Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 493 posts

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#391

Post by Gordonjcp »

dqv wrote: post #365
z33k wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

86%[0] of livestock feed is inedible by humans. They consume forage, food-waste and crop residues that could otherwise become an environmental burden. 13% of animal feed consists of potentially edible low-quality grains, which make up a third of global cereal (not total crop) production. All US beef cattle spend the majority of their life on pasture and upcycle protein even when grain-finished (0.6 to 1). [0] http://…

>crop residues that could otherwise become an environmental burden Could is doing a lot of work here, especially because someone might quickly read this as would . This statistic makes it seem like 36% of non-forage inedibles can only be processed by livestock, but there isn't evidence for that.

If you work out how to eat straw and bean stalks, and tough heathery grasses, then you've got a real moneyspinner on your hands.

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#392

Post by flenserboy »

superkuh wrote: post #33

It will be animal cells differentiated into muscle tissues on collagen scaffolds initially. The technology comes from attempts to grow functional organs (ie, liver) that are biocompatible in the body serum proper. If there aren't health effects from transplantation within the animal type you can probably eat the animal tissues just fine. It's the same thing. It's meat. It's just without the animal suffering. And hope…

"Meat", at best. Yes, muscle cells in a matrix. The problem will be getting the rest of the structure to be there, and to grow properly, such as connective tissues and fats, and to get the same amounts of minerals and other nutrients into the "meat" as an animal does. Meat, as a food, is much more than a clump of muscle cells.

Then there are the costs to do this properly (packaging the correct nutrients in bioavailable forms, for one), which will likely be much greater than simply letting a cow loose in a pasture to do what it does. This is to say nothing of the long-term testing that should be done on any such product — whether it promotes cancer, leads to misfolded proteins, thereby jetting new and interesting prions into the population, etc. The 20th century was marked by morally-unmoored technocrats allowed to run wild; why is the 21st century doubling down on this?

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#393

Post by Gordonjcp »

waboremo wrote: post #193
Gordonjcp wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet that's where all the meat I eat comes from, and indeed most of the meat eaten in this country.

You are wildly mistaken if you believe traditional "cow does whatever it wants until slaughter" farming is where the majority[0] of meat comes from in this country (assuming USA). [0] https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estima...

I'm not in the USA. You haven't got any form of safe or ecologically sustainable farming in the US, and you need to fix that.

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#394

Post by wtetzner »

myshpa wrote: post #382
randomdata wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could rewild huge parts of the Earth Probably not without radically changing how we grow plants for human consumption, assuming we still eat plants and don't move to an all-meat diet. Looking over the data for the area I farm, according to government figures, 36% of the cropland is used for animal food. Most farmers here grow a rotation of soybeans, corn, edible beans, and wheat. The edible beans and wheat are i…

If the world adopted a plant-based diet we would reduce global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture ... and 77% of it is used for livestock: meat and dairy https://ourworldindata.org/land-use More than three-quarters (77%) of global soy is fed to livestock for meat and dairy production. Most of the rest…

We could also just eat grassfed beef instead of feeding animals soy.

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#395

Post by eloff »

virtualritz wrote: post #387
eloff wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When this technology finally gets there, and I see no reason to think it won't eventually, it will change the world so dramatically. The amount of land and water we won't need to raise animals or food for animals it's staggering. The amount of meat the world consumes will double by the end of the century (will it? I made that up). As the world gets richer, people eat more meat. Combine that with a rising population a…

> As the world gets richer, people eat more meat. Living in central Berlin (Mitte), one of the most expensive parts of the city, it feels the opposite is happening. Everything here is vegan or vegetarian at least. Even a steak place next door to where I live has vegan plates. On that note: it made me sad that all the dramatic changes you listed omitted the suffering of animals.

What it feels like and the story the data tell are two different things. The data is unambiguous, the richer the country, the higher the per-capita meat consumption. Meat consumption in the world is rising rapidly.

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#396

Post by wtetzner »

chrisco255 wrote: post #388
CaptainNegative wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally no one worth a mention was saying the animal slaughter industry adds or removes water from the water cycle in meaningful quantities. The issue with their water usage is in the redirection of the limited fresh water sources into the virtually unlimited saltwater oceans, or pollutes it beyond the point of usability for any form of life.

The limit on fresh water is a local problem. Maybe that's an issue in California during dry years, but not in North Carolina or Iowa, which are subject to completely different rainfall patterns.

And one of the problems in California is how much water almonds use.

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#397

Post by wtetzner »

411111111111111 wrote: post #363
jokethrowaway wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that making the same volume of food is probably cheaper if you're processing vegan only ingredients - but if you look at the amount of nutrients / $, vegan substitutes are nowhere close to meat

That's honestly highly unlikely. These animals consume the same products the vegan alternatives are made with... for months or years, depending on the animal. It might be true in places without massive animal farms, but that's usually connected to more human attention which would make it even more unlikely.

> These animals consume the same products the vegan alternatives are made with...

How many people are living off of grass?

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#398

Post by replygirl »

olddustytrail wrote: post #288
prometheus76 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try injecting yourself with saltwater and see what happens. The osmotic effects won't just affect the undesired cells. It will also affect the desired cells.

Quoted post unavailable.

talking down to people while you're telling them not to do something harmful usually just inflames their interest in doing it. look at how calling people stupid or evil for not following covid precautions or for looking into poorly-studied treatments worked out. no need for a patriarchal superiority complex here

Re: Lab-Grown Meat Is Safe to Eat, FDA Says

#399

Post by dqv »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #391
dqv wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>crop residues that could otherwise become an environmental burden Could is doing a lot of work here, especially because someone might quickly read this as would . This statistic makes it seem like 36% of non-forage inedibles can only be processed by livestock, but there isn't evidence for that.

If you work out how to eat straw and bean stalks, and tough heathery grasses, then you've got a real moneyspinner on your hands.

>eat

This is exactly what I mean - the statistic has convinced you of some unwritten law that says that only livestock or humans can eat this stuff. Since humans can't, it has to go to livestock.

But you're completely ignoring that processing these inedibles doesn't have to come in the form of eating them - we can make compost, building materials, packaging. Just because something is doesn't mean it ought to.

Post reply on HN