Slashdot Mirror


Behind the Hype of 'Lab-Grown' Meat (gizmodo.com)

In an exclusive report via Gizmodo, Ryan F. Mandelbaum discusses the hype surrounding "lab-grown" meat: Some folks have big plans for your future. They want you -- a burger-eatin', chicken-finger-dippin' American -- to buy their burgers and nuggets grown from stem cells. One day, meat eaters and vegans might even share their hypothetical burger. That burger will be delicious, environmentally friendly, and be indistinguishable from a regular burger. And they assure you the meat will be real meat, just not ground from slaughtered animals. That future is on the minds of a cadre of Silicon Valley startup founders and at least one nonprofit in the world of cultured meat. Some are sure it will heal the environmental woes caused by American agriculture while protecting the welfare of farm animals. But these future foods' promises are hypothetical, with many claims based on a futurist optimism in line with Silicon Valley's startup culture. Cultured meat is still in its research and development phase and must overcome massive hurdles before hitting market. A consumer-ready product does not yet exist and its progress is heavily shrouded by intellectual property claims and sensationalist press. Today, cultured meat is a lot of hype and no consumer product.

"Much of what happens in the world of cultured meat is done for the sake of PR," Ben Wurgaft, an MIT-based post-doctoral researcher writing a book on cultured meat, told Gizmodo. Wurgaft finds it hard to believe many predictions about cultured meat's future, including the promise of an FDA-approved consumer product within a year. The truth is that only a few successful prototypes have yet been shown to the public, including a NASA-funded goldfish-based protein in the early 2000s, and a steak grown from frog cells in 2003 for an art exhibit. More have come recently: Mark Post unveiled a $330,000 cultured burger in 2013, startup Memphis Meats has produced cultured meatballs and poultry last and this year, and Hampton Creek plans to have a product reveal dinner by the end of the year.

4 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Animals have a functioning immune system by ledow · · Score: 4, Informative

    What kind of immune system does pasteurised milk have?

    Though it does indeed present some problems (immuno-laxity is not a small issue, don't get me wrong), it's not the end of the world. Foods are already preserved to combat them being attacked, and a cucumber or potato has little more defence against bacterial infection than anything synthetic.

    Basically, if you could grow this stuff in a sterile atmosphere, preserve it and package it, it's not going to be able to harbour anything nasty.

    The fact that then you're basically eating "sterile" food is much more of an issue (i.e. you won't grow defences, and may be more likely to be "intolerant" or real food if you live entirely on this stuff), but basic food preservation combats what you're talking about.

    The bigger issue really is - what's the cost of keeping it sterile and preserving it that way, after synthetically producing it? I'm guessing it adds yet-more-expense to an already expensive synthesised item.

  2. Let's cut through the bullshit, please. by Bearhouse · · Score: 3, Informative

    Oh FFS; there's nothing wrong with eating meat, especially in moderation and from sustainable sources.
    Over-population in many countries, (who are now moving towards a more meat-intensive diet), intensive & abusive agriculture, over-fishing etc. are the real villains.

    From the fine article:

    "But despite what you may have heard, the evidence as to whether cultured meat is better for the environment is inconclusive. “On the environmental studies, the work that’s been done is very preliminary,” Hampton Creek’s Fischer said. A 2011 study estimated that the product might produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions, but use about the same amount of energy as the European pork industry. One 2015 study found potential environmental benefits in China, but another 2015 estimate found it could use just as much energy as animal-based meats. The common theme is uncertainty."

    So, the financial viability and environmental impact of all this seems most vague at this point.

  3. Re:But is it food. by arth1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is fairly trivial to prove meat is not necessary for a healthy or nutritional diet (e.g. vegetarians aren't particularly sick).

    No, that is not fairly easy to "prove".
    Vitamin B12, for example, is only sourced from animals. Vegetarians who care about their health tend to buy supplements or fortified foods, closing their eyes to the source.
    Similar for vitamin D, and to a lesser degree, vitamin A.
    Then there's the risk of iron or amino acid deficiency; pick one. The problem here is that the plants high in amino acids like nuts and legumes also inhibit iron absorption. So to get enough of both, you need to flip back and forth between vegetarian foods that provide iron and provide proteins, but not at the same time.
    Then there's the added risk of diabetes 2. When adjusted for overall lifestyle, vegetarians do eat a more carb rich diet. (The important here is "when adjusted for overall lifestyle" - overall, vegetarians have a lessened risk, but that's not due to the diet, but other lifestyle choices. But if you look at random people with the same calorie intake, alcohol intake and exercise level, the vegetarian is at higher risk.)

    A quick google showed me:

    - 50% of vegetarians and 80% of vegans have vitamin B12 deficiency
    - Vegetarians face a 40% higher risk of colorectal cancer
    - Vegetarians on average have a 5% lower bone-mineral density

    So, good luck with your fairly trivial proof.

    Unless vegans take the consequence of their choice by filing down their canines and premolars, I'm not sure they really believe in it.

  4. Re:Protecting the welfare of farm animals??? by Gilgaron · · Score: 3, Informative

    There'll be artisanal hand raised meat at handsome prices.