278
The first cultivated meat is approved for sale in the US
(upsidefoods.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
278 points (100.0% liked)
World News
22087 readers
89 users here now
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
For US News, see the US News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Looks like only available in one restaurant for now, but it's a start.
"For one thing, cultivated meat is not vegan or vegetarian." -> I know some vegans who would disagree with that, on the grounds that no animal cruelty or slaughter is involved. I suspect there will be a fair bit of debate on this as cultivated meat becomes more widespread. I would guess just like we've already got "I'm a vegetarian who eats fish" we'll end up with "I'm a vegan who does/doesn't eat cultivated meat."
You might want to cross-post this to !food too.
I definitely would!
Usually, the reason people go vegan is to try to reduce (hopefully eliminate) animal suffering, and/or to reduce green house gas emissions from animal farming.
Cultivated meat deals with the first, and, depending on how it's produced, can probably entirely avoid the second as well.
I don't know the process in detail, but I would also imagine that cultivated meat is no more sourced from animals than a plant that was fertilized with animal dung, and that would still be considered vegan.
There are some analyses out there that suggest cultivated meat will actually be worse for the climate than animals - for example https://www.ucdavis.edu/food/news/lab-grown-meat-carbon-footprint-worse-beef
Of course the cultivated meat startups disagree: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/21/1138371310/a-taste-of-lab-grown-meat
I was going to say, all the articles and science I saw on lab meat previously had it consuming far, far less resources than the traditional beef industry. Definitely going to read more about it but I'm still team lab meat for now.
Even if cultivated meat was initially bad for the environment, I'd guess that it would be easy to minimize it's environmental impact versus traditional meat. There's only so much you can do to stop cows from belching CO2. However, a factory making vats of cultured meat could install pollution controls to reduce their emissions.
I'd definitely like to see peer reviewed studies backing everything up, but my guess is that cultivated meat will on par with or be better for the environment than traditional meat and will only get better.
Yeah so far it seems to be battling experts. UC Davis is a big agriculture/animal science school. On the other hand I don't trust the lab meat industry's own experts either. Hoping at some point to see a credible neutral analysis.
I've read it, and there's already two issues:
I think it's odd to even compare. One is a brand new industry, the other is a hundreds of year old process in terms of learning how to make it efficient. Over time, I have no doubt lab-grown can out-carbon footprint actual cattle raising.
That was an interesting read, thanks for the link!
But yeah, I had no idea it was so much worse for the environment. But it seems there's still the possibility it will be better one day, so I hope for the best. I guess in the meantime I'll stick with plant-based foods.
You should check out issues brought up about this article by other comments since yours.
Oh, I did see some of them later, but thank you for the heads-up!
I noticed it wasn't peer-reviewed, but when they mentioned the process and I started to imagine all it must take to cultivate meat in a lab, it started to seem that it could be a lot worse for the environment than I had really considered, and it didn't seem implausible that it could be worse than farmed meat.
Either way, at this point I would be willing to bet it definitely isn't as sustainable as just eating plant based food, so I'd rather stick with that for now; I'm accustomed to it already anyway.
They biopsy live animals to get the cells to grow meat, so I am sure many vegans will object -- but the labs theoretically never need to get more cells. The question becomes whether they do or not and how the source livestock is treated. Do they just sell the source animals to a slaughterhouse? Or do they donate them to a petting zoo? They are unlikely to tell the public.
I noticed the post's link is PR from the Upside company website. GOOD Meat is another provider. Here is an NPR link with a bit less sensationalism: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/06/21/1183484892/no-kill-meat-grown-from-animal-cells-is-now-approved-for-sale-in-the-u-s
I know they biopsy animals to get the cells, but I just assume it's a one and done thing since there's no need to go back; or at least just once for each company working on it. If it's more than that, it would completely defeat the purpose and probably not be worth it for them.
Not perfect, but assuming they only do it the one time with an animal that was already likely to be slaughtered, I think I'd still consider it vegan.
Either way, I'll probably still stick more plant based. Even if lab meat is better for the environment than farm meat, it still needs to be "fed" and so will probably always take more resources than plant based to be produced.
I'm not vegan, but I do keep Kosher and I'm sure there would be a huge debate in the Jewish community as to whether cultured meat was kosher.
Assuming that the animal that the original cells were taken from was Kosher (e.g. a chicken or a cow, not a pig), then would the cultured meat be Kosher? Would it not need to follow usual processes (specific slaughter techniques, salting and soaking the meat to remove blood, etc) if there was no animal/blood?
As cultured meat takes hold, there are going to be a lot of communities trying to take it into account. I'm sure there will be plenty of arguments as to the status of it as well. It should be interesting.
Looks like it's already under discussion (not surprising given that some of the cultured meat companies are in Israel: https://time.com/6251154/lab-grown-meat-kosher-israel-rabbi/ https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2293219/jewish/Is-Lab-Grown-Meat-Kosher.htm
This is a fascinating issue, though it looks like from that article that there is no consensus. I think I'd side on it being kosher and pareve though as Rabbi Lau asserts in that article. The root principle of kosher laws is food safety and kindness to animals (however misguided that is given the we now know schechting an animal is actually horrifically cruel to it). Moreover, the rule against mixing meat and dairy derives from the prohibition on boiling a calf in its mother's milk. Cultivated meat is the least cruel method of acquiring meat obviously and it has no mother, so kosher and pareve in my book.
I know at least one person that has preemptively rejected cultivated meat because it requires the death of an animal.
Even though they know that a single animal's death could then spare uncountable billions of future animals.
... does that make the chicken sampled for cultivation Chicken Jesus?
If you're going to start rejecting things because even one animal died in the process of making them, you'd have to say goodbye to much of modern medicine too.
I would argue at some point they would need to reject modern living as a whole. Go build an A frame in the woods. Forage for berries and shit. Many aspects of the ways we live cause deaths. Like cars hitting animals. So if a single animal is too much, I have a feeling they should really be following that mindset.
The amount of animals killed by a modern farm tractor combine passing through is enormous. Its just that we don't count "vermin" like that life. And most people who are vegan will never see it.
I don't think that cultivated meat technically requires the death of an animal at all.
If the vegan is there for ethics then cultivated meat should be all good. More ethical than cheese or leather anyway.
Maybe some will complain about the source of the starter cells or something.
Yes, there ain't much to complain except for health. After all, vegan isn't a diet, it is an ideology and if meat was the only healthy option, then it would be vegan to sometimes eat animal products and use products that caused harm to animal. In fact, I doubt there is such a thing as a totally vegan as the world is quite harsh. Because veganism is about minimising harm. Anyway, back to the diet, vegans generally believe that meat isn't a necessity for humans thus making this lab meat potentialy unhealthy (according to that belief).
Health wise there really isn't a big advantage to being vegan, vegetarian, or a meat eater. People can have healthy or unhealthy diets regardless of particular restrictions. In the past there wasn't a lot of vegan junk food or options so vegans kinda had to be healthy on accident. Now days you can get just as messed up on vegan food. As an example oreos are vegan but no one is going to argue they're a healthy meal.
A complete protein is important but a little more complex to get without meat or dairy. Right now the cheapest protein sources are chicken or protein powder derived from milk (whey). Vegan options are kinda pricey for powder and whole foods would be kinda a pain if you want a higher protein diet. I wonder if they could do "lab grown" complete protein powder cheap.
Arguably the lab grown meat could be more efficient than growing a whole chicken. And a lot of people simply won't give up meat.
Accurate! At the very least fish are incredibly unhealthy. It's funny that most governments recommend that their people limit the amount of fish they eat in a week due to mercury. But fish take all the stuff we dump like chemicals and trash among other things. Farm raised fish are all that plus disgusting and disease ridden.
Basically, all the stuff a pregnant woman is supposed to avoid, like processed meat, EVERYONE SHOULD AVOID.
Speaking just for myself, I'll be giving cultivated meat a pass. Not because I'm a vegan, but because I avoid ultraprocessed foods and venture capitalism as much as possible.
I remember reading about cultivated meat using fetal bovine serum, so I’m wondering if Upside managed to take out a reliance on livestock for its process
There is no real way to scale production without eliminating fetal bovine serum.
People are posting sources saying that most companies have been serum free for a few years now.
As far as I read recently, currently the liquid to provide the cells with nutrition is gathered from slaughtering cattle. I couldn't find the link, will keep looking, but if anyone has information to the contrary, I'd be happy. I love the idea of meat-taste without animal cruelty and I think it is the way we have to go if we as a species want to survive.
EDIT: https://gemeinsam-gegen-die-tierindustrie.org/en/clean-meat-the-solution-to-the-problems/
As the domain name already suggests ("Together against animal industries"), this article seems heavily biased, however. If tissue of a calf embryo is required for the serum, that's not a calf, but an embryo, which is slaughtered. Just like abortion is not murder.
Nevertheless, I hope the mentioned algea nutrition solution will prove a viable alternative.
https://upsidefoods.com/blog/animal-component-free-upsides-cell-feed-breakthrough-levels-up-the-future-of-cultivated-meat
This is apparently from one of the companys that Works on cultivated meat.
According to them, they got the animal cell free nutrition working. And use it for their production.
Since its from the company directly, You should take it with just as much of a grain of salt as the other article.
But, they have a very convincing argument:
The bovine cells are the most expensive part of the production, and using them for production purposes would be prohibitly expensive.
As cynical as that take is, to me thats the best argument that animal cell free meat will be the rule instead of an exception for cultured meat.
Thanks! Let's hope for the best, I'd definitely embrace it as an option. And unfortunately, "zynical" is often synonymous with "realistic"...