"The world's first cruelty-free hamburger" - The Guardian

Breezer

"The world's first cruelty-free hamburger"

So we now have in vitro mince meat.

I have very mixed feelings about this. One the one hand, I find it ludicrous the efforts that are being put into this, and the cost involved, in order to produce something that in my view is completely unnecessary. We do not need meat to survive, and the health benefits of not eating meat are well-documented. The money and research hours could be spent so much better elsewhere. Plus I'm not convinced that eating in vitro meat is without risk to our health over and above that of eating in vivo meat.

On the other hand, the world at large does not share my view. Despite all of the above, most people continue to eat meat. Animals continue to suffer, and the environment continues to be destroyed. If this scientific advance can help prevent that, then I suppose as an ethical vegan I'm broadly in favour of it.

I still won't be eating it though.

Thoughts?

bigneacy

Breezer wrote: »

There is a large body of evidence to suggest that human beings are not biologically designed to eat meat.

Bullsh*t. Show me one example of non-biased, reputable evidence that unequivocally says this. (I.e not the pseudoscience published by PETA or their ilk)

Breezer

bigneacy wrote: »

Bullsh*t. Show me one example of non-biased, reputable evidence that unequivocally says this. (I.e not the pseudoscience published by PETA or their ilk)

Fair enough, I don't have any. I don't even know where to being looking for peer-reviewed research on this, since biology isn't my field. That was a contrived statement on my part, and I shouldn't have said it. I've retracted it.

What I do have is a large body of peer-reviewed medical (as opposed to biological) evidence linking meat eating to various diseases. I've provided some of it here before, and I'll gladly do it again, on another thread. That isn't the purpose of this thread though: we're discussing in vitro meat. The health benefits, or otherwise, of meat eating are obviously an important side issue to this, but it's not the focus of discussion.

Have you any views on in vitro meat?

Benny_Cake

Provided that it could be shown to be safe for human consumption, and that any concerns regarding animal welfare were cleared up, I'd have no problem in eating this although it would only be an occasional thing for me. It would be nice to have the option when going out for a meal, or when visiting countries where vegetarianism is little understood. I'm happy eating a vegetarian diet for the most part so that wouldn't change.

Whether we like it or not, large numbers of people will want to eat meat for the foreseeable future. If we can produce meat in a cruelty-free manner while reducing the environmental impact, this can only be a good thing.

Scarinae

The Vegetarian Society has made a statement on this:

The biggest question for many vegetarians is why? Why go to this much trouble and expense to replace a foodstuff that we simply do not need? Wouldn’t it be simpler, cheaper and more sustainable to just stop eating meat altogether?

Also, in a poll running on their website, 79.86% have stated that they would not eat in vitro meat while 6.91% have said they would. I suppose a lot of it depends on your reasons for being vegetarian. Strictly speaking it is still meat, as it is cultured from cow stem cells, although of course in theory you don't have to kill any additional cows to make the meat. If you're vegetarian for environmental reasons, this development could be very welcome - it doesn't produce methane the way that cows do and it doesn't require vast areas of land to be cleared for grazing.

It will be a long time before in vitro meat will be commercially available, but I think it is a very interesting development.

smellslikeshoes

The biggest question for many vegetarians is why? Why go to this much trouble and expense to replace a foodstuff that we simply do not need? Wouldn’t it be simpler, cheaper and more sustainable to just stop eating meat altogether?

I absolutely detest quotes like these from vegetarian organisations, Its downright dismissive of meateaters and their personal decision to eat meat.

The majority of meat eaters aren't simply going to give up meat, it just won't happen. If this process could eventually lead to an environmentally friendly, cruelty free, healthy and reasonably priced meat it would be one of mankind's greatest achievements.

JTMan

Larry Page, the co-founder of Google, who part-funded this project, put it best when he said ...

"When you see how these animals are treated, well it is certainly not something I am comfortable with". "One option is we all become vegetarian, but I don't think that is going to happen. The second option, is we ignore the issues with meat production. The third option is we do something new".

Vitro meat, which could save countless animals lives, might be a happy middle ground for those that would never consider being vegetarian.

Zombienosh

I'd put this in the GMO box, I wouldn't be comfortable eating it regardless of my stance on meat. I wouldn't into lab grown vegetables either.

Irish Guitarist

It sounds like it's not going to taste much like a burger so they're going to add loads of extra ingredients to the 'meat' to make it edible. There are already vegetarian burgers available that taste about as meat-like as this laboratory made burger will so I'll stick to those.

The possibility of less animals being killed is good news but I won't be eating these genetically modified burgers.

Shenshen

The way I see it, the general population wants meat.
They for the most part don't care much about quality or animal suffering, they want to be able to eat meat three meals a day, 7 days a week, and pay as little as possible for it.

And this doesn't just refers to Western Europe, it refers to most of the rest of the world, increasingly so as populations grow and countries get richer. People are becoming more affluent, and one way for them to enjoy this is to eat more meat.

In light of this, I do welcome the development of artificially grown meat. While it appears to be horrendously expensive at the moment, I've little doubt that once processes can be improved and mass-production of the product can be started the price will plummet and it will eventually be cheaper then "real" meat, thereby eliminating the need to keep animals in cruel conditions and kill them.
So people will get to eat cheap meat, and animals will not have to suffer for it.

Breezer

I guess most of us are broadly in agreement then.

I'd still prefer it weren't necessary, and the money and research efforts could have been put into cancer research or something. But that's wishing for utopia, I guess.

bigneacy

Breezer wrote: »

Fair enough, I don't have any. I don't even know where to being looking for peer-reviewed research on this, since biology isn't my field. That was a contrived statement on my part, and I shouldn't have said it. I've retracted it.

What I do have is a large body of peer-reviewed medical (as opposed to biological) evidence linking meat eating to various diseases. I've provided some of it here before, and I'll gladly do it again, on another thread. That isn't the purpose of this thread though: we're discussing in vitro meat. The health benefits, or otherwise, of meat eating are obviously an important side issue to this, but it's not the focus of discussion.

Have you any views on in vitro meat?

I think it's a good step forward in the right direction. If humans can satisfy their want & need for meat, poultry and dairy through non-destructive means then I don't see the harm. Better than the GM/Factory farm alternative we currently are facing.

Artful_Badger

Its a step in the right direct but the reason money was pumped into it as opposed to other stuff is because the backers knew there already is a huge huge market for meat. If they get it right its a product that will sell well and cost a fraction of the cost the traditional route costs to get meat to the market. Its business.

FouxDaFaFa

I wouldn't eat it myself because even when I ate meat I hated the taste of beef and burgers.

I think it's interesting from a scientific point of view, if nothing else.

Nature Boy

The biggest question for many vegetarians is why? Why go to this much trouble and expense to replace a foodstuff that we simply do not need? Wouldn’t it be simpler, cheaper and more sustainable to just stop eating meat altogether?

I'm disappointed with this view from the Vegetarian Society. Yes we don't need it, just like we don't need chocolate or cars or laundry baskets, but that doesn't mean there isn't a demand for it! The world will always be made up of more people who eat meat than don't and the demand for meat will always increase. So with that in mind, we do need it as we can't sustain meat production as it is now, not to mention the animal cruelty.

As for eating it, I would probably be in the 80% right now only because I would find it strange after all this time. I guess it depends why you are a veggie. If you don't like the taste of meat or find it repulsing of course you won't eat IVM, if it's for religious reasons probably not either, for health probably not either (although it'll probably be healthier than convetional meat), there's less reasons for not eating it if it's about environmental reasons, and no reason if it's for ethical reasons (like me). I would say over time I might try it, especially if I was stuck somewhere with no veggie options, but I certainly wouldn't be rushing out to the shops to buy it.

Zombienosh

I wouldn't eat this meat myself but I have to say I'm fully behind the idea and it will be the future of meat production. There's no way what is happening now is sustainable and there is no way everyone will stop eating meat, so this is the best outcome both environmentally and for animal welfare.

seamus

I think the vegetarian's society's point was not to have a go at people eating meat, rather the exceptional level of effort expended on recreating meat, when this effort didn't really need to be spent.

That said, I'd be surprised if the process didn't yield additional usefulness such as helping with ways to grow human flesh for transplantation, etc.

I think what's more important is not whether vegetarians would eat this, but rather whether meat eaters will eat it.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that even if this stuff became widespread, a market would still exist for "real" meat because some people will claim they can taste the difference or they have some phony objection to "unnatural" things, or some religious nonsense that your meat has to be tortured before you're allowed to eat it.
Also, some people are just pig-headed (no pun) and would insist on eating "real" meat just because.

In that regard, having a synthetic alternative seems like a big waste of time if it changes nothing. I think that's what they were trying to convey, but I may be wrong. But at the same time if synthetic meat relegated "real" meat eating to niche food freaks and overpriced restaurants, then that would be a massive win for the vegetarian "cause" and should be welcomed by the society.

I would certainly give this meat a go, and it would be nice to have a wider choice of dishes open to me on a menu, but I certainly wouldn't be champing at the bit for it, 99% of my meals would probably remain vegetarian.

Tar.Aldarion

If it was cheaper people would buy it (and I can see how it would), it basically comes down to that, people already buy the cheapest meat available, there would be a market for "real" meat but that would get more expensive and less common as time went on. It's very useful for reasons you suggest, being able to grow useful things.