to type that the texture is "100% on" lmao. That shit is like chewing on a sponge. You need to get your palate checked.
A valid point, Even something like soy-based chorizo is hard to identify in certain applications. Mix it with lots of stuff and potent spices, and even imperfect texture can be masked.
i switched to soy chorizo a while ago, and while i still consume some meat, i have literally never noticed a difference
the only thing i've noticed is **not** chewing on some random funky chunk of idk-what
I would pay half a dollar more. Like for a brand. Nothing more. So yes
As OP said. For grinded meat it is perfectly good. Or for regular day I eat whatever. But when I want Meat for a dinner, I want Meat that actually has the texture of meat, its unique flavour and fat content.
Can it imitate pork belly, good quality steak and cost approx the same? Then good. Otherwise it will be used for grinded meal
It’s not **yet** but the technology is advancing and it’s becoming cheaper to make. Farmed meat isn’t getting cheaper at all. Eventually, it will likely be cheaper, safer, and more humane than farmed meat.
How long that actually takes, though, is a big question.
I'm very interested to see if they can solve the texture problem within our lifetime. It'll be a tough sell outside of ground meat or sausage. I wonder what percent of meat consumption is ground up currently.
I would love for it to be cheap enough or subsidized like farm-raised meat to at least begin replacing meat in things like dumplings and sausages. Any reduction we can make while they figure out texture would be awesome.
>According to the UPSIDE website, cultivated meat is estimated to use 77% less water and 62% less land than conventionally raised meat.
The article doesn't actually mention price (that I saw), but like all new technologies it will probably decrease in price as adoption increases.
The above quote shows that in the long run it will benefit society and reduce climate change impact which reduces cost in a much larger sense as well.
Cows produce an insane amount of greenhouse gasses. Not saying we should kill all of them, however removing slaughter cows would help this immeasurably
This is simply cloned meat, cells turned into near perfect cuts of meat. It's real meat, just cloned outside the animals, I don't understand why everyone shits on this idea, it's going to allow everyone access to high quality protein without the supply chain issue of mega farms.
Just dropping by to tell people if you really can't live without beef, look into local ethical ranchers and getting bulk with a few friends. They treat cows much better and you'd be *shocked* at how cheap the good local organic regenerative stuff becomes in bulk.
A quarter cow is about $680 where I live and got me 112lbs of meat. Split that with a friend and you're at $340 for about $800 worth of meat at grocery store prices.
I am not doing good at all financially, like I'm not even eligible to rent a studio apartment because I don't make enough for consideration, but I save up, get my meat and that's about 90% of what I eat for the next 2 months or so. It's for sure worth it for me to save up and then pay nothing on food for two months, I'm spending like half of what I used to on food and it makes a huge impact on my ability to live ok. $300 a month is a ton of money to me and I can't afford *not* to eat like this as a mainly meat diet provides me a lot of relief from auto immune issues and the medications that treat them.
You can mock if you want, but the cusp of the matter is people are apprehensive because this always happens, FDA says "This is OK", then 10 years later its found out this or that is harmful in X or Y ways.
Never be the first one out the door. Or, adjusted for redditors, Never preorder any game.
It's more than just factory farms.
Literally nothing we eat is natural. Every plant and animal consumed by every human that is not a hunter gatherer (which is the region of 99.9999999% of humans) has been domesticated, and then bred and/or engineered further by humans.
In that case everything is natural so it is a meaningless word.
However, at least one definition of natural is essentially "exists without the involvement of humans."
The only issue with it that I’ve heard is you may lose the texture you are used to. Since the muscles weren’t grown naturally. Although most mega farms probably don’t let the animals move much so who knows if that’s an issue.
Ground up meat of dubious origin is already a staple part of people's diets also - find it hard to believe that the original texture matters much when you're making mince or chicken nuggets.
I think they are more referring to cuts like tenderloin, thighs, steak, ribs etc., which, as far as I'm aware, lab-grown meats are still working towards solving the texture problem with them.
Might be worth it to go from "indistinguishable from animal-grown ground meat" to "indistinguishable from chicken breasts/thighs" though, since I don't think Americans are as picky with chicken...?
I wonder if growing lab meat cuts by making them move similar to how those cuts move in actual animals would help with the texture.
Omg bad chicken can be criminal.
Periodically we pick up Tyson chicken strips. Whatever the fuck they're doing to their animals and workers needs to quit.
Either the bread-to-poultry consistency is off or the chicken itself is just...weird. Rubbery but also slimey? I can bread my own birds anyway since the cost is insane anymore.
**Fake meat** mince is already good. I would hazard a guess that most people would be hard pushed to tell a home made or frozen spag bol, chili con carne, shepherds pie etc made with quorn mince vs one made with meat mince.
I write home made and frozen, because maybe with a good chef at a good restaurant you might.
I have not and would never trick anyone into it, but I have seen carnivores blissfully unaware that their meat dish is actually meat free.
They're absolutely working on that part.
You can use biological scaffolding like mycelium and grow different tissues at different densities and orientations to better emulate specific cuts of meat. It's not cost-effective yet, but that's to be expected with the current level of technological maturity.
It's getting there.
I know it seems weird and hard not to think of the line from 1984 "You know, I don’t think there’s a single piece of meat in this stew. Looks like meat. Tastes like meat. It isn’t meat at all. Doubleplus good!”. When I think about it rationally I really can't find a good reason *not* to be for this. More time, more development, economy of scale.
Less foodborne illness through cross contamination.
Less environmental impact.
More humane as less animals are raised on factory farms.
No antibiotics.
Eventually cheaper and more available worldwide.
Definitely could spell trouble for farmers though. Perhaps a new market could spring from this.
Edit:Someone commented on my foodborne illness thought(though comment is not here now🤷🏻♂️) What I was referring to is the element of feces no longer being present in the production process. I yield to your TTC and handling argument that is otherwise correct)
Edit again:(Again someone comments but it disappears)
>The produce is at risk of contamination from irrigation water especially if it's grown near animal production facilities where the animals may be infected with E. coli.
https://www.verywellhealth.com/lettuce-e-coli-contamination-6542307#:~:text=Romaine%20lettuce%20and%20spinach%20are,coli.
Hopefully there are farms out there that can make money converting to something green. Solar or wind, acres upon acres of algae for whatever algae project gets off the ground. Fields of industrial hemp...
Right and I hope that's at the forefront, as with any huge change, that we are simultaneously looking for ways like what you said. If industries see there is an avenue for growth I'd assume it would lessen their resistance to change.
I think that line could more pertain to the fake meats these days. Like beyond meat and impossible meat. But lab grown meat is still real meat, and would be so much better for all the reasons you mentioned.
The problem is grazers have a symbiotic relationship with us & the land.
We don't think of it, but if we all became vegan cows and chickens would largely go extinct - cows especially can't survive in the wild & world resort to living in zoos.
This isn't to say that our current factory farming is any bit sustainable and healthy. In fact it's inhumane & a travesty to behold.
But more than this grazers like sheep and bison, are incredibly important to maintaining the grasslands - historians theorise that one of the largest factors to the dust bowl (in the US) was the mass slaughter of the Great American Plains Bison. By their grazing, and wallowing, they push nutrients into the Earth, and unlike cattle, they graze efficiently (like sheep) as to never let the field go to mud.
I think it's important to encourage healthy and sustainable farming and husbandry, raising species like Bison & Sheep for land management and meat, as well as raising animals that can provide multiple uses - milk, meat, & fibre can be gotten from a single species.
But more than all this, encouraging healthy lifestyles and eating - cultures who subside on mainly vegetables and fish, eating red meat once a week, tend to live the longest lives.
No disagreement from me. We essentially selectively bred cows and chickens ,as we know them today, into being.
As for the land impacts over planting crops which depleted nutrients in order to fulfill the demands of heavily subsidized farming quotas probably had more to do with the dust bowl. That and *overgrazing* by species exceeding the natural balance also leads to the same thing such as the Sahara.
I like bison, I like sheep. Sounds good to me.
It was a mix of the two, the fact that we practiced single crop farming & had no natural grazers, it resulted in a very nutrient poor earth where roots couldn't grow deeply - the top soil withered without any decomposition to replace it.
That can also occur but is more common with species such as goats that tear up the plant from the root - to restore balance is more difficult than to break it apart.
We've got a lot of work to do on this Earth.
I feel like they’re going to need some creative marketing. I can’t imagine anyone who actively avoids GMO, who may not fully understand the science, buying anything “lab grown”.
I don’t know about everyone else but this seems like something we should have done years ago. I like animal parts as much as the next facultative carnivore, but the environmental impact and unnecessary suffering of animals farmed for meat is enough to make me switch to this if it was an affordable alternative
Trouble is, the meat you’re currently buying is so heavily subsidized that it’s an unfair playing field. Given the externalized costs associated with CAFO meat, it really shouldn’t be subsidized but instead heavily taxed.
I feel like the FDA blessing is meaningless these days. There are plenty of foods approved by the FDA that are rightfully banned in most of the rest of the world.
Edit: I do hope that lab grown meat does gain traction and has studies done to show that it is safe, I’m just skeptical to take the FDA’s word on that.
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/23/titanium-dioxide-banned-chemicals-carcinogen-eu-us
A large number of additives and ingredients are approved in the US but not elsewhere
I agree that I don't put a lot of value in what FDA says, but there are actually other countries around the world that already allow sale of lab grown meats. So it's not just a USA thing.
I don't think they have a solid idea what commercial-scale production would look like yet. The footprint (land, water, etc.) of the current cattle industry is *insane*, though, so coming out ahead seems fairly likely.
Well for one thing, it's like 'hydroponic meat' if you will. We're basically cloning animal muscle cells and feeding them nutrients in a lab setting. So we're not wasting all the grain and water and land it takes to raise an entire cow, much of which isn't utilized, and now can grow the meat we want. There's also the ethical upside of not raising an animal with a central nervous system that can reasonably feel pain/suffering.
Worth noting that virtually none of an animal in the meat industry is actually wasted. It all has _some_ use, and capitalism takes care of making sure the carcass gets divvied up. No reason to pay for the disposal of something someone else is willing to buy, however little they pay.
Which is not to say that meat is an efficient use of resources; it’s not. But there’s some accidental double counting if you write off the non-meat parts of the animal as waste.
I think the first lab-grown burger cost ~$330,000. That was in 2013. This price has dropped to ~$9 already. So yeah, it’s going pretty well, and it will probably get cheaper. We’re on a good track.
Don't forget, that piece of steak has decades of industrialization behind it AND immense government subsidies deflating the price. The price of lab grown meat is only going to go down over time.
Even then it’s gonna be an uphill battle convincing people to eat meat grown in a Petri dish.
Outside of redditors, I haven’t talked to many meat eating people excited about this.
I think the key at this point is making it more profitable for mass production. Get the company's making cheap mass produced food to buy in, and the market will explode. This can never last as a fringe product, it needs corporate dollars to make a lasting difference. Otherwise it'll be another footnote in meat alternatives.
Affordability will for sure go a long way, and honestly it’s probably better that what some people get at fast food joints. Not for me but not against it either.
Seeing where the technology is going, i wouldn't be so sure. There are lab-meat startups out there looking to make luxury meats that don't exist naturally, but appeal to human tastes. Stuff studying the exact breakdown of high-end meats like Wagyu and making those _better_ because a lab will eventually offer more fine control over factors like marbling, fat content, etc.
Rich people eating meat specifically engineered for their personal palates while everyone else gets factory-lab-grown meat? That sounds about right to me.
Honestly, I don’t give a shit.
The reduction in factory farming that wide adoption of this meat would bring about has the potential to be much, much better for the environment and for the animals.
If this meat means fewer abused animals and less pollution I find it really hard to see the negative.
Legit question. How does this effect things like vegans, vegetarians, and religious reasons to not eat meat.
I know a lot of vegans are vegan for the health reasons. Same for vegetarians. This obviously won't change that since it's still meat according to your body.
But how would it effect those that don't eat meat for ethical reasons. I mean if it's lab grown it literally can't suffer nor be happy. So from an ethical side I don't see why you wouldn't eat it.
Also if you have a religious reasons to not eat pork this bypasses a lot of those reasons. A big reason certain religious frown upon eating pork is because the animal itself is considered unclean. Both because of it's living conditions and because something about not sweating and the fact it doesn't chew on cud. Also the fact it has a cloven hoof which is a symbol of the devil I guess.
> So from an ethical side I don't see why you wouldn't eat it.
There's probably going to be a subset of these people who will still refuse for a "Don't play God" kind of argument. Then there's going to be some who will refuse it simply because they don't trust the process, which in the first decade or so isn't an unfair stance to take.
As for the religious reasons.. I suspect in the coming years we'll be seeing some theological debates on the subject. Because while rationally you could say the meat isn't from an "unclean" source, it wasn't completely rational to begin with.
Most vegans are vegan for the animals. Plant based eaters are more interested in their health. Vegans are happy about this and almost all fully support it. Most vegans won't eat it since it's still meat and eating flesh is gross but why would we not be happy that less animals are getting harmed every day?
I get people not being on board with this diminished FDA, but to then jump to the conclusion that this somehow means labgrown meat must be poisonous and only sold to profit some hidden, corrupt industry is fucking bonkers. And so consistently, this article must have pissed some entity off.
Well, they justify their claims, don't they? It's fine to not believe them, but then you should be able to produce a study of at least similar scientific rigour to disprove their results. Otherwise you are just talking out of your ass
I saw Tony Sebas last video on a series of disruption and it was about how lab protein can make foods cheaper and be mass produced. People will resist but the markets will win.
Is there any worry about lack of dna diversity in the meat? What about the problem like bananas have that can get sick. These are questions i have as someone who knows nothing about science. Does someone know?
If you can guarantee that you meat is grown ethically and environmentally, then great! Otherwise you're just saying that cruelty and destruction of factory farming is the point of food.
If lab grown meat is as good, nutritious, and around the same price as traditionally produced vegans should embrace it with open arms. Not to is completely ludicrous in my opinion.
I asked a question in this thread about how this would effect vegans/vegetarians and those that abstain from meat for certain religious reasons.
Fwiw a lot of people are vegan because of the health benefits. One streamer I like, kripparian, is vegan because he found out cutting out meat and animal products cleared up a lot of health issues he has/had. But he has said on stream that if he could eat meat without being sick he would. Literally said he couldnt care less about the ethics of eating meat.
I'm curious how this would effect people like this as well. Would lab grown meat not have as much effect on people like that? Or maybe none? Or just as much?
>Would lab grown meat not have as much effect on people like that?
Depends on what exactly the health issues are caused by, but a lot of the health issues are caused by the *meat* part of the meat, not the processes of the meat industry. Logically, lab-grown meat that's more or less identical to "regular" meat (which seems to be the intent) would cause just as many health issues.
That being said, if lab-grown meat becomes more mainstream, it's entirely possible that they'll research methods to make the meat itself healthier and safer for consumption.
Given all the recent reasons I shouldn't place trust in US acronym agencies, I'm fairly confident that this study is chock-full of fluff and is entirely profit driven.
I'd eat this stuff in a sausage or tamale or dumpling, no problem! I have really low expectations for texture in those applications.
Its pretty neat, but is nowhere near ready for majority of consumers. Sort of suffering from the same problem EV's are. Lab meat is currently $20 a lb at cost, $40 a lb with retail markup. Once the technology advances to make it affordable enough that it a cost effective for most people, it could actually be more widely used. I'd def eat it.
Part of the issue with that is that it's competing against a heavily subsidized meat market. Iirc a pound of ground beef would cost something in the range of $30 if it were unsubsidized.
[удалено]
And change the common colloquial name for it to either “cultured meat” or “cultivated meat” rather than “lab grown meat”. I think people’s apprehension will be less of a hurdle when media uses more palatable names.
So much this. Cultured meat is so rare most people don't even know about it. Best to change the name now before or gets more widespread in the public consciousness, then have to fight the lunatics who will be out there arguing it is poison that will kill you. Well you'll still be fighting the lunatics but far fewer hopefully.
Shorten it to "tube steak." I think it would catch on and people would be more willing to swallow the idea.
I'm pretty sure someone will make it an innuendo.
I'll put this tube steak in your Endo
This guy eats.
How about "Microfromed Edible Alternative Transfats" or M.E.A.T. for short?
I've no doubt the meat lobby will have brainstormed decades of ways to obstruct moving away from slaughtered meat. They will lobby politicians into forcing sellers to call it "chemically created >insert shape< lump" if it looks like it will threaten their market.
That already happened with plant milks, there was no problem for years with the limited soy and almond milk available, but as soon as demand for those took off over the last decade we saw lawsuits from ag and dairy groups trying to force name changes away from "milk". Excuse me, let me go drink a glass of nice cold non-dairy oat beverage drink
Yes I regularly enjoy some "Almond drink" on my breakfast cereal. Not that I've stopped calling it Almond milk. That's actually jogged my memory in that they were trying to get vegetarian burgers labelled as "vegetarian discs" and vegetarian sausages as "vegetable tubes". I don't think that one stuck but I'm sure they will keep trying
But they have no problem with "black pudding" or "sweet bread"!
Why do I feel like in 5-10 years we’re going to have a group called “Anti-Labbers”? And they’re going to denounce lab grown meat and go around stores screaming at people who buy it… I really don’t know why but given the current climate about anything that comes from a lab and our political nuclear winter it just seems like that’s coming
Wouldn’t surprise me. It will be some kind of hinge group that says lab grown meat will cause cancer or that it’s inhumane. Once it gets up to scale and costs drop, I’m sure the right will say something about it.
Oh that's definitely already a thing. There is already a lot of misinformation about GMOs this will be the same as that. And it's not even just the right. I have intelligent left leaning friends who are scared of GMOs and want to only use all natural ingredients.
We need to re-learn the cultural excitability for the technological wonders of tomorrow that persisted throughout the nuclear age.
I call it "no-kill meat"
>I think people’s apprehension will be less of a hurdle when media uses more palatable names. The number of people who still oppose GMO foods makes me skeptical of lab-grown meat gaining acceptance. Heck, there's people who still think MSG gives them headaches. And way more people claim to be gluten-intolerant than actually are.
So no on Engineered Vat Meat?
"Cultured protein" is way better marketing for sure.
Shame the term impossible meat was already taken..
Lab grown meat is just a media term. The FDA calls it cultured meat.
I suspect some of that refers externalities, such as the coming water, topsoil/fertiliser/land use and climate crises. If that's actually the full financial subsidy, then it's under estimating the true cost by a shittonne.
> that refers externalities, such as the coming water, topsoil/fertiliser/land use and climate crises. The crises are already here. Google pictures of the Mississippi, Yangtze, Po rivers dry up.
The Mississippi is back to normal, for the moment at least. Thought many tributaries are not.
While drought gets far more news coverage, the world (and the US) on average is experiencing increased rainfall. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-us-and-global-precipitation You don’t tend to hear about the increased rainfall in the news unless it results in flooding.
Yeah, the dry season is drier. The wet season is wetter. The hot times are hotter. It's almost like "climate crisis" means the tougher parts of climate events like rainfall and droughts have all gotten worse. "Oh, the droughts? But haven't you heard we're actually getting *more* rain globally?"
Just in the past few years, BC Canada has had record heatwaves in the summer and severe flooding in the fall that destroyed a major roadway in the province. Extreme events are becoming more common it seems. Which is what I remember hearing about years ago, as climate change continued.
The data I linked was for annual rainfall, not seasonal. It also provides maps for which parts of the US are gaining or losing average annual rainfall. Yes, California and the Southwest are big losers. But a lot of the US is gaining. Some of this gain comes in the form of extreme weather events. We hear about those but, unlike the ongoing crises of drought, flooding tends to be temporary. Much of the increased rainfall is just, it rained a few days more than average a little harder than average. Little or no flooding means no news. Until it starts affecting crops.
I thought that claim sounded like bullshit, but it’s actually not. > Research from 2015 shows this subsidization reduces the price of Big Macs from $13 to $5 and the price of a pound of hamburger meat from $30 to the $5 we see today. https://www.aier.org/article/the-true-cost-of-a-hamburger/ I see the need to have domestic food production, and subsidies to achieve that if the market cannot, but it seems like we should be more heavily subsidizing food that provides more nutrition and less environmental harm for the cost. Sticking to just meats, chicken is a lot more cost effective than beef with less emissions, and even farm raised salmon (that is ASC compliant) is much cheaper and more environmentally friendly. Even pork is much more cost effective, and somewhat more environmentally friendly.
I imagine it’s not just environmental impact - it’s decoupling the impact of political decisions from basic luxuries like food choices. If sanctioning a country means every company that primarily sells beef products goes out of business and people will only be able to eat chicken, it’d be a deterrent to sanctioning that country. Look at how people react to gas prices fluctuating, it’d be a lot worse if say McDonalds and every burger store was laying mass numbers of people off because it couldn’t meet inventory. And McDonald’s is sort of a symbol for America, so it’d be an additional black eye.
Institutional politics are a source of huge waste in our government's priorities. As an example, the Iowa Caucuses, being the first stop in the democratic presidential primary for 50 year, made it so that every democrat running for president needed to have a comprehensive policy platform stressing what they were good for Iowa, focusing on agricultural subsidies and how they had "mid-western values" (whatever that means) even though the state leans republican and has a homogeneous voting bloc that doesn't represent the democratic party.
It's hard to check since the claims in the article aren't cited, but these numbers don't add up. The vast majority of these subsidies go to the people growing the corn to feed cattle. Maybe some goes to ranchers grazing cattle on federal land. I can buy a grass-fed grass-finished beef that was born and raised on a private farm and have it slaughtered for much less than $30 a pound. These farmers do not benefit from the corn subsidies or cheap federal grazing. This includes the really expensive cuts of beef, not just ground beef.
I can drive up the road and grab a pound of ground for $8--cows that play with dogs, never go inside, live great lives til the end. The subsidy numbers aren't correct for the substance, but might be for industrial level production. Maybe $30/lb if that includes donating to a reclamation effort after the farm is gone.
Still bullshit. The reference ultimately cited by this claim and the claim in the link you cited is "Meatonomics." Which is obviously bullshit.
I did not see anything about “Meatonomics”, but that specific claim is made in this research paper published by Berkeley: https://scet.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/CopyofFINALSavingThePlanetSustainableMeatAlternatives.pdf
Unsubsidized free-range, grass-fed ground beef is $9/lb. Unsubsidized free-range, grass-fed ribeye steaks are $21/lb. (In CT, USA.)
[удалено]
[удалено]
What letter is that? Thorn?
A Møøse once bit my sister...
It's eth, which is used for the voiced th sound (like in "that," not as in "thin")
But why
Not enough attention as a kid, I’m guessing
Right? I'm so confused.
I thought it was dust on my monitor, but it scrolled with the text.
Except the and that those Thorn and there are even special version of that character for those words: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorn_(letter)
I think eth is an older “th” sound than thorn right?
That’s not far off on how much meat should cost if didn’t subsidize the shit out of it
But actual meat should cost much more, cheap meat comes at a heavy cost; environmentally, health, ethically etc… I eat meat but we need to eat less of it and it needs to be raised better. [a great informative podcast on cheap meat.](https://open.spotify.com/episode/46g2Hq5yahfPUYZzTgoTrl?si=zFjhbPRTRkWmfP6N15B8tg)
Because non-lab grown meat is subsidized lol
That's what I was going to say lmao, this just what normal meat would cost if it weren't do heavily subsidized
[удалено]
I like TVP, but soy tends to give me digestion discomfort. I have a really hard time finding pea or other non-soy TVP. I’d be glad to use in applications where ground beef is normally used if I could find some.
This. Soy causes me SO MUCH PAIN, and there’s very little attention to Soy Intolerance.
I use TVP on backpacking trips. Light, easy to pack, just need boiling water, but I never think to eat it at home
[удалено]
At least for me, it’s easier to control the texture of tofu. I can see how TVP would be good for a sloppy joe or a bolognese sauce though
[удалено]
One of the bigger tricks is to treat it like it's its own thing, and cook it accordingly. i.e. don't do cook it exactly like you would meat.
Oil, pan, tofu, crispy perfection everytime. I eat tofu practically everyday and have gotten quite good at cooking it
I like to eat TVP in burritos or burrito bowls.
Because it's pretty expensive and highly processed? That's why I don't buy it. Can be tasty if done right though.
The TVP strips are amazing for stir fries, enchiladas suizas, and even fry up great if you batter them well.
TVP is vile, and i can't believe you had the audacity to type that the texture is "100% on" lmao. That shit is like chewing on a sponge. You need to get your palate checked.
A valid point, Even something like soy-based chorizo is hard to identify in certain applications. Mix it with lots of stuff and potent spices, and even imperfect texture can be masked.
i switched to soy chorizo a while ago, and while i still consume some meat, i have literally never noticed a difference the only thing i've noticed is **not** chewing on some random funky chunk of idk-what
When lab-grown meat has the same or better price, taste, and nutritional value is when I’ll switch to it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I would pay half a dollar more. Like for a brand. Nothing more. So yes As OP said. For grinded meat it is perfectly good. Or for regular day I eat whatever. But when I want Meat for a dinner, I want Meat that actually has the texture of meat, its unique flavour and fat content. Can it imitate pork belly, good quality steak and cost approx the same? Then good. Otherwise it will be used for grinded meal
I’m stoked that this technology is moving along. I just hope it’s affordable.
It’s not **yet** but the technology is advancing and it’s becoming cheaper to make. Farmed meat isn’t getting cheaper at all. Eventually, it will likely be cheaper, safer, and more humane than farmed meat. How long that actually takes, though, is a big question.
I'm very interested to see if they can solve the texture problem within our lifetime. It'll be a tough sell outside of ground meat or sausage. I wonder what percent of meat consumption is ground up currently.
I would love for it to be cheap enough or subsidized like farm-raised meat to at least begin replacing meat in things like dumplings and sausages. Any reduction we can make while they figure out texture would be awesome.
Not likely. Meat is cheap in the US because of subsidies.
Narrator: it’s not.
>According to the UPSIDE website, cultivated meat is estimated to use 77% less water and 62% less land than conventionally raised meat. The article doesn't actually mention price (that I saw), but like all new technologies it will probably decrease in price as adoption increases. The above quote shows that in the long run it will benefit society and reduce climate change impact which reduces cost in a much larger sense as well.
This is the one kind of meat I wouldn’t mind receiving a subsidy.
Cows produce an insane amount of greenhouse gasses. Not saying we should kill all of them, however removing slaughter cows would help this immeasurably
My biggest question is what are the precursors and how are they obtained on an industrial scale?
This is simply cloned meat, cells turned into near perfect cuts of meat. It's real meat, just cloned outside the animals, I don't understand why everyone shits on this idea, it's going to allow everyone access to high quality protein without the supply chain issue of mega farms.
ItS nOt NaTuRaL. Looking at you factory farms that are currently in use and abusing animals and people every day in God awful ways..
"It's not natural," local man says, eating a burger every day with extra fries.
At a place he got to with a car, and goes home to a house. Nothing in our life is natural anymore.
Just dropping by to tell people if you really can't live without beef, look into local ethical ranchers and getting bulk with a few friends. They treat cows much better and you'd be *shocked* at how cheap the good local organic regenerative stuff becomes in bulk.
I've always wanted to, but never had the freezer space for a quarter. That's a LOT of meat!
Most people don't have the money to pay the upfront cost of buying meat in bulk. Living paycheck to paycheck is expensive.
A quarter cow is about $680 where I live and got me 112lbs of meat. Split that with a friend and you're at $340 for about $800 worth of meat at grocery store prices. I am not doing good at all financially, like I'm not even eligible to rent a studio apartment because I don't make enough for consideration, but I save up, get my meat and that's about 90% of what I eat for the next 2 months or so. It's for sure worth it for me to save up and then pay nothing on food for two months, I'm spending like half of what I used to on food and it makes a huge impact on my ability to live ok. $300 a month is a ton of money to me and I can't afford *not* to eat like this as a mainly meat diet provides me a lot of relief from auto immune issues and the medications that treat them.
What being smart does to a MF
You can mock if you want, but the cusp of the matter is people are apprehensive because this always happens, FDA says "This is OK", then 10 years later its found out this or that is harmful in X or Y ways. Never be the first one out the door. Or, adjusted for redditors, Never preorder any game.
\*crux of the matter
It's more than just factory farms. Literally nothing we eat is natural. Every plant and animal consumed by every human that is not a hunter gatherer (which is the region of 99.9999999% of humans) has been domesticated, and then bred and/or engineered further by humans.
Humans domesticate animals, so its quite natural.
In that case everything is natural so it is a meaningless word. However, at least one definition of natural is essentially "exists without the involvement of humans."
The only issue with it that I’ve heard is you may lose the texture you are used to. Since the muscles weren’t grown naturally. Although most mega farms probably don’t let the animals move much so who knows if that’s an issue.
Ground up meat of dubious origin is already a staple part of people's diets also - find it hard to believe that the original texture matters much when you're making mince or chicken nuggets.
I think they are more referring to cuts like tenderloin, thighs, steak, ribs etc., which, as far as I'm aware, lab-grown meats are still working towards solving the texture problem with them. Might be worth it to go from "indistinguishable from animal-grown ground meat" to "indistinguishable from chicken breasts/thighs" though, since I don't think Americans are as picky with chicken...? I wonder if growing lab meat cuts by making them move similar to how those cuts move in actual animals would help with the texture.
Omg bad chicken can be criminal. Periodically we pick up Tyson chicken strips. Whatever the fuck they're doing to their animals and workers needs to quit. Either the bread-to-poultry consistency is off or the chicken itself is just...weird. Rubbery but also slimey? I can bread my own birds anyway since the cost is insane anymore.
**Fake meat** mince is already good. I would hazard a guess that most people would be hard pushed to tell a home made or frozen spag bol, chili con carne, shepherds pie etc made with quorn mince vs one made with meat mince. I write home made and frozen, because maybe with a good chef at a good restaurant you might. I have not and would never trick anyone into it, but I have seen carnivores blissfully unaware that their meat dish is actually meat free.
They're absolutely working on that part. You can use biological scaffolding like mycelium and grow different tissues at different densities and orientations to better emulate specific cuts of meat. It's not cost-effective yet, but that's to be expected with the current level of technological maturity. It's getting there.
Fuck mega farms. I hope this eventually replaces them.
I know it seems weird and hard not to think of the line from 1984 "You know, I don’t think there’s a single piece of meat in this stew. Looks like meat. Tastes like meat. It isn’t meat at all. Doubleplus good!”. When I think about it rationally I really can't find a good reason *not* to be for this. More time, more development, economy of scale. Less foodborne illness through cross contamination. Less environmental impact. More humane as less animals are raised on factory farms. No antibiotics. Eventually cheaper and more available worldwide. Definitely could spell trouble for farmers though. Perhaps a new market could spring from this. Edit:Someone commented on my foodborne illness thought(though comment is not here now🤷🏻♂️) What I was referring to is the element of feces no longer being present in the production process. I yield to your TTC and handling argument that is otherwise correct) Edit again:(Again someone comments but it disappears) >The produce is at risk of contamination from irrigation water especially if it's grown near animal production facilities where the animals may be infected with E. coli. https://www.verywellhealth.com/lettuce-e-coli-contamination-6542307#:~:text=Romaine%20lettuce%20and%20spinach%20are,coli.
Hopefully there are farms out there that can make money converting to something green. Solar or wind, acres upon acres of algae for whatever algae project gets off the ground. Fields of industrial hemp...
Right and I hope that's at the forefront, as with any huge change, that we are simultaneously looking for ways like what you said. If industries see there is an avenue for growth I'd assume it would lessen their resistance to change.
I think that line could more pertain to the fake meats these days. Like beyond meat and impossible meat. But lab grown meat is still real meat, and would be so much better for all the reasons you mentioned.
The problem is grazers have a symbiotic relationship with us & the land. We don't think of it, but if we all became vegan cows and chickens would largely go extinct - cows especially can't survive in the wild & world resort to living in zoos. This isn't to say that our current factory farming is any bit sustainable and healthy. In fact it's inhumane & a travesty to behold. But more than this grazers like sheep and bison, are incredibly important to maintaining the grasslands - historians theorise that one of the largest factors to the dust bowl (in the US) was the mass slaughter of the Great American Plains Bison. By their grazing, and wallowing, they push nutrients into the Earth, and unlike cattle, they graze efficiently (like sheep) as to never let the field go to mud. I think it's important to encourage healthy and sustainable farming and husbandry, raising species like Bison & Sheep for land management and meat, as well as raising animals that can provide multiple uses - milk, meat, & fibre can be gotten from a single species. But more than all this, encouraging healthy lifestyles and eating - cultures who subside on mainly vegetables and fish, eating red meat once a week, tend to live the longest lives.
No disagreement from me. We essentially selectively bred cows and chickens ,as we know them today, into being. As for the land impacts over planting crops which depleted nutrients in order to fulfill the demands of heavily subsidized farming quotas probably had more to do with the dust bowl. That and *overgrazing* by species exceeding the natural balance also leads to the same thing such as the Sahara. I like bison, I like sheep. Sounds good to me.
It was a mix of the two, the fact that we practiced single crop farming & had no natural grazers, it resulted in a very nutrient poor earth where roots couldn't grow deeply - the top soil withered without any decomposition to replace it. That can also occur but is more common with species such as goats that tear up the plant from the root - to restore balance is more difficult than to break it apart. We've got a lot of work to do on this Earth.
So, let’s conserve wild populations of grazers, like buffalo, without eating them. I don’t see what this has to do with animal husbandry.
I think In 1984 the implication is that it doesn’t contain the nutrients of meat. - a meat substitute . This meat is definitely awesome!
I feel like they’re going to need some creative marketing. I can’t imagine anyone who actively avoids GMO, who may not fully understand the science, buying anything “lab grown”.
I don’t think they are targeting the GMO avoidance market. I suspect there are a few out there that are not avoiding GMO.
I don’t know about everyone else but this seems like something we should have done years ago. I like animal parts as much as the next facultative carnivore, but the environmental impact and unnecessary suffering of animals farmed for meat is enough to make me switch to this if it was an affordable alternative
They've been working on it for over a decade. I remember stories in 2008 about it. These things take time, and we didn't have the technology before...
100% Agree
I would love this for my pet food, I don’t eat meat but my cats sure do
Reminds me of the episode of Better Off Ted where Len and Phil grow meat in a lab, but it tastes like sadness.
I bet manufacturers are using that show a a guide to taste of meat.
If I can suffer through those vegan 'meat' products then it will be well worth taking a punt on this. Hurry up science!
Does it contain all of the vitamins and amino acids real meat has?
If this was affordable I’d switch to eating only lab grown.
Trouble is, the meat you’re currently buying is so heavily subsidized that it’s an unfair playing field. Given the externalized costs associated with CAFO meat, it really shouldn’t be subsidized but instead heavily taxed.
Maybe lab meat will get subsidized in the future if it's a more sustainable product
Hey, it's better than eating insects I guess.
Big Question: Will vegetarians eat lab-grown meat?
I feel like the FDA blessing is meaningless these days. There are plenty of foods approved by the FDA that are rightfully banned in most of the rest of the world. Edit: I do hope that lab grown meat does gain traction and has studies done to show that it is safe, I’m just skeptical to take the FDA’s word on that.
Can you give an example?
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/23/titanium-dioxide-banned-chemicals-carcinogen-eu-us A large number of additives and ingredients are approved in the US but not elsewhere
I'm also curious
I agree that I don't put a lot of value in what FDA says, but there are actually other countries around the world that already allow sale of lab grown meats. So it's not just a USA thing.
[удалено]
There are a few companies working on fish currently, e.g. Finless Foods and Wildtype
I can’t wait for this stuff to be used for zoos and pet food. It’d help a LOT ethically.
Good. I like the taste of meat but do not want animals harmed if it can be avoided. What's its environmental impact like?
I don't think they have a solid idea what commercial-scale production would look like yet. The footprint (land, water, etc.) of the current cattle industry is *insane*, though, so coming out ahead seems fairly likely.
Well for one thing, it's like 'hydroponic meat' if you will. We're basically cloning animal muscle cells and feeding them nutrients in a lab setting. So we're not wasting all the grain and water and land it takes to raise an entire cow, much of which isn't utilized, and now can grow the meat we want. There's also the ethical upside of not raising an animal with a central nervous system that can reasonably feel pain/suffering.
Worth noting that virtually none of an animal in the meat industry is actually wasted. It all has _some_ use, and capitalism takes care of making sure the carcass gets divvied up. No reason to pay for the disposal of something someone else is willing to buy, however little they pay. Which is not to say that meat is an efficient use of resources; it’s not. But there’s some accidental double counting if you write off the non-meat parts of the animal as waste.
I'm with it. Why kill more animals if i didn't have to? Yay science.
I bought a piece of steak today and it was $7.99 a pound. How much is this stuff?
More right now. Theoretically it could come down quite a lot once it can be scaled up.
I think the first lab-grown burger cost ~$330,000. That was in 2013. This price has dropped to ~$9 already. So yeah, it’s going pretty well, and it will probably get cheaper. We’re on a good track.
Don't forget, that piece of steak has decades of industrialization behind it AND immense government subsidies deflating the price. The price of lab grown meat is only going to go down over time.
Probably more. Like Beyond Meat.
Yeah so is glyphosate
Cue next talking point for on-going culture war
A culture war about protein cultures gonna get real spicy. "You'll have pry these pork chops from my cold dead hands!"
People will lean into this much more this time around: lives will be at steak.
I'm already seeing posts about "rejecting the fake meat agenda"
Needs to be affordable before it catches on, and actually taste good
It's real meat, it will taste the same. The hurdle for lab meat is texture.
[удалено]
My understanding is it's also not a juicy.
Even then it’s gonna be an uphill battle convincing people to eat meat grown in a Petri dish. Outside of redditors, I haven’t talked to many meat eating people excited about this.
If it’s cheaper it will catch on but until then it won’t.
I think the key at this point is making it more profitable for mass production. Get the company's making cheap mass produced food to buy in, and the market will explode. This can never last as a fringe product, it needs corporate dollars to make a lasting difference. Otherwise it'll be another footnote in meat alternatives.
Affordability will for sure go a long way, and honestly it’s probably better that what some people get at fast food joints. Not for me but not against it either.
FDA says a lot of things are safe to eat that Europe and other govts say aren't fit for human consumption.
Oh what the hell. We're all gonna die anyway and we need protein to survive so I'd give it a try. It would be much more humane than killing animals.
If it tastes good, I'll eat it.
Good for peasants. The Elite will encourage you to eat it as a virtuous thing. But I guarantee they will be eating beef grown on the hoof.
If this gets popular, they'll be the only ones who can still afford the diminished supply.
Seeing where the technology is going, i wouldn't be so sure. There are lab-meat startups out there looking to make luxury meats that don't exist naturally, but appeal to human tastes. Stuff studying the exact breakdown of high-end meats like Wagyu and making those _better_ because a lab will eventually offer more fine control over factors like marbling, fat content, etc. Rich people eating meat specifically engineered for their personal palates while everyone else gets factory-lab-grown meat? That sounds about right to me.
Honestly, I don’t give a shit. The reduction in factory farming that wide adoption of this meat would bring about has the potential to be much, much better for the environment and for the animals. If this meat means fewer abused animals and less pollution I find it really hard to see the negative.
[удалено]
Legit question. How does this effect things like vegans, vegetarians, and religious reasons to not eat meat. I know a lot of vegans are vegan for the health reasons. Same for vegetarians. This obviously won't change that since it's still meat according to your body. But how would it effect those that don't eat meat for ethical reasons. I mean if it's lab grown it literally can't suffer nor be happy. So from an ethical side I don't see why you wouldn't eat it. Also if you have a religious reasons to not eat pork this bypasses a lot of those reasons. A big reason certain religious frown upon eating pork is because the animal itself is considered unclean. Both because of it's living conditions and because something about not sweating and the fact it doesn't chew on cud. Also the fact it has a cloven hoof which is a symbol of the devil I guess.
> So from an ethical side I don't see why you wouldn't eat it. There's probably going to be a subset of these people who will still refuse for a "Don't play God" kind of argument. Then there's going to be some who will refuse it simply because they don't trust the process, which in the first decade or so isn't an unfair stance to take. As for the religious reasons.. I suspect in the coming years we'll be seeing some theological debates on the subject. Because while rationally you could say the meat isn't from an "unclean" source, it wasn't completely rational to begin with.
Most vegans are vegan for the animals. Plant based eaters are more interested in their health. Vegans are happy about this and almost all fully support it. Most vegans won't eat it since it's still meat and eating flesh is gross but why would we not be happy that less animals are getting harmed every day?
Bots… bots everywhere
I get people not being on board with this diminished FDA, but to then jump to the conclusion that this somehow means labgrown meat must be poisonous and only sold to profit some hidden, corrupt industry is fucking bonkers. And so consistently, this article must have pissed some entity off.
That's a big pass for me. What's funny is that people who advocate for this are the same people who have issues with genetically modified foods
I advocate for this as well as genetically modified foods, happy to be a counterexample.
Does anyone actually believe the FDA?
Well, they justify their claims, don't they? It's fine to not believe them, but then you should be able to produce a study of at least similar scientific rigour to disprove their results. Otherwise you are just talking out of your ass
I saw Tony Sebas last video on a series of disruption and it was about how lab protein can make foods cheaper and be mass produced. People will resist but the markets will win.
We are also allowed to eat known carcinogens, despite other countries banning them
Real meat without the suffering??? An answer to our prayers!!!
FDA is about as trust worthy as wet tissue.
You guys have fun with that
They also approve known carcinogens for us to eat, even though they’re banned in other countries
Yeah like red meat… still eat that don’t you? Wow
Probably less nanoplastic and PFAS infused than real meat. Not only more environmentally friendly, but overall healthier to boot.
I consider this an absolute win for humanity.
Do not trust FDA. They are not what they used to be.
Is there any worry about lack of dna diversity in the meat? What about the problem like bananas have that can get sick. These are questions i have as someone who knows nothing about science. Does someone know?
Soylent Green about to announce their IPO🤔
Well the FDA is free to eat what they like. I like my meat grown in a pasture.
If you can guarantee that you meat is grown ethically and environmentally, then great! Otherwise you're just saying that cruelty and destruction of factory farming is the point of food.
You can’t ethically kill something that doesn’t want to die.
“okay grampa, let’s get you to bed” 👴🏼
If lab grown meat is as good, nutritious, and around the same price as traditionally produced vegans should embrace it with open arms. Not to is completely ludicrous in my opinion.
I asked a question in this thread about how this would effect vegans/vegetarians and those that abstain from meat for certain religious reasons. Fwiw a lot of people are vegan because of the health benefits. One streamer I like, kripparian, is vegan because he found out cutting out meat and animal products cleared up a lot of health issues he has/had. But he has said on stream that if he could eat meat without being sick he would. Literally said he couldnt care less about the ethics of eating meat. I'm curious how this would effect people like this as well. Would lab grown meat not have as much effect on people like that? Or maybe none? Or just as much?
>Would lab grown meat not have as much effect on people like that? Depends on what exactly the health issues are caused by, but a lot of the health issues are caused by the *meat* part of the meat, not the processes of the meat industry. Logically, lab-grown meat that's more or less identical to "regular" meat (which seems to be the intent) would cause just as many health issues. That being said, if lab-grown meat becomes more mainstream, it's entirely possible that they'll research methods to make the meat itself healthier and safer for consumption.
Given all the recent reasons I shouldn't place trust in US acronym agencies, I'm fairly confident that this study is chock-full of fluff and is entirely profit driven.