Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Vat grown meat

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    blatantrereg wrote: »
    Vat grown meat would just be another alternative to meat from animals. That's my point really:

    It's not an alternative to meat. It is meat. The fact that it's cloned from an original lump of flesh means it is a lump of flesh therefore of no intrest to a vegetarian.


  • Options
    #33
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    It's an alternative to meat from animals.
    I feel silly posting the same point repeatedly because of funny challenges. I'm not aware of posting anything remotely offensive, but you seem to be a bit wound up about my comments for some reason.
    it's cloned from an original lump of flesh means it is a lump of flesh therefore of no intrest to a vegetarian.

    Personally I wouldn't be interested, but at least one vegetarian said they'd try it on this thread. Honestly, I think militant/aggressive attitudes like yours are counter-productive. They just alienate people. Dont be a bad advertisement for your own beliefs.


  • Options
    #34
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    blatantrereg wrote: »
    It's an alternative to meat from animals.
    I feel silly posting the same point repeatedly because of funny challenges. I'm not aware of posting anything remotely offensive, but you seem to be a bit wound up about my comments for some reason.



    Personally I wouldn't be interested, but at least one vegetarian said they'd try it on this thread. Honestly, I think militant/aggressive attitudes like yours are counter-productive. They just alienate people. Dont be a bad advertisement for your own beliefs.

    I'm not advertising anything. The notion that pointing out the bloody obvious is "militant/aggressive" is absurd. This IS meat from animals. What is it you don't or can't understand?


  • Options
    #35
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    I'm not advertising anything. The notion that pointing out the bloody obvious is "militant/aggressive" is absurd. This IS meat from animals. What is it you don't or can't understand?
    No you're really not. I understand you fine. My explaining a different point of view seems to anger you. Hence the "militant/aggressive" tag. No worries I'll leave you to it.


  • Options
    #36
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    blatantrereg wrote: »
    My explaining a different point of view seems to anger you.

    You have never once explained how meat is an alternative to meat.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    You have never once explained how meat is an alternative to meat.
    Depends on your viewpoint, dunnit?

    My aim is to avoid as much as possible inflicting any additional suffering to animals through my consumption.

    Since the initial step here is taken through by-products of the slaughter process (i.e. animals aren't slaughtered for their stem cells, nor would that strictly be necessary anyway), then that satisfies my goal.

    There is also an additional argument that since the end goal here is to eliminate or eradicate suffering, then it's ethically justifiable for one animal to die to save billions from slaughter.

    But like I say, it depends on your point of view. For me, meat grown in a lab is an alternative to meat taken from butchered animals.

    The real issue for vegetarians at that stage is what do you call people who specifically only eat artificially grown meat? "Vegetarian" seems inappropriate, but at the same time they're pretty much adhering to an identical idealogy to the majority of vegetarians.


  • Options
    #38
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    seamus wrote: »

    There is also an additional argument that since the end goal here is to eliminate or eradicate suffering, then it's ethically justifiable for one animal to die to save billions from slaughter.

    There isn't a hope in hell that it will eliminate or eradicate suffering, it will have a similar impact as soya protein or quorn. Most people will still want "real" meat so let's not exaggerate the impact this lab grown meat will actually have.
    The fact that it is developed from a dead animal "by product" or not, means it is still very much meat. I would see small heards being kept to supply the source of the lab grown meat. Not for me thanks,


  • Options
    #39
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,303 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    It's not an alternative to meat. It is meat. The fact that it's cloned from an original lump of flesh means it is a lump of flesh therefore of no intrest to a vegetarian.
    That would be totally dependant on the persons own reasons for avoiding meat. I don't think anyone is in a position to make claims for everyone
    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    The fact that it is developed from a dead animal "by product" or not, means it is still very much meat. I would see small heards being kept to supply the source of the lab grown meat. Not for me thanks,

    It would needn't small herds, a single cell could start it, and all subsequent meat grown from lab grown cells.
    If its not for you thats fine, nobody is forcing you to consider it.

    But some people may miss meat. This might be acceptable to them.
    Also, the more people choose this option, the more profitable/viable it becomes and therefore the more people that may choose this over butchered meat.

    Besides, its a silly decussion, it probably won't be widespread availible in our lifetime


  • Options
    #40
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    There isn't a hope in hell that it will eliminate or eradicate suffering, it will have a similar impact as soya protein or quorn. Most people will still want "real" meat so let's not exaggerate the impact this lab grown meat will actually have.
    Actually if pre-packed suppliers switched to this meat, the majority of the population wouldn't know the difference. They barely know what their food contains as it is.
    The only difference may be in butchers where it would be harder to pass it off.
    But in time most likely this alternative would become far cheaper and more available, meaning that meat from live animals becomes even more expensive and scarcer, until it becomes a "delicacy" product which most people have some discomfort with, like veal or fur coats.
    The fact that it is developed from a dead animal "by product" or not, means it is still very much meat. I would see small heards being kept to supply the source of the lab grown meat. Not for me thanks,
    There's no need to maintain small herds. Once they have the initial batch, that can be used on a practically infinite basis to create more cells and more meat. They don't even have to kill or farm animals to obtain it. The cells can be extracted from wild animals without injuring them. That's even vegan friendly.

    I'm not sure if you're deliberately missing the point on this, or you're just having difficulty getting your head around it.
    Whether you would eat it or not is irrelevant, surely you must be able to see why it will result in less animals being slaughtered for meat?


  • Options
    #41
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    No difficulty grasping this at all. The point is that this lab grown meat is still meat. Fact. It doesn't matter if it's batch #1 or batch #9999 it's still meat so, logically, wouldn't appeal to a vegetarian.
    On the broader market issue I'd make the comparison with with petrol/car companies embracing electric or hybrid cars. Actively resisting for decades and then doing just a minimum. Most of the lobbying being done by groups/people who are anti car anyway.

    To be honest I don't know why a thread about meat consumption is even in this forum... take it to a broader food thread and see how much support you get for your "petri dish of the day".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,092 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Appeals to me a lot, would appeal to a lot of vegetarians and to a lot it would not. It depends on why people are vegetarians. I LOVE meat, it's my favourite food, doesnt mean I will eat it if it is against my ethics.


    it's not an alternative to meat, it's an alternative to getting meat through suffering and killing. Same as I would eat an animal if it died of old age, road kill and so forth, as long as I deemed it healthy.


  • Options
    #43
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    Appeals to me a lot, would appeal to a lot of vegetarians and to a lot it would not. It depends on why people are vegetarians. I LOVE meat, it's my favourite food, doesnt mean I will eat it if it is against my ethics.


    it's not an alternative to meat, it's an alternative to getting meat through suffering and killing. Same as I would eat an animal if it died of old age, road kill and so forth, as long as I deemed it healthy.
    Nobody was saying it was an alternative to meat incidentally. I said it was an alternative to normal meat. Then a guy kept saying BUT HOW CAN MEAT BE AN ALTERNATIVE TO MEAT!?!?!? or something like that. Nobody actually said it was though.


  • Options
    #44
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,303 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    No difficulty grasping this at all. The point is that this lab grown meat is still meat. Fact. It doesn't matter if it's batch #1 or batch #9999 it's still meat so, logically, wouldn't appeal to a vegetarian.

    You have your views, opinion etc and that fine. But there are lots of reasons for choosing a vegetarian diet.
    But nothing gives you the right to speak for all vegetarians like that. It makes you sound kinda bigoted.

    Tar above is a perfect example. He chooses not to eat meat as he doesn't want to contribute in any way to an animal dying needlessly. Once "vat meat" production starts it continues with no further animals dying, so it makes perfect sense that some vegetarians have no moral objection. Their choosing to try a vat meat burger has zero impact on an animals life. For some, thats the problem solved.
    Furthermore, the more widespread it becomes, the more likely non-vegetarians are to try it, which means the number of animals slaughted reduces. For some, thats a good thing.


  • Options
    #45
    kumate_champ07
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    Absurdum wrote: »
    some people are assuming that vegetarians/vegans long for meat, a lot of us simply don't like the taste/texture of it

    it's all a bit frankenstein imo
    but a lot do and 'a lot' is subjective. look at Quorn for instance


  • Options
    #46
    kumate_champ07
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    its not going to taste the same unless the meat/animal muscle gets electro stimulation during 'harvesting', even then it will more than likely taste different to normal meat

    same as veg grown quickly and not in a very natural way doesnt have the full flavour of traditional/organically grown 'slow food'

    Its a good idea but I see it possibly being used as a cheap source of meat. India and Chinas growth are killing Brazilian rainforests in order to make way for flat land for cattle


  • Options
    #47
    sensibleken
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    weird idea. I would imagine it would be quite unlikely to turn meat eaters away from real meat.

    I've been veggie for so long Im perfectly happy with the diet and probably wouldnt go near it, the smell of meat really puts me off


  • Options
    #48
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    gypsy_rose wrote: »
    hahahahaah :P

    would you? if the situation arised?
    I'm a bit too stringy to make a decent meal out of. Maybe a nibble on a toe.


    As for the taste and texture, yes they will perfect it so its indistinguishable from normal meat, and probably before too long. Why? The massive rollicking mountains of money they will make. Farming is land, labour and capital intensive, if it can be reduced to an assembly line process where nutrients go in one end and thick steaks come out the other, in an ethical manner, the firm responsible will be extremely wealthy.

    I would imagine ultimately that meat from live animals will be banned entirely, one won't be able to get it even if one wants it, for some reason...


  • Options
    #49
    icicle2000
    Registered Users Posts: 36 ✭icicle2000


    I think it's a good idea. Personally, the idea would probably not appeal to me, it's been too long since I've eaten meat, and I don't miss it at all. But if it leads to less animals being harmed, then I'm all for it. Although the whole lab-made food idea seems a bit weird to me.


  • Options
    #50
    _ __ _
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8 ✭_ __ _


    As someone who recently became a vegan for ethical reasons i eagerly await the day when artificially grown meat is affordably available. Unfortunately I can't see it being in this decade and probably not in the next :(. Although i'd love to be proven wrong :).
    Absurdum wrote: »
    it's all a bit frankenstein imo

    This is the sort of sentiment people had about blood transfusions when they first came in. It might not last long. Proccessed meat foods would probably be the easiest to duplicate from artificially grown meat because you can add in other ingredients and it's all mixed up mush anyway so texture is irrelevant. And even if it can't duplicate current meat very well it might still make for a cheap source of high-quality protein, which no doubt would be appreciated by many. It might have a huge positive impact on world nutrition. Then again, perhaps i'm being overly optimistic.
    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    No difficulty grasping this at all. The point is that this lab grown meat is still meat. Fact. It doesn't matter if it's batch #1 or batch #9999 it's still meat so, logically, wouldn't appeal to a vegetarian.
    To be honest I don't know why a thread about meat consumption is even in this forum... take it to a broader food thread and see how much support you get for your "petri dish of the day".

    A lot of vegetarians are vegetarians for ethical reasons, with the availability of artificially-grown meat many of those vegetarians would probably stop being vegetarians. There seems to be a lot of discussion of the ethical arguments for vegetarianism/veganism on this board so i don't see why this topic isn't relevant.


  • Options
    #51
    rubadub
    Registered Users Posts: 32,381 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    Haha, funny you should mention that, but with this technology you could literally eat yourself!
    +1. They could have celebrity meats, I could see myself tucking into a fillet of Kelly Brook curry, only for my mate to then tell me it was really Brian Cowens arse :pac:

    Human meat is meant to taste like pork.
    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    This IS meat from animals. What is it you don't or can't understand?
    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    If the source is an animal, either living or dead, then I'm not eating it.
    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    The fact that it's cloned from an original lump of flesh means it is a lump of flesh therefore of no intrest to a vegetarian.
    So what if it was yourself or some other person who started the culture, giving full rights, would you eat it then? or object to others doing it if you did not want to do it for taste reasons. You seem to have one singular idea in your head why people are vegetarians and what they care about. I think I saw Tar.Aldarion mention before that he would eat human flesh if it was going to go to waste.

    I was reading an argument that if people are concerned about animals dying they might be better off eating some meats before some other vegetarian foods, since one lost life (e.g. a cow) creates a lot of meals, while the normal harvesting of other vegetarian crops may result in a greater loss of life per meal, -e.g. combine harvesters killing mice while harvesting crops, or pesticides killing millions of insects. Some will equate all life as equal, be it a cow or minute insect with a short lifespan.
    Absurdum wrote: »
    some people are assuming that vegetarians/vegans long for meat, a lot of us simply don't like the taste/texture of it

    it's all a bit frankenstein imo
    Some people here are also assuming meat eaters like the texture of it, many do not. I know people who much prefer mince over steak, and processed chicken over fillets. They are repulsed if they find veins in a chicken fillet and 1 guy I know prefers processed fish too. I know many who baulk if you name the animal they are eating.

    Quorn is grown in vats should be consistent, which maybe a selling point to fussy eaters. Like how people go to mcdonalds abroad knowing it will be close to what they are used to. You might have preferred lab grown meat brands. It could be consistent size pieces for ease of cooking & portioning. It could possibly have a steady marbled fat running through a steak, like those expensive kobe steaks. So you could have cheaper meat which you consider superior.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    rubadub wrote: »
    You seem to have one singular idea in your head why people are vegetarians and what they care about.
    Yes I do seem that way alright!
    I fully accept there are many reasons why people are vegetarian and if this did reduce suffering etc then of course it can only be a good thing. It still uses an animal as a souce of food so for me it's unthinkable.

    I don't see this as being the great solution to world hunger or animal abuse - no more than soya or quorn have been. I suggested this topic be floated on the general food forums to see the reaction. I suspect the reaction would be depressing.


  • Options
    #53
    kumate_champ07
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    I was of the understanding that the vast majority of vegetarians dont eat meat because of ethical reasons ie not eating a living creature. alot gave up meat in their teens as they would have been brought up by their parents as omnivores, so at one time they enjoyed meat, the taste/texture. alot will try find meat substitutes

    some people here have said that lab produced meat would have initially come from a living animal at stage 1, BUT in the production of crops some animals are killed, the production of electricity can cause deaths to animals.

    So I think its is acceptable for a 'vegetarian' to eat lab produced 'meat' without any feeling of guilt.


  • Options
    #54
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    kumate_champ07 wrote: »
    So I think its is acceptable for a 'vegetarian' to eat lab produced 'meat' without any feeling of guilt.
    As I've said more than once on this forum... it's probably best to let individuals decide such things for themselves.


  • Options
    #55
    kumate_champ07
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    As I've said more than once on this forum... it's probably best to let individuals decide such things for themselves.
    so do I, Im just adding to the discussion. people can choose to eat what they want.


  • Options
    #56
    Slaphead07
    Registered Users Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭Slaphead07


    more on the subject

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/20/test-tube-meat-coming_n_1288874.html?ref=tw


  • Options
    #57
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    Slaphead07 wrote: »
    more on the subject

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/20/test-tube-meat-coming_n_1288874.html?ref=tw
    I'll be a bit OT here, responding to a bit in that article:
    Such success could singlehandedly help satiate the world’s growing appetite for meat — a desire that is expected to double meat consumption by 2050.

    I think this trend stems from the paleo diet fad and a lot of misinformed people spouting nonsense in an authoritive manner. I think the effects of following very high meat/very high cholesterol diets will be pretty clear before 2050 anyway.

    Most people are ****. They love a diet that let's them fantasise that they are stoneage hunters.

    But yeah this is very OT.


  • Options
    #58
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    blatantrereg wrote: »
    I think this trend stems from the paleo diet fad

    No. Seriously, no. It stems from the Asian countries getting richer and people being able to afford more meat (since it is very expensive in most non-Western countries) in their diets. Meat consumption in China is rising very dramatically etc.


  • Options
    #59
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    kumate_champ07 wrote: »
    but a lot do and 'a lot' is subjective. look at Quorn for instance

    I can eat Quorn mince precisely because it doesn't remind me of the texture of meat. Some of the Fry's products on the other hand make me gag.


  • Options
    #60
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    nesf wrote: »
    No. Seriously, no. It stems from the Asian countries getting richer and people being able to afford more meat (since it is very expensive in most non-Western countries) in their diets. Meat consumption in China is rising very dramatically etc.
    Funny I saw that information somewhere since I wrote that post.
    I'm a bit surprised by it. I read that the government is trying to encourage the Chinese to eat less meat (have a meat free day a weekl etc) - and I thought that the Chinese were quite fond of meat in the first place. I would have thought Indian culture would have been antipathic to too much meat eating too. [I know you dont refer to India here at all, but I think the other source I saw did..]


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    kleefarr
    Registered Users Posts: 5,743 ✭✭✭kleefarr


    Well, if it turns out to be anything like Quorn I won't be touching it.

    www.cspinet.org/quorn


Advertisement