Tyson Foods CEO: The Future of Food Might Be Meatless

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Mar 08, 2017, 10:45 AM UTC

jaredklewis wrote: post #126

maerF0x0 wrote: post #92

This is just shareholder value. Scaling meat has so many problems, but if you can sell fake meat at meat prices suddenly there is so much more profit margin to be returned to shareholders. I do not believe for 1 second that Tyson cares about health, environments, farmers or the well being of animals. > "We just got to the point last year where the consumer is demanding [the elimination of antibiotics in the food chai…

> I do not believe for 1 second that Tyson cares about health, environments, farmers or the well being of animals. In which case we should all marvel at the virtues of capitalism and the free market, which take our selfish desires, and convert them into environmentally and communally beneficial actions.

Post by cmdrfred » Wed, Mar 08, 2017, 12:50 PM UTC

warent wrote: post #142

cmdrfred wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt corn wants to be farmed and eaten either. Should we stop the use of antibiotics to preserve the lives of billions of bacteria? You see its not a matter of caring about life when you boil it down. The majority of vegans are pro choice for example. This is a matter of where you draw the line. You may move that line a little bit further down the food chain than I but all mammals must kill to survive.

Neither bacteria or corn are animals, and bacteria isn't even part of the Eukarya domain, it's something else entirely. I was pretty specific about saying animals in my post. Why animals? Because we are known to mourn the death of other animals.

Post by pyre » Wed, Mar 08, 2017, 1:07 PM UTC

ars wrote: post #138

pyre wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As evidence look at how many people want to "go back to the farm", and raise their own animals. On the surface, why? It's harder and more expensive. Yet, people want that anyway. No one is "going back to the farm" to raise their own cattle, which they slaughter themselves, for a steak. It also doesn't scale to the "buy cheap steaks and grill a steak for lunch every day" level that some people do. Just the reduction…

> No one is "going back to the farm" to raise their own cattle, which they slaughter themselves, for a steak. It also doesn't scale to the "buy cheap steaks and grill a steak for lunch every day" level that some people do. I'm sorry, but you are quite wrong. There are mobile slaughterhouses that cater to this exact market: A farmer raises a couple cows, the mobile butcher slaughters the animal and process the meat in…

Post by cholantesh » Wed, Mar 08, 2017, 1:23 PM UTC

Post by xexers » Wed, Mar 08, 2017, 2:29 PM UTC

jimmywanger wrote: post #96

xexers wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the ones that we do, we consume only a tiny minority of the plant (most of the time) So do the animals. The soy and wheat we feed the animals is a tiny portion of the plant... so what? If we have 1000 calories of wheat, it's better to feed that to a human, than a cow; The cow will only produce 100 calories of meat for the same grains that we would have eaten.

> So do the animals. Not really. Cows, goats, sheep raised somewhat naturally eat grass and leaves and twigs, things we cannot digest. They can also eat the parts of the tomato that we don't eat, such as the stalks and leaves. If you're talking about feeling animals with grains, the way we grow grains is even more problematic, with huge amounts of petroleum and water inputs.