Slashdot Mirror
Large Scale Production of Artificial Meat
Fraser Cain writes "Scientists at the University of Maryland think that large quantities of artificial meat could be produced to supply the world with animal-free meat products, like chickenless nuggets. This is based on experiments for NASA, that created small amounts of fish protein cultured from single cells. According to the researchers, larger quantities could be grown in thin sheets and then stacked up to create thickness. Of course, they need to figure out a way to exercise it to make it taste like regular meat."
If no animal had to die for the meat, what's the point? Meat just isn't the same without the murder.
A little more seriously...if no animal had to die for the meat, what will this mean for voluntary (PETA-style) vegetarianism or veganism? What will it mean for religious vegetarianism?
I'm sure they'll have a problem with it though.. protesters tend to wrap up their identity in the fact that they're a protester. If you fix the problem they care about, they'll find something else to protest about, because otherwise they have to stop protesting.
In reality these type of people really don't care about the issue they're protesting. They care about changing people's lifestyles. They pick what to protest so that success is most likely to change people's lifestyle to what they think it should be. Once somebody comes up with a way to satisfy the curent lifestyle requirements of the general population and the protesters demands, they move on to some other strategically chosen thing to be opposed to.
Someday somebody will come up with a way to generate energy that, for all practical purposes, produces an infinite supply and is polution free. People will be able to use all the power to synthesize matter... Anything they want, like, a steak for example. Then they'll be able to get in their overpowered, overindulgent vehicle and go wherever they want whenever they want and break down any cultural barriers that still remain. Then all those lifestyle protesters will be forced to preach their ethical ideals like religous nuts in some godless cult of minimalism.
I've always said that the one universal application for cloning research is the development of vat-grown meat.
Cruelty free, vegan-friendly. It could be engineered for the perfect protein, fat and mineral content while maintaining perfect flavor.
Imagine a sea of perfectly marbled, gristle-free beef filets.... droooool....
:::: the insomniac's digest
McDonald's I don't know about. But Wendy's is surely something strange - I've been allergic to poultry my entire life. Every year or two I'll get brave and try something else to test the waters, and Wendy's chicken leaves me unscathed. Turkey I can't eat from anywhere, though.
So, how long before some smart-arse comes up with the idea for menless-dildos ?
Getting them erect might be a problem.
Christ, I think I've just grossed myself out.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
I don't think that's a good comparison because they probably don't think sugar is evil.
I think the cigarette comparison works because people think cigarettes are evil. Remember when they tried to come out with the "safe" cigarette that didn't actually burn tobacco? Remember how people railed against it because it was emulating what they perceived as "evil"? Why do things that emulate "evil" meat get a pass? That's the crux of my question, and still unanswered.
Especially for moral reasons - how could it be immoral to make it easier not to do whatever you think is wrong?, and not to have to sacrifice anything for it?
If meat is immoral, isn't the promotion of meat immoral? Isn't trying to emulate meat in effect promoting is as OK? Just like candy cigarettes, "smokeless" cigarettes, toy guns, etc. that are all blamed for "promoting" a perceived evil?
Religious? Probably nothing - it's still actually meat, just carved from one giant contiually cloned, ever-living, non-sentient beast.
What about vegetarianism in the spirit of ahimsa (do no harm) - not eating animals because you would be supporting killing them? Since it's not a living and sentient being, you're not harming it in any way.
IANAB (I am not a Buddhist), though. Are there any here who'd like to respond?