Space Meat Coming to your Kitchen 854
jdray writes "Australia's GizMag is running an article about the industrialization of a NASA-tested concept for artificially creating meat. The article mentions meat makers as home appliances. Carne-Matic aside, this sounds like a mixed blessing, and brings about visions of some sterile, Spandex-jumpsuit future where food production is controlled by some central authority, and real, hoof-grown meat is a rare delicacy. Remember, Soylent Green is people!" You can read a curiously familiar Slashdot story from a month ago too.
we need healthy burgers/fries/chips (Score:1, Interesting)
because they taste so good nobody will give them upo but at the moment they are bad for you, if someone could invent junk food that is actually healthy for us, the world would be a better place
Re:You Insensitive Clod!... (Score:5, Interesting)
can it be shaped? (Score:0, Interesting)
like my meat
Society of people scared of acne... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's truly sickening to me the lengths that people go these days to ruin their eating experiences. Too many restaurants refuse to cook meat anything under "medium" - hell I'll sign a waiver to eat a burger medium rare! Too many people crinkle their nose unless you cook their meat to shoe leather and someone even asked me if I should be rushed to the hospital because my steak was "too pink".
All the fears in the world about animal borne disease (avian flu, mad cow disease, etc) have spawned even more "illness psychos" who are obsessed with the latest in 99.9% bacteria free soaps, hand lotions, and air filters. We are breeding a population of individuals that are more susceptible to illness than ever before!
Eat that fucking natural meat and cook it rare. When you are making some hamburger, wad up a ball, add some pepper and salt and eat it. I've done it since I was a kid and never had any ill effects.
I am beginning to enjoy food less and less (especially out here in the Midwest where they have no tastebuds) and bullshit like this will only make it worse. Sadly, people will love it... See, no bacteria - especially when I cook it till it's charcoal.
Blah.
Where meat is everywhere, it is nowhere? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, because I know all my home appliances are controlled by the government. I get a Toaster Use Coupon every Tuesday in the mail so I can use the toaster 3 times a week between the hours of 4-6 PM. Thank god for the central authority.
I don't see what the problem is. If the meat tastes like meat and has roughly the same protein and calorie content but costs much less then this can only be a good thing, right? Maybe we won't need to raise millions of cows just for meat production and we can change some of the food crop over to something more useful like grains.
I just don't understand how being able to synthesize food in every home in America means there would suddenly be a shortage of non-synthesized food, strictly controlled by the government.
Slashdot submitter comments are made of STUPID! (Score:5, Interesting)
Decentralized 'meat' production where there's no suffering involved, the risk of dangerous bacterial contamination from slaughterhouse processing is gone, the consumer has moer direct control over what antibiotics and hormones, if any, go into their meat is such an Orwellian idea.
Since when did it become required in
Wait... (Score:3, Interesting)
Unless you grow it yourself, this is already effectively the case, isn't it? If you're not making a deliberate effort to the contrary, the bulk of the food you eat is likely to come from large operations and national chains.
As a borderline vegan, (Score:2, Interesting)
If the meat is wholly synthetic, and never came from a living animal, I think that most vegetarians would find it difficult to say no to it.
However, haven spoken to my vegan wife about a similar issue just yesterday (cloned meat), if the fake meat originated from the cell of one real animal, it still goes against the basic constructs of veganism.
It's not all about how the animal is treated, it's just that it is animal flesh.
Re:You Insensitive Clod!... (Score:4, Interesting)
Religious Implications (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the ideological implications are more interesting (fake bacon is one thing, but this...), but those aren't really of any concern on
-Erwos
Re:You Insensitive Clod!... (Score:5, Interesting)
I for one would not eat this. It skeeves me out like you wouldn't believe. Tank-grown, faux-critter isn't on the list of things I'm likely to try.
And, for many of us vegetarians, it's a combination of the ethics of meat combined with the fact that meat-heavy diets are held up as unhealthy overall.
I think you'll find that for vegetarians, this stuff is a non-starter -- it's still meat. The fact that it's a lab experiment is even creepier.
Manwich (Score:3, Interesting)
i'll second that (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:You Insensitive Clod!... (Score:1, Interesting)
On the other hand if it were "guaranteed" that with that one animal you could (and would) clone all the "meat" you want and no animals would be eaten after that point (i.e. all now-meat-eaters would become artificial-meat-eaters), then they would be pragmatic enough to support that.
Re:You Insensitive Clod!... (Score:3, Interesting)
Suppose the vegan himself was the tissue donor. Could he cannibalize his own derived tissue without any ethical quandry?
My opinion (as one of 'those' folk) (Score:5, Interesting)
Back to those male cows though: you've got a lot of them, but you can't just kill them, that would be resource consuming in and of itself, so what do you do? You sell them off for veal. They, more often than not, have their hooves nailed to the tiny cages they'll spend the rest of their lives in, before being slaughtered for a delicacy. If I chose not to eat meat, but consumed a lot of dairy, I'd be directly funding one of the most inhumane (again, POV) parts of the industry I was personally boycotting. Male egg chicks are at least disposed of quickly, but usually not disposed of, generally just discarded, i.e. in a dumpster or elsewhere.
So yeah, those are my main reasons for not partaking in animal products. It'd require some deep thought, but initially I'd say that yes, it is possible that I'd consume products that were derived from an animal, so long as it was humane, sterile, and non-harmful to the animal. This seems, again initally, like a pretty non-invasive procedure, and there will probably always be host animals around, hopefully ones living happy lives.
*Note: I'm not in anyway trying to proselytize here; I'm not telling you what to do, think, eat, or say. The above information is accurate, as far as I'm concerned.
Re:i'll second that (Score:3, Interesting)
I also find it puzzling that somehow a cow ranging the field eating where they took a dump a while ago is "healthier" than a biologically steril vat growing meat!
Re:Whats with the Spin (Score:2, Interesting)
We could get a long perfectly well seeing in black & white, or a gross shade of brown, like dogs do. But we in fact, see colors because it's... better.
Same with taste. Why does everything have taste? More importantly, why does everything edible taste good and (most) everything harmful taste bad? We don't even have to have taste to get sustenance. But we do because it's... better.
And there are more efficient ways to eat than meat, but enjoyment isn't always the result of effeciency. And what is the point of life if it isn't as enjoyable as possible?
Re:i'll second that (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:i'll second that (Score:3, Interesting)
This is just a cultural meme that can easily change over the course of a generation. What different cultures think of as appetizing or revolting is so variable such a small transition as from hoof-meat to vat-meat is likely to be relatively painless. Of course, the flip side of the coin is that two generations from now, people might think in disgust of their grandparents who ate _actual_ _animals_ *yuck*
Should make BSE a thing of the past too.
Re:As a borderline vegan, (Score:2, Interesting)
Much of the horrific videos (read: "Propaganda" for you meat-eating folk) put out by PETA is largely directed towards the visceral response.
Personally, myself, again being an ovo-lacto-pesco vegetarian, (eating vegan food when prepared at home), I wouldn't have a problem eating this new synthetic meat.
As for everyone who is saying "Ew, gross," well ... it's no less disgusting than bloody animal flesh from a tortured animal. They're just being huge pussies.
What? No Invader Zim references? (Score:3, Interesting)
However, having grown up on a dairy and beef farm, there is nothing more satisfying than a good slab of heated cow flesh.
I'm an omnivore, have always been. I hate plants as well as animals.
There was a militant vegan in my office. Ignoring her leather shoes and so on, she used to scoff me for my lunch. Smirkingly and smarmingly eating a banana like she was -superior- to me. "You know. Cows are superior to Bananas." "Impossible!" "Sure. After I'm done eating -MY- lunch, -I- can wear the peel."
Unlike her, I've -seen- cows in person. I grew up on a farm. I -know- just how mind numbingly stupid cows are. I mean, they're nearly as dumb as your average member of $political_party. I mean, the cow's -ONLY- saving grace, is that they are tasty. (Mind you, I'm not of the faith that considers cows to be sacred.)
I eat steak, chicken, fish, you name it. If its the flesh of a formerly living creature, there's a good chance I'd consider it food. Make it as rare as safe. I want to -taste- the meat. Steak Sauce? Sure, but -only- if I really, really f'ed up the cooking. She? Strictly Vegan, has been most of her life.
I take practically no sick leave from work. If I'm out sick, people are surprised, and wonder about me when I return. Her? She was out sick constantly. Anyone so much as wrote 'Germs' on a post-it, and she had a three day cold.
I'd like to think that -maybe- my diet contributed to a more formidable immune system.
Additional Social Impact (Score:4, Interesting)
* Monkey Meat - People will no longer have the taboo associated with eat Chimm Chimm.
* Cannibals - Someone with phrack one of these units and take a human muscle sample (your own, a friend, a famous person, ect.) so they can indulge in eating human flesh.
* Faked Identities - take someone's DNA, grow it, and use it in an examine.
* Faked Deaths - take your own DNA, grow it, and put it into a house fire.
Re:w00t! (Score:3, Interesting)
Take a look at the nano-forge in Joe Haldeman's "The Forever Peace" for what happens to such promises.
Re:Don't forget thermodynamics (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I think they already did this... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My opinion (as one of 'those' folk) (Score:4, Interesting)
I do too, and that's really my answer to your question. Milk and eggs come about as a biproduct of reproduction, and there are a heck of a lot of people, so any useful amount of milk and/or eggs has to come from a lot of reproduction going on (lots of gettin' busy). Thus, as you've mentioned, the only way to for that to be in any way sustainable is to slaughter the animals for meat. Since I started out as a vegetarian, and didn't want to support the meat industry monetarily, it was the next logical progression to become vegan. It's not something I pressure on people, though I advocate it, it's just that personally, when I was just veg, I felt like a hypocrite a lot of the time, because I was funding the meat industry semi-directly by supporting an industry that can only be sustained transitively by the meat industry.
Also with regard to milk/cheese grossness, notice that I said it was a coping mechanism. If I were to stop being vegan today, I'd probably find both of them tasty and delicious, but since I'm choosing willfully not to consume either, it's easiest if I think about where it comes from, rather than keep thinking about what I may be missing out on.
Re:My opinion (as one of 'those' folk) (Score:4, Interesting)
I once organised a forum led by an activist vegan nutritionist and a free-range organic rancher. I was hoping for some controversy and heated discussion (ah, the perversions of media), but what I got was an underlying agreement: for many vegans, it is the structure of the food system they object to, especially its depravities. The vegan actually supported the rancher in his venture, and suggested that given his carefully 'humane' techniques as the dominant method of production, only the spiritually-motivated vegans would remain.
Vegans have developed an ideology (like any other movement) that blinds some of its purveyors. I have a friend who's devoted to it, she rescues livestock and keeps them on her property as 'farm pets' so they can live out their life as fertility producers (pigshit is good plant food). Still, it's a bit much, what are we going to do, free the cows? They can't be naturalized, just extincted by attrition according to that logic.
I myself grew up on my grandparents' subsistence farm, and saw how old-fashioned animal husbandry is not too far from hunting-gathering in its relationship (respect) for the livestock. They had names and a 'good' domesticated life... except for the veal (hey, we're italian). I was once vegetarian due to the dissociation between slaughter and table, but now tell people that "I eat meat, but prefer to know its name first." My advice? strive for less than 10% meat in your diet, buy local from smaller family farms, make sure you know about the steps in the food chain that lead to your table... including the death of the animal.
You must be easily grossed out.
Others maybe, but I'm not, I like milking goats/sheep/cows and killing my own food. However, do you actually know what the pus/blood/urine/hormone/pollutant/antibiotic levels are in industrial milk? No, if you want to drink in comfort, don't ask.
Re:w00t! (Score:2, Interesting)
One supposes the artificial meat would have to be rather better than that, before people would give up the real stuff.
It is worth noting that it's possible (indeed, not that hard) to make real sugars (including sucrose, i.e., table sugar) chemically in a lab, and in that case they taste just as good as the white granular stuff you buy at the store today. (Artificial "brown sugar" might be rather harder to arrange, and making artificial honey taste right is probably impossible, at least with today's technology. OTOH, I would have thought artificial meat would be really hard to do as well, and they're apparently already starting to research a means of doing it.)
The thing that makes artificial sweeteners taste bad is that they're designed to be chemically different from sugar, in order to not raise your blood sugar as much (for diabetics), not have as many Calories, and so forth. One supposes the artificial meat would not be designed, intentionally, to be so different from real meat, because that would defeat the purpose. Unless the purpose is to make low-fat meat, or low-protein meat, or PKU-safe meat... I suppose if they get the regular kind mastered, those would be obvious variations on the concept.
Re:As a borderline vegan, (Score:0, Interesting)
A pig shouldn't be stomped on and have it legs broken so you can eat bacon. Some things are just unacceptable. And you, as a consumer, have little to no say as to what happens in the preparation of your meat.
I myself grew up in the country, and while we didn't have a farm, we did hunt deer on our property. Deer which we then ate.
When it comes to the ethics of it, I have way less of a problem with the man who hunts to feed his family than I do for the fat slob who buys the mass-produced hormone-laden slop in the grocery isle. The "disconnect" of animal and flesh is not present for the hunter; he is responsible for his actions.
Good discussion! :)
Re:good and bad, from the cow perspective (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I think they already did this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Beaf is most fun when you pronounce it "Bee-Aff", as in, "Hey, Horace, pass me the bee-aff!".
Also, from the perspective of someone who's a vegetarian because he doesn't want to kill animals, I suppose I'd prefer somewhat creepily grown meat to meat from dead animals.
To reiterate, I love Beaf.
Re:My opinion (as one of 'those' folk) (Score:2, Interesting)
Do you and other vegans actually believe that stuff about animals being "enslaved?" Can it be true enslavement if the animal is not even capable of understanding that they are "enslaved," let alone what that even means? Now, I'm not saying that just because they do not have any concept of life or enslavement we should just abuse them for no reason. But how is a free-range cow harmed by being "enslaved" (in the sense that they are owned and restricted to the confines of the range)? They get to roam around, graze, and be near their kind all day long. Obviously the animal will probably eventually be killed for its meat, but how is that any different than any other predatory animal killing its prey? Is it only that we are sentient (or sapient depending on your usage)?
As far as the "do unto others" part goes, why only animals? I'm sure you get asked that a lot by people who think you're crazy but I mean it as a serious question. Why are animals the only living beings entitled to the same level of respect as those of your own species? The plants you eat must be killed before you eat them (You might even be eating a living plant since they do not immediately die upon removal from their habitat). If your answer is something like "Oh well they're just plants," what is the difference between that and carnivores saying "Oh well they're just animals?" Both are categorizing their food as a lesser form of life. I unfortunately don't have any links or much information about this but, I remember reading at one point that plants may actually communicate in some way(someone please tell me if this study turned out to be bunk). Communication would display some level of sentience and would that cause you the same ethical dilema as killing an animal?
I'm sure there are many other questions I could ask but that's probably good enough for now
Re:No, not like vegetables (Score:1, Interesting)
Many plants that produce seedless fruits are propagated asexually. Almost all commercially cultivated bananas, for example, are genetically the same. These are known as the 'Cavendish' cultivar.
This is definitely a monoculture. But monocultures are not a problem as long as a few simple precautions are taken. There is not much risk of a blight today causing gigantic problems.
In fact, there is already a disease spreading which will probably make 'Cavendish' impractical to grow within a few decades. If this happens, we will just switch to a new cultivar. After all, the same thing happened to the cultivar 'Gros Michel', predessor to 'Cavendish', which finally fell victim to a disease in the 1960s.
In general, improved farming methods and understanding of biology have dramatically reduced risk of famine due to disease. Nowadays, the bigger problems are with weather events (esp. drought), climate change, locusts (depending on the continent), and political instability.
Re:You Insensitive Clod!... (Score:3, Interesting)
As an example, I worked for a few years at a wildlife rehab center. We had a very high turnover rate for volunteers because many of these folks had never had any actual experience with an animal other than a pet. They seemed to think that they and the animals would somehow live in happy harmony, with the animals recognizing (in some mysterious, unexplained fashion) the generosity and kindness of their would-be benefactors, and rewarding them accordingly with warm fuzzies.
The reality of the situation was considerably different. Even after training, the idiots who thought this sort of thing would deliberately go and do something stupid, apparently on the assumption that since *they* were somehow different/more moral/of a purer intellect than the rest of us, the things we had told them about the behavior of the animals wouldn't apply to them. They racked up an impressive number of interesting injuries while trying to 'bond' with our furry and feathered patients.
Of course, this didn't change their opinion of their own exalted nature. They simply blamed us for the actions of the animals (I never did quite figure out *how* we were to blame) and quit. The idea that they were wrong, that the animals did indeed fear and hate them just like they feared and hated everyone else, was something they simply couldn't accept. To the animals they were nothing more than a predator who could eat them at any moment; how they could expect anything different was beyond me. Perhaps they thought their 'auras' would make the animals all friendly and happy? I don't know.
We used to take bets on who would last and who wouldn't. The people with realistic expectations (mainly folks who grew up on farms) lasted longest; the ones who had some sort of "environmental" agenda were often no-shows after two or three shifts, at most (as long as it took them to acquire their first injury from trying to be 'one' with nature). I thought it amusing that the people most vociferous about 'saving the Earth' and 'helping the animals' were the most miffed that the animals couldn't give a shit about their motivations, and treated them just like they did any other human being.
Can't say this experience endeared me to these people. I saw first-hand, repeatedly, that these folks didn't have the first fucking clue, and lived in a la-la land that didn't bear even a remote resemblance to actual reality. It certainly didn't do much to give them any credibility in my eyes.
Max
Re:My opinion (as one of 'those' folk) (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:i'll second that (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, at least I know it is not eating the remains of other cows. Can you guess how mad cow disease spreads among cows ? Non-free-range cows are often being fed with protein that comes from... cow meat and bone meal ! Like in those trashy zombie movies, non-free-range cows do eat cow brains. I dont care what type of grass they find to eat out in the range, but I certainly dont imagine they will start eating each others brains...
For more info:
Brazil's Vegetarian Cows Don't Go Mad
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0107-04.h