How do we feel about artificial meat?

[diggernotdreamer]

I just wondered what others thought about the lab grown meat that was cooked in a burger yesterday, I saw it and thought it looked pretty unappetising. I for one would rather eat meat once or twice a week rather than something grown in a lab.

[Odsox]

It probably won't happen anyway, or at least not in our lifetime.
I remember many years ago they forecasted that meat would be almost totally replaced with TVP, with Tomorrow's World featuring "steaks" made from "knitted" TVP and saying how you couldn't tell the difference between that and the real thing.

When was the last time you had a medium rare knitted steak ?

[seasidegirl]

It makes my mouth water for a nice cheese sandwich.

[mamos]

Unless you either rear your own meat at home or hunt for meat you don't really know what toxic gunk you are putting into your mouth. I personally would not be happy eating the lab grown meat but we are probably already eating a lot worse.

[KathyLauren]

I personally wouldn't be tempted to try it. It's been over 30 years since I ate meat, so I have lost the taste for it. On the few occasions where I eat a meat-like product, an Yves Gardenburger does it for me.

On the other hand, there are people who crave the taste of meat. While I understand that the most recent lab-grown product doesn't taste like the real thing, it is only a matter of time before they make one that does. If die-hard meat eaters can be satisfied with a product that does not involve the slaughter of animals, that is a step forwards.

[Bulworthyproject]

We eat an omnivorous diet and eat meat as part of that. We try to keep our food as sustainable as possible so we eat a lot of wild meat and the meat that we buy has been raised locally by people that we know. We do not buy much processed food at all.

Our objection to factory made meat is is also an objection to factory farmed meat and proccessed food whether it contains meat or not. Food should be produced outside where it can be produced in harmony with nature rather than in a factory as part of an industrial process. Producing food through industrial processes necesarily involves turning over land to industry and thereby destroying habitats.

[berry]

I listened to an interesting piece on radio 4. Not so much for artificial meat but towards leather. If we could create artificial leather for things like shoes which ive always believed are more sustainable than synthetic shoes you cant repair the soles on, surely that is a good thing?

[Crickleymal]

I've got no problem with it and I'd be happy to give it a go. I can't see why it would be worse than eating some of the antibiotic laden meat that we eat nowadays anyway. Tastewise I can imagine it would be bland though.

[Skippy]

I can fully understand the ethical argument and can see the logic.I too heard a radio bit from someone from an ethical animal treatment society who was saying that in principal the idea was sound, no animal suffered and it was a better use of resources and so on. However, I still can't think that it's a case of science for the sake of science and that resources could be better spent in other ways.


Pete

[mamos]

If animals are going to be killed for meat then surely it is more ethical to also use the skin for leather. We should be using 100% of an animal if it is going to be killed.

None of this research into artificial food is about solving world hunger, it is about profit. We already produce enough food for everyone but it is channeled to the wrong places and too much is wasted.

mamos

[berry]

agreed 100% that every part of the animal should be used but with the leather Im thinking from a vegan stand point. No animals will be harmed with the making of lab grown leather.

[Thomzo]

I watched an interview about this with the scientist who is developing the process. He admitted that animals will still be required and they will still be slaughtered in order to obtain the initial stem cells. Vegetarians need to beware that the 'meat' isn't as cruelty free as the media is making out.

I'm undecided about the whole issue. I guess this would be better than factory farmed animals kept in unnatural conditions. My concern would be that real meat would cease to be available, cows would become almost extinct (other than the small number they breed for the stem cells) and we'd have no choice.

Zoe

[contadina]

When you consider the health problems brought on by processed foods, what could possibly go wrong? I still believe that moving away from factory processes in the food industry and changing peoples consumption habits a better option.

Also, I believe it's another epic fail by PETA, who are happily funding and promoting in-vitro meat, despite the fact the cells are obtained by slaughtering pregnant cows.

[Jandra]

I think this is a very interesting development. The fact that it isn't perfect NOW shouldn't discourage people to stop researching this avenue. As a people on this world we are too numerous to stop researching. I rather they research this, than mega-bio-intensive-rearing techniques!

Even if you are vegetarian or vegan, you are still living off the resources of the earth. Wildlife habitat gets destroyed for planting more cereals and soy. No matter how hard you try, you can't have no impact. The trick is to have the least impact possible. Being a vegetarian means that you use up significantly less land than a meat eater. As there are all sorts of reasons why many people resist becoming vegetarian, in my opinion it is a good idea to research least-impact and most-animal-wellfare-improving techniques.

As cows aren't really natural at all (playing devil's advocate here, I like cows and I eat them too) and were just developed because of the unending appetite of mankind for meat and diary, it might not be a bad thing for the cow population to become a lot smaller. For now I am not afraid of them becoming extinct, as there will always be the rich people for whom the real thing will be available.

Anyway, I'll follow the developments with interest.

[Bulworthyproject]

Being a vegetarian means that you use up significantly less land than a meat eater.

This is an oversimplification of a complicated debate. Strawberries and asparagus both produce less nutrition than even the most inefficient meat production. If you keep grazing animals on mountains and moorland that is not suitable for arable or horticultural crops, you are utilising the land more efficiently than you would if you struggled to grow crops on it. Also without grazing animals on grassland it needs to be managed in another way in order to keep it as grassland which is an important wildlife habitat. Wild meat is another issue. If rabbit and deer numbers were not controlled it would cause major problems in feeding a vegetarian Britain. There is also the issue of providing nutrients for the crops to grow. Manure is an important part of organic agriculture and for soil health organic mixed farming with rotations including livestock is hard to beat.

There is no doubt that factory farming is unsustainable and an inefficient use of land as well as being cruel.

it is a good idea to research least-impact and most-animal-wellfare-improving techniques

Absolutely. However it is hard to see the argument that there is less impact in producing meat in a factory than there is in producing it on small mixed farms.