A tubeful of daisy makes the medicine go down.

ArtyM

Right, first off I would like to appologise for the Daily Mail link below.
I am fully aware that coming to AH and linking to the DM is akin to going to the Athiest forum and asking if anyone wants to sing Kum ba yah, my Lord
That said, here is my rant...
I have always been what is generally considered a slow adopter. I view new technology with immense fear and suspicion. For the first 5 years I wouldnt go near a microwave without my solid lead man-diapers (thanks David Icke).
As for mobile phones, there were probably guatemalan goat herders blogging on their smartphones before I even held a cordless housephone.
I dont own a Sat Nav, have never facebebo'd or twitterbooked, and I consider 3d to be the work of satan himself.
About the only technological advance I ever openly adopted was internet pornography - I was balls deep into that quicker than you could say www dot boobies dot com.
I do eventually come around though, and I do recognise that many technological advances are beneficial.
However, I would like to go on record here and now and state that as long as there is strength left in my angry, suspicious, technology-hating body I will never eat meat grown in a f**kin test tube.
End of rant

---

The article
Quote
The first ‘test-tube’ hamburger is only a year away, scientists claim.

They believe the product, beef mince grown from stem cells, could pave the way for eating meat without animals being slaughtered.

The Dutch scientists predict that over the next few decades the world’s population will increase so quickly that there will not be enough livestock to feed everyone.
He told Scientific American magazine that he thought the first burger could be made within 12 months.

In 2009 scientists from the same university grew strips of pork using the same method. They admitted it was not particularly appetising, being grey with a similar texture to calamari. Fish fillets have been grown in a New York laboratory using cells taken from goldfish muscle tissue

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2008347/Test-tube-burger-coming-soon-Lab-grown-meat-needed-feed-world.html#ixzz1QVFSnhER

P.s - I am absolutely off my t*ts on coffee, just finished cup number 7.

cml387

MMMMMmmm,Soylent Green.

MungBean

Whats the problem ? Its a food source grown for consumption, no different than vegetables. You would rather huge amounts of animals be reared and killed in horrible conditions to feed you than a mindless bit of biological matter grown in a tube ?

Seachmall

Sounds fantastic to me. It will, presumably, be essentially the same as if it had come from a cow but cheaper.

Chuck Stone

Bet it'd be disgusting.

It behooves us no to..


ah forget it.

RachaelVO

Nice little rant OP. I enjoyed reading that

Not so sure Id eat a test tube hamburger, mostly cos I reckon it'd be rank!!!

Sinfonia

I think Abrakebabra are already selling these

RachaelVO

Sinfonia wrote: »

I think Abrakebabra are already selling these

Don't think Abrakebabra sell much in the way of meat!

Badgermonkey

I'd draw the line at fallopian tube kebab.

Kevin Duffy

Hmmm...suppose it goes this way, what are the implications for the rest of nature? Take out cows, just to pick one, presumably they play a role in the environment other than just to stand there 'til they're killed and eaten, ergo it has a knock on effect if we severely reduce their numbers or even eliminate them.
I am fairly uneducated on this, but I can't see any part of the food chain and the environment it sits in being so unimportant that there would be no loss to its elimination.

MungBean

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

Hmmm...suppose it goes this way, what are the implications for the rest of nature? Take out cows, just to pick one, presumably they play a role in the environment other than just to stand there 'til they're killed and eaten, ergo it has a knock on effect if we severely reduce their numbers or even eliminate them.
I am fairly uneducated on this, but I can't see any part of the food chain and the environment it sits in being so unimportant that there would be no loss to its elimination.

Not necessarily. There will always be a market for fresh meat. So they wont be extinct any time soon. And with the amount of animals being bred to meet demand any role they play in the environment is nowhere near in balance. I believe one of the biggest contributors to the green house effect is methane produced by cows. Not saying cows are the problem just pointing out the fact that as more and more are bred to meet demand the role they play as regards to the environment is more destructive than anything else so reducing numbers would be beneficial.

squod

It's gross and will therefore be cheap.

Kevin Duffy

Skunkle wrote: »

Not necessarily. There will always be a market for fresh meat. So they wont be extinct any time soon. And with the amount of animals being bred to meet demand any role they play in the environment is nowhere near in balance. I believe one of the biggest contributors to the green house effect is methane produced by cows. Not saying cows are the problem just pointing out the fact that as more and more are bred to meet demand the role they play as regards to the environment is more destructive than anything else so reducing numbers would be beneficial.

I would imagine that the point would be to make meat cheap and easily available, rather than an altruistic aim to stop killing the wuvvewly animals. If that happens, the meat produced by current methods will become a premium, expensive product produced on a small scale. The loss of large numbers would have an impact on the nitrogen cycle - would that be a good thing?
Would the loss of large numbers of farmed animals also impact negatively on plant fertilization? Bio-diversity?

Like I say, I'm not educated on this issue, but I think the implications are potentialy threatening to the environment if the science is successful long-term.

pragmatic1

Not going to happen for a long time. Growing cell cultures is a fairly labour intensive activity.

easyeason3

OP get yourself a herd number, rent/ buy a little patch of land, buy a few calves & rear your own animals for meat.
You can control what they are fed, you can play them music, you can talk to them, befriend them.

And then when they have your trust you can kill them & eat them.

Knex*

I didn't realise there was porn on Boards? Must be browsing the wrong forums...

MungBean

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

I would imagine that the point would be to make meat cheap and easily available, rather than an altruistic aim to stop killing the wuvvewly animals. If that happens, the meat produced by current methods will become a premium, expensive product produced on a small scale. The loss of large numbers would have an impact on the nitrogen cycle - would that be a good thing?
Would the loss of large numbers of farmed animals also impact negatively on plant fertilization? Bio-diversity?

Like I say, I'm not educated on this issue, but I think the implications are potentialy threatening to the environment if the science is successful long-term.

I'm not educated on the issue either so I cant offer much in the way of in depth discussion on the implications. All I can do is assume really.

I agree that the aim is to create a cheap and available source of meat. I'm not sure that the reduction of numbers would have a dramatic impact though, their numbers have increased a lot in recent history and is cited as a major contributor to climate change and species extinction. Estimated to double by 2050 according to wiki.

As the human population increases it will affect the environment monumentally more than any change to livestock and if livestock numbers increase to provide for the population then the implications will be far worse than anything that too much of a reduction would cause. Plus with the reduction of livestock numbers vast amounts of land will become available for re-forestation or other things.

I'm not an expert on it but as far as I see we cant continue on the road we are on and this seems to be a valid and achievable alternative. I think the benefits from cheap food source and reduction in livestock numbers would vastly outweigh any potential damage to the eco system.

TheReverend

If it tastes good I will eat it

Kevin Duffy

Skunkle wrote: »

I'm not educated on the issue either so I cant offer much in the way of in depth discussion on the implications. All I can do is assume really.




I'm not an expert on it but as far as I see we cant continue on the road we are on and this seems to be a valid and achievable alternative. I think the benefits from cheap food source and reduction in livestock numbers would vastly outweigh any potential damage to the eco system.

Agreed, we do need change, not sure I'd agree this is the change we need though.

Hopefully someone professing to be more knowledgable that either of us does on this will come along and enlighten us.

MungBean

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

Agreed, we do need change, not sure I'd agree this is the change we need though.

Hopefully someone professing to be more knowledgable that either of us does on this will come along and enlighten us.

Just out of interest what change would ya like to see yourself ? I've often thought about "test tube meat" (for want of a better description) as being the inevitable result of a growing population and increased demand. I never really thought of an alternative.

Kevin Duffy

Skunkle wrote: »

Just out of interest what change would ya like to see yourself ? I've often thought about "test tube meat" (for want of a better description) as being the inevitable result of a growing population and increased demand. I never really thought of an alternative.

I have a feeling that this kid of production is ignoring the consequences, but I think the whole of food production needs to be overhauled - more efficient land use, fairer/less/no (choose the best) trade tarrifs and subsidies, eliminating consumer waste, tackling obesity, less use of harmful farming practises when there are more sustainable alternatives, more sustainable population growth and other things I'm sure someone more familar with this than I am would point to. So, er, food production and consumption utopia is what I think I'm saying here