I Left Florida To Try Lab-Grown Meat
When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis banned cultivated meat, Reason's Zach Weissmueller visited California labs to try cultivated chicken and salmon and explore the future of this industry.
HD DownloadA company based in San Francisco just became the first in the world to sell direct to consumers what its founders call "cultivated meat," meaning it didn't originate from an animal that lived on a farm or in a muddy feedlot but from a giant steel vat.
The first thing I wanted to know—is it delicious? I visited one of the labs of GOOD Meat to taste it for myself.
GOOD Meat, a subsidiary of the company Eat Just, began selling its lab-grown chicken direct-to-consumers in Singapore this past summer and recently received approval from the Food and Drug Administration, which means that it could be coming to a grocery store or restaurant near you.
Except if, like me, you live in the Sunshine State.
"Take your fake lab-grown meat elsewhere. We're not doing that in the state of Florida," declared Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis when he banned lab-grown meat last May, claiming that it's part of a left-wing conspiracy orchestrated by the World Economic Forum (WEF). Alabama followed in Florida's footsteps with its own ban.
"This is really a vision of imposing restrictions on freedoms for everyday people while these elites are effectively pulling the strings, calling the shots, and doing whatever the hell they want to do in their own lives," said DeSantis. "These folks at, like, the World Economic Forum and Davos, they meet and they scheme. Those policies are dead on arrival in the state of Florida."
Founded by Klaus Schwab and host of the famous annual Davos conference, the WEF has, in fact, endorsed lab-grown meat for its potential to reduce the environmental impact of raising animals. But Josh Tetrick, Eat Just's founder and CEO, says DeSantis' rhetoric is nonsensical.
"It's an easy way to sort of establish your anti-woke credibility, by saying that you're against anything that the global elites in the World Economic Forum want to do," says Tetrick, who says he has no connections to the WEF. "My [agenda] is not an authoritarian agenda. It's simply to build a company and try to do some good stuff for the food system."
Dean Black, a Republican member of the Florida House of Representatives, was instrumental in the passage of the bill banning lab-grown meat in Florida. He disagrees with Tetrick's assertion that cultivated meat is likely to improve the food system. I visited him at his Jacksonville residence, which, it turns out, is a cattle ranch.
"My family have been raising beef cattle in Florida since 1803," says Black. "So you might say it's in my roots. It's in my blood. And…lab-grown meat, that's not meat."
Nearly half of Florida's agricultural land is used for beef cattle. The Florida Cattlemen's Association lobbied for the lab-grown meat ban, and its leadership attended DeSantis' signing of the bill.
But Black maintains that the law is about safety, not protecting an entrenched industry from competition.
"I don't think ranchers like myself have a lot to fear from consumers choosing the cellular-based nitrogen protein paste over my steak. I just don't see that as a big threat," says Black. "My concern as a legislator is about public safety."
The FDA has been studying the safety of cultivated meat since the industry began developing this technology about a decade ago and has found no evidence of toxic byproducts. In reviewing and approving the applications of Good Meat and its competitor Upside Foods, it's endorsed the industry's findings that the products are "as safe as comparable foods produced by other methods."
But Black isn't buying it.
"There was a time when the government said smoking cigarettes was good for you. And we now know differently. The federal government is not God. And we're going to err on the side of safety," says Black.
A specific concern of the critics of cultivated meat is a process known as "cell immortalization." GOOD Meat makes its chicken by sampling real tissue and then selecting cells that continue dividing indefinitely, which critics equate with cancer.
"We have no idea what the long-term effects…are of consuming cells that are found in cancer," said one of the bill's authors during the debate.
"After a really rigorous, two-and-a-half-plus year review, both the FDA and the regulators in Singapore, both really well respected, said it is safe for human consumption," says Tetrick when asked about immortalization.
The FDA, in reviewing the immortalization technique in cultivated chicken, said that the cells would "quickly die" once removed from the bioreactors feeding their growth and that cooking and digestion would further break them down.
"In summary, we did not identify any properties of the cells as described that would render them different from other animal cells with respect to safety for food use," wrote the agency.
"I will simply offer that the science isn't settled yet," says Black. "They have work to do. They best get to work. And one hopes that when they get that work done, that we'll know it when we see it."
Tetrick says that critics of cultivated meat underplay the valid health concerns about factory farming that their product aims to ameliorate. Overuse of antibiotics in factory farming is making bacteria more resistant to treatment, a problem that causes tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths annually in the U.S. alone. And 48 million Americans get sick from foodborne illnesses every year. Tetrick says large-scale factory farming is exactly what he hopes to replace one day, not the romanticized open American pasture.
"I think they'll probably always be a place for pasture-raised, more ethical meat," says Tetrick. "We wouldn't be doing this if that's what the meat industry actually looked like. I don't think any American is concerned about losing a dark, automated warehouse that smells like urine."
Instead of a crowded slaughterhouse, cultivated meat begins in sterile labs. And it grows in giant stainless steel vats before being shaped into patties and cutlets. Meat provides about a quarter of global protein consumption, and that's expected to grow substantially as the world grows wealthier.
Aryé Elfenbein, who is the founder of Wildtype, says his industry can help meet this demand. Wildtype makes salmon in a lab.
"This is about taking the pressure off the oceans that have been overfished now," says Elfenbein.
The United Nations estimates that a third of the world's fish stocks are overexploited. With demand for fish expected to double in the next 25 years, Elfenbein thinks Wildtype can help.
However, cultivated meat still faces significant production challenges. For one, it's not easy to duplicate the nutritional profile of conventional meat. Elfenbein believes this will be solved as the product is refined.
"When it comes to fats and, in particular, the more, helpful fats, like the omega-3s, omega-6s, it is at the same level as the most pristine wild-caught Pacific salmon," says Elfenbein. "The protein level is still below what it would be in conventional salmon, but that's something that in future iterations of what we're creating, will be at exactly the same level."
Skeptics like Black believe the lab is unlikely to duplicate what the pasture can produce.
"It's not even close," says Black. "There are bioactive constituents of beef that we're still discovering. We know that there are omega-3s and carotenoids and flavonoids…and just numerous other bioactive compounds that come from the diet that the animals eat."
Elfenbein says a fair evaluation of the tradeoffs would also take into account all of the harmful substances that you won't find in cultivated meat, which is missing many of the noxious substances in farm-raised and wild-caught animals.
"We still are learning about nutrition generally. Things that we do know are that mercury is toxic, that arsenic is toxic, that antibiotics are not great for many, many reasons, that microplastics are becoming increasingly pervasive in our seafood system," says Elfenbein. "And so the absence of those, I think, is actually a greater health benefit than any of the types of things that [Black] is describing."
But Black and the cattle ranchers, poultrymen, and salmon farmers might not have much to worry about in the short-term anyway, because none of these companies have figured out a way to bring production even close to where they can turn a profit. GOOD Meat's chicken nuggets are on sale in Singapore, but they contain only 3 percent cultivated meat to stay competitive. In other words, 97 percent of what they're selling today is plant-based filler.
"One of the big challenges is how do you reduce the costs of the feed? And the feed is amino acids and sugars and salt," says Tetrick. "Maintaining a sterility at a larger scale is a big technical challenge. So if we and other companies aren't able to figure that out, you know, then we're screwed. And probably the single biggest challenge is these facilities are just too damn expensive. I don't know, a large-scale cultivation meat facility, would be north of half $1 billion to build. And it's just way too much."
Cultivated meat has a ways to go before it can come close to satisfying global meat consumption. But, whether it's really just "nitrogen paste" or not, a majority of American consumers are open to trying it—60 percent of meat eaters say they're willing. The question is, will governments let them?
"The consumers should be able to decide what they want to eat," says Elfenbein. "That should determine whether or not this company succeeds or fails, not politicians opining about food safety."
Photo Credits: Billy Hathorn, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Lian Yi / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom; Benedikt von Loebell / Avalon/Newscom; JASPER JACOBS/Belga/Sipa USA/Newscom; Nikhinson Julia/ABACA/Newscom; Gage Skidmore/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Annabelle Gordon/picture alliance / Consolidated News Photos/NewscomCHINE NOUVELLE/SIPA/Newscom; Avalon/Newscom; Alexander Pohl/Sipa USA/Newscom; World Economic Forum/Sandra Blaser / Avalon/Newscom; Gary Coronado/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Deans/ZUMApress/Newscom; Paul Hennessy/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Pedro Portal/TNS/Newscom; Joe Burbank/TNS/Newscom; Bayne Stanley/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Loren Holmes / Adn/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Richard Graulich/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Keith Myers/MCT/Newscom; Bkirkland909, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Envato Elements; Artlist.io.
Music Credits: "Dawn - Instrumental Version," by nuer self via Artlist; "Sunset," by nuer self via Artlist; "Bubbles Drop," by Cosmonkey via Artlist; "Life's Journey Begins," by Pitched Percussion via Artlist; "Dive," by Stanley Gurvich via Artlist.
- Editor: Regan Taylor
- Camera: Justin Zuckerman
- Color Correction: Cody Huff
- Audio Production: Ian Keyser
- Camera: James Marsh
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
GOOD Meat makes its chicken by sampling real tissue and then selecting cells that continue dividing indefinitely...
They don't select for immortal cells. They make them by forcing expression sv40 large T antigen. This is not a good idea as it could immortalize your cells too, i.e. cause cancer. Also, the line "cultivated meat," meaning it didn't originate from an animal that lived on a farm or in a muddy feedlot is 100% bullshit. The article even admits that the cells orginate from such an animal. Also, you are going to need some form of animal serum, such as FBS, to grow the cells in a vat. This will still require animal farming. The whole thing is bullshit. Just buy real meat.
I fully support forcing the proles to eat this crap, and saving the real food for us, their superiors.
Could you supply references to this hypothesis of food DNA affecting consumer genes?
I hear GMO-phobic liberals saying such things about Monsanto corn and it sounded like alarmist tripe. Have some data for me?
We know the arguments. The push for this stuff is absolutely WEF "live in the pod, eat the bugs" types. I'm more concerned about being given no choice but to eat this slop than places banning it.
I actually came here hoping for a review of the product itself. Camp gave a garbage review tainted by the fact that she's vegan. Did I miss the taste test?
I'm more concerned about being given no choice but to eat this slop than places banning it.
Except no-one serious is advocating for its being compulsory, but it has been banned, IT's not as if both are happening at once and you have to make a choice. You can reasonably oppose both positions - yet you don't.
"This is really a vision of imposing restrictions on freedoms for everyday people" - DeSantis defending his ban.
And "freedom is slavery". Even the most moronic rigjht-winger here should be able to tell that banning this stuff is imposing restrictions on freedom!
Okay. Cool. I was imagining all that WEF and leftist government actions to reduce cattle and ranches. Glad that was all fake shrike.
Except no-one serious is advocating for its being compulsory...
Only cranks think the government is going to take away your gas appliances making electric ones compulsory!
No shit. Yeah, bro. This stuff only goes one direction as dictated by one party. Grab a wad of Frankenmeat and go fuck yourself.
... yet.
As I noted, it hasn't happened yet, but the ban has happened. Ignoring the real issue while pearl-clutching a possible future issue looks suspiciously like approval of the current status quo.
More gaslighting than Victorian London.
But Josh Tetrick, Eat Just's founder and CEO
The "vegan mayo" fraudster, fuck that guy. Reason sure loves them some paid product placement crap.
Thank you!
"Consumer choice!" unless liberals like it.
Can't stand the cherry-picking. Paternalistic nanny-state legislation when one it makes one of your voting blocs feeeeeeeeeeel good.
That's the only reason I came here too, the taste review. I used to be curious about some of the fake meats until I saw the reviews. The lack of a taste report tells me to stay clear of this one too.
The lack of a taste report tells me to stay clear of this one too
You realize that this commentary is about the video, the video where Zach tastes the salmon on camera.
I noted that Zach said the chicken tasted like thigh meat and the salmon like salmon. I also noted the text of the food suggests that it will have a familiar mouth feel.
You can actually already get, eat, review, and share recipes for lots of really tasty non-meat, vat-free food products all over the internet. Turns out that even for some of the most carnivorous humans, the rate at which they consume these "alternative" foods is on the order of 20-40% of their diet. But, of course, for some fanatics, that's not good enough.
Any taste test for this one is specifically propaganda for how well the WEF and "eat the bug" types think they can deceive the plebs into thinking their product counts as food.
Why don’t they just call it “Trans-meat”?
I think the correct term is lady dick.
"Broadwang".
"Honeycock"?
"Schwesterschwanz"?
"Twat todger"?
"Mollmanmeat"?
"Squawschlong"?
Zombie meat.
They called it “Chicken Little” back in 1952:
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1002
Meanwhile, TJ's soy chorizo tastes nothing like chorizo but is really good crumbled on pasta.
Why would you ruin a pizza like that?
Good move. Keep the precautionary principle alive.
And we're going to err on the side of safety
My first reaction is just another damn do-gooder, this one in a good Republican cloth coat.
My second reaction is, what does the law actually say? Is this another "Don't Say Gay" pack of lies? Maybe I'll get enough spare time to find it and read it. Don't hold your breath.
ETA: No mention of the law by name, or link. I'm not that ambitious.
Florida SB 1084 created Section 500.452, Florida Statutes to read:
500.452 Cultivated meat; prohibition; penalties.—
(1) It is unlawful for any person to manufacture for sale,sell, hold or offer for sale, or distribute cultivated meat in this state.
(2) A person who knowingly violates this section commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) A food establishment that manufactures, distributes, or sells cultivated meat in violation of this section is subject to disciplinary action pursuant to s. 500.121.
(4) In addition to the penalties provided in this section, the license of any restaurant, store, or other business may be suspended as provided in the applicable licensing law upon the conviction of an owner or employee of that business for a violation of this section in connection with that business.
(5) A product found to be in violation of this section is subject to s. 500.172 and an immediate stop-sale order.
(6) The department may adopt rules to implement this section.
Alabama's version appears to be SB 23 here. Italy also has such a ban (and I think a couple other european states) but I don't know their systems well enough to provide details.
Should be pointed out this was a single part of a very large omnibill.
The first thing I wanted to know—is it delicious? I visited one of the labs of GOOD Meat to taste it for myself.
Guess he’s keeping the results to himself as well.
Imagine cheerleading this garbage.
I hope the fucker chokes on the bugs in his next assignment.
Guess he’s keeping the results to himself as well.
This is a comment section on the video, the video where Zach tastes the salmon on camera.
The taste test is in the video.
The FDA has been studying the safety of cultivated meat since the industry began developing this technology about a decade ago and has found no evidence of toxic byproducts.
Same guys calling the COVID vaccine safe and effective with no side effects?
You know, so safe they had to give blanket immunity to get anyone to actually manufacture the stuff.
Not to mention that taking taxpayer money to pay off banks that are over-leveraged is completely safe, won't kill a single person. So, taking government money to replace food people like with the food activists think people should eat is 100% safe and effective, with no downsides, too.
"Wildtype makes salmon in a lab."
Truth in reporting:
Wildtype makes something that is NOT salmon in a lab.
The misnamed Precautionary Principle is a bankrupt policy tool when Ds use it and it's still no good when Rs use it.
I am deeply skeptical of the alleged benefits of lab-grown meat. The business case presented here reminds me of the case for electric cars and windmills - all sunshine and light as long as you leave out half the costs and consequences. But my skepticism is personal and I accept my responsibility to become informed. The government should butt out entirely.
You should be especially skeptical of it because it's being bankrolled by various governments and creepy-af-ngos.
The misnamed Precautionary Principle is a bankrupt policy tool when Ds use it and it's still no good when Rs use it.
Bankrupt but not bankrupting. That is, if I say "We should proceed slowly, cautiously, with gender reassignment surgeries and policies." I may be incorrect in my advisement, but it doesn't fundamentally undermine the nature of genders or transitioning or doing harm or medical therapy. Now, if my opposition says, "A woman with a penis is a woman." or "The company grows salmon in a lab." they are, intentionally or not, undercutting or pressing back against the very fabric of what a woman or what a salmon is, generally to the point or end of forcing me to disbelieve my lying eyes. Unless I or someone else tells them to stop and fuck off with their bullshit. At which point, they generally persist, even proudly, they just do it elsewhere and/or more surreptitiously. Something that can't really be done with (pre)caution.
Sorry, I was using a shorthand that assumes a lot of prior knowledge about the Precautionary Principle and its failings. I say that it is "bankrupt" as a policy-setting tool because it provides no useful advice about policy choices.
The Precautionary Principle says (paraphrasing losely) that we should be cautious about new thing X because we don't yet know the full consequences of X. The strong version of the Precautionary Principle says we should not do X until we know for sure that there will be no adverse consequences.
Where it breaks down is that the Precautionary Principle gives no weight to the known and/or unknown adverse consequences of not-X. For example, the Precautionary Principle says 'test this new cancer drug more so we know it won't hurt [pick a subset of the population]'. The Precautionary Principle does not allow you to consider the many, many people who will die for lack of the drug during that artificially extended testing period.
It further fails (though how much depends on how strong your version of the PP is) because perfect knowledge of future consequences is inherently unknowable. There will always be some risk of some new discovery showing that X was a bad idea. Not doing X until you have perfect knowledge requires freezing society and technology at the current point even if the risk is small and the reward great.
That lack of balance between risk and reward is what makes the Precautionary Principle "bankrupt" as a policy selection tool.
typo above - "losely" should be "loosely".
I would add that what you described was not really the Precautionary Principle per se. I would describe your example more as 'have a conservative bias (that is, be skeptical of the new) in your risk/reward calculation'. Your comment still acknowledged that there is a risk/reward - something the Precautionary Principle rejects.
Your comment still acknowledged that there is a risk/reward - something the Precautionary Principle rejects.
I don't think the Precautionary Principle (esp. weak iterations) rejects them except inasmuch as it gets conflated with obstructionism.
"The government should butt out entirely."
Second that +100000000000.
"I Left Florida To Try Lab-Grown Meat"
But he came back.
Sad.
(just for the record, it is not meat)
It’s trans meat you monster!
You're the Hero we need zach. So brave.
Founded by Klaus Schwab and host of the famous annual Davos conference, the WEF has, in fact, endorsed lab-grown meat for its potential to reduce the environmental impact of raising animals.
It's true, but it's not as bad as you say.
"It's an easy way to sort of establish your anti-woke credibility, by saying that you're against anything that the global elites in the World Economic Forum want to do," says Tetrick, who says he has no connections to the WEF. "My [agenda] is not an authoritarian agenda. It's simply to build a company and try to do some good stuff for the food system."
Right, just like the WEF was created to do. Just... you know, do some good stuff for humanity.
"One of the big challenges is how do you reduce the costs of the feed? And the feed is amino acids and sugars and salt," says Tetrick. "Maintaining a sterility at a larger scale is a big technical challenge. So if we and other companies aren't able to figure that out, you know, then we're screwed. And probably the single biggest challenge is these facilities are just too damn expensive. I don't know, a large-scale cultivation meat facility, would be north of half $1 billion to build. And it's just way too much."
This is the kind of thing that after it craters in five years, a reporter will actually sit down with a physicist and an evolutionary biologist (I know one you can talk to, Zach) they'll tell you that growing a cow the natural way is about as energy efficient as it can be, and growing it in a VAT will probably be definitionally less efficient.
It's true, but it's not as bad as you say.
It's straight up worse.
From their own pages proudly:
https://proveg.org/news/the-european-union-funds-research-in-cellular-agriculture/
Taxation of nitrogen fertilizers to the point of riots, which Reason couldn't generally be bothered to cover, but nevermind that the fake meat industry... that Reason cannot. stop. hocking... wouldn't exist without government funding.
It's like Musk and Trump shot the USAID dog and all the fleas and ticks are just moving to the next host.
No no, it's just a guy with a vision who's being meat-blocked by Ron DeSantis. He's no different than that Italian immigrant grocer at the turn of the century who built a small chain of stores.
The United States Army beef scandal was an American political scandal caused by the widespread distribution of extremely low-quality, heavily adulterated beef products to U.S Army soldiers fighting in the Spanish–American War. General Nelson Miles called the adulterated meat "embalmed beef," and the scandal also became alternatively known as the Embalmed Beef scandal.
"[M]uch of the beef I examined arriving on the transports from the United States ... [was] apparently preserved by injected chemicals to aid deficient refrigeration," the medical officer wrote. "It looked well, but had an odor similar to that of a dead human body after being injected with formaldehyde, and it tasted when first cooked like decomposed boric acid ..."
No record from the medical officer as to whether electromagnetic waves may or may not have been part of the problem.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis when he banned lab-grown meat last May, claiming that it's part of a left-wing conspiracy orchestrated by the World Economic Forum (WEF).
The same was Zach Weismuller disingenuously claimed that he went to California to try lab-grown meat.
This shit is known and stated fact Zeb. These companies derive funding from foreign governments to develop and promote their products. An actual libertarian or just an honest person would acknowledge this rather than trying to obfuscate.
Eat Just
...
My [agenda] is not an authoritarian agenda.
Go fuck yourselves. Your products continually fail. You don't pay your bills. You obfuscate in order to (fail to) sell your product. You don't care about a free and fair exchange of goods between peers or near peers. You need to deceive people into eating your shitty product because you're every bit the religious fanatic that the Westboro Baptist Church nuts are, the only difference is, the Westboro Baptists are more honest. You make people like The Liver King look legitimate.
I just did five minutes of googling to find out who funds, who backs and who's involved with this "Eat Just" and holy crap, is it a who's who of oxygenated-anti-emw pod-sleeping, toga-wearing, Namaste-saying luminaries who aren't in it for the money, but just want to make humanity better.
Apparently, enshittification is a helluva drug.
Orwell was writing about people like that back in the 30s.
“Why are they always socialist?”
Said Orwell the socialist.
Does anyone else get the feeling that the average Reason writer would happily test out an AI-enabled Sarco suicide pod if Ron DeSantis complained about it?
What the fk does a suicide pod need AI for? If they integrate it with Google Gemini it will lock the doors and kill everyone, just because that is what it has decided is best.
Laws banning lab grown meat are simple anticompetition legislation. People like Ron DeSantis want his sheep to think that the environmental elites are trying to force LGM on people when it's just the elites in the farm industry protecting their turf.
Parody.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/16/netherlands-european-union-regulations-livestock
https://www.peta.org.uk/blog/europes-largest-dairy-farm-blocked/
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/10/theyre-drowning-us-in-regulations-how-europes-furious-farmers-took-on-brussels-and-won
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/30/europe-france-war-on-farmers-is-playing-with-eurosceptic-fi/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/15/netherlands-announces-25bn-plan-to-radically-reduce-livestock-numbers
https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/11/30/dutch-farmers-could-be-paid-to-close-their-livestock-farms-under-new-scheme
Sheep
https://civileats.com/2019/10/18/restricting-plant-based-meat-labels-wont-save-the-meat-industry/?pn=manage_account
https://www.wsj.com/articles/meat-and-milk-groups-seek-to-defend-supermarket-turf-11570465758
Lol.
I'm showing you where politicians are restricting a product through action debunking your claims retard.
Do you want me to post GND or WEF propaganda now parody?
So you literally posted from the advocacy group FOR these lab grown meats? How quaint. Ironically them claiming the restrictions won't save meat production.
Factory farms are bad, but protein fabricated in a factory is ok?
Remember when everybody was aghast about the approval of lean, finely textured beef trimmings/pink slime?
It's almost like this whole "BOAF SIDEZ (but really the one side more)" selective reporting, one-way-ratchet didn't just spring into existence in 2016.
Cannot. Hate. Them. Enough.
I think that the lab meats give you a better product. Ideally you want small scale agriculture with pastured animals. The small scale does not work to meet demands at a reasonable price point. Factory farms give you large scale production but require animals feed with a poor diet and heavily medicated. Assuming lab meats can be scaled up you would get a healthier product at a reasonable price point. I see the future of lab grown meat replacing factory farms and I see factory farm operators look for legislature to prevent competition.
Oh I'm so glad to hear Florida banned it! I accidentally bought fake meat salad for my husband once and now I keep scouring the packaging to make sure I'm buying real meat.
Now I know I don't have to worry about clever marketing and tricking me into something.
what's the Red Barchetta equivalent here? shark week?
I can skin a buck and I can run a trotline.
Lab grown meat is essentially forced tumor growth.
That is what the meat comes from. That is what grows from immortalized cell cultures.
And, as all have noticed, no mention whatsoever of whether or not it's 'delicious'.
Mmm, cancer meat.
Lab grown meat is essentially forced tumor growth.
Aside from the initial ick factor of eating "cancer" you do know that you can't get cancer by eating cancer right?
no mention whatsoever of whether or not it's 'delicious'.
In the video you mean? When he tries it while on camera?
I have switched to using oat milk for my morning cereal. One of my children is transitioning to a vegan diet for health reasons, they don't want to have to take statins. This has caused me to look more at nonmeat and dairy alternatives. I am very pleased with the oat milk as it has a mouth texture of whole milk with similar favor. This leaves me thinking I am cheating as I had been using skim milk.
I think the future will provide better food options and the LGM will likely be one of these.
Nobody cares.
You did care enough to comment, didn't you.
Anybody taking Statins is an idiot
I take 80 mg atorvastatin nightly and I'm a genius.
“Transitioning to a vegan diet for health reasons.”
My condolences.
It is nice that there are options for people and changing your diet is not the worst thing a person can experience.
If it tastes like crap, Floridians will stop buying it - when they're allowed to buy it in the first place. So what's the problem?
The problem is they might like it or at least see it as an alternative.
Only easily led people like you will try it.
LOL. Do you have any idea how many people are employed and how much money is spent to get people to eat food products? Money spent to make food more attractive. Money spent to advertise food to people. The giant food and beverage industries depends on easily lead people.
If it tasted like and had the texture of Kobe beef, it would be enough for someone to say, "but liberals eat it" for you, proudly and independently, to refuse to try it.
F'En RINO'S.
Republicans are suppose to be about ensuring Individual Liberty and Justice for all ... NOT power-mad [WE] gangsters just like Democrats.
So you think DeSantis is wrong to ban it. Good for you!
Yes. "ban" happy Republicans are just as wrong as any given Democrat.
And I'd like to believe most Republican Voters, as demonstrated by Florida voting a 57% majority for Roe v Wade at the State, are more than just partisan-shills of their own [WE] gang party RULES which is precisely what Democrats very foundation is.
Or worded for clarity...
Republicans make many mistakes.
Democrats ARE a mistake.
The USA is a *Constitutional* Republic
NOT a [WE] gang RULES 'democracy'.
Good for Florida. Bill Gates belongs in jail. Anything he is selling I'm for making illegal. I'll tell you what though.... Allow the US to build modern coal plants like China so we can bring our energy prices down. We never got a say in that ourselves. Itvwas mandated. Let us burn coal and you can eat your fake meat. Deal?
This sort of situation comes up in a lot of democratic polities wherein individual liberty gets sort enough shrift that one or both sides are afraid to allow equipoise, fearing that the winning side will impose itself on the other. So France and Turkey adopt muscular secularism, afraid the religionists (Muslim) will get the upper hand and so need to be suppressed. In this case it's the suspicion that if artificial meat catches on, real meat will be banned, so the artificial has to be pre-empted.
So cultivated 'meat' is a commercially non-viable science experiment for tree huggers to feel good about themselves. Got it.
No Soylent Green to see here, move along.
That of course is not a reason to ban it. On the contrary, if it is non-commercially viable, letting consumers try if for themselves will mean that the originators will be unable to blame its commercial failure on anyone else.
Growing up in Wisconsin, the dairy state, you could not buy margarine. People would drive to IL to buy margarine. The anti-margarine laws fell because the public wanted access to the product. The same will happen when lab grown meat becomes commercially viable.
"Take your fake lab-grown meat elsewhere. We're not doing that in the state of Florida," declared Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis when he banned lab-grown meat last May, claiming that it's part of a left-wing conspiracy orchestrated by the World Economic Forum (WEF). Alabama followed in Florida's footsteps with its own ban.
What the heck are you talking about. Nothing in the link you provided even MENTIONED "left-wing conspiracy" or the WEF.
The closest he came to anything even remotely near that is, "it represents a threat to agriculture as we know it."
Which is true. Whether it's a threat that should be taken seriously, YMMV. But nothing in the source for that quote mentions ANYTHING close to what you're talking about.
This entire paragraph (in two parts):
"This is really a vision of imposing restrictions on freedoms for everyday people while these elites are effectively pulling the strings, calling the shots, and doing whatever the hell they want to do in their own lives," said DeSantis.
Is nowhere to be found or sourced in this entire article. I even searched the entire quote in multiple engines, and the ONLY source I could find was "DeSantis Daily" which is openly "right-wing" but the article that has the quote apparently doesn't exist anymore.
So where is this coming from?
"These folks at, like, the World Economic Forum and Davos, they meet and they scheme. Those policies are dead on arrival in the state of Florida."
As far as I can tell, this was taken from a speech that had nothing to do with lab-grown meat, but was in response to the WEF's desire to seek a "deep systemic restructuring of our world."
So why is it being used here, as if it has anything to do with DeSantis' actions towards fake meat?
"I will simply offer that the science isn't settled yet," says Black.
And that's valid. Especially when it comes to emergent tech, and especially when that emergent tech is trying to fill a market desire for environmentally-friendly alternatives. Because environmentalist-motivated endeavors ALWAYS seem to cut corners, for an overall detriment when implemented.
How many times have we been bitten in the ass with that? Solar. Boondoggle. Wind. Boondoggle. Electric Cars. Zero infrastructure. And so on and so on. We keep trying to wish all this stuff into existence - and it's not wrong TO wish that, I really do hope they're all viable things eventually - but they're just not now.
And we should be able to be honest about that. Lab-grown meat is a tech that's in its infancy. If Florida (and the people of Florida) wants to put the kibosh on it until it's reached adolescence, or even adulthood, why isn't that their right?
Because it benefits the cattlemen, creating an appearance of impropriety? Get over it.
Tetrick says that critics of cultivated meat underplay the valid health concerns about factory farming that their product aims to ameliorate. Overuse of antibiotics in factory farming is making bacteria more resistant to treatment, a problem that causes tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths annually in the U.S. alone.
And prevents millions of unnecessary deaths at the same time by making it abundant and affordable. I always call to mind that old Penn & Teller episode that calls this nonsense out on its face (they were talking about GMO crops, but the same principle applies here): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bie7w3tsQ80
48 million Americans aren't getting sick because of factory farming. They're getting sick because the products of those factory farms are then mishandled by the people who pack, ship, retail, source, store, and cook with them.
The fact that Tetrick even brings up "more ethical meat," shows you his cards. That Gaia-cult talk. It's not about food-borne illness, that's just piss down your back while he tells you it's raining. That's where the "smell of urine" is coming from. His mouth.
"This is about taking the pressure off the oceans that have been overfished now," says Elfenbein.
Oh my gosh, the ocean is fine. Breathe into a paper bag or something, you nutjob.
But, whether it's really just "nitrogen paste" or not, a majority of American consumers are open to trying it—60 percent of meat eaters say they're willing.
Yea, they're willing. Sure.