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

Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 474 posts

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#211

Post by nashashmi »

burkaman wrote: post #165
nashashmi wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man plans. God laughs. I'm calling Bs on the whole cow industry being bad for the planet because of their bodily functions. Any cows, any animals, any living creatures are never going to be bad for the planet. There is more resource consumption and harm in transferring the livestock as meat and farming livestock than there is in the methane gas. And lab grown meat is not going to change that.

It's not just their bodily functions (which are very significant despite your feelings), it's the enormous amount of land we clearcut and leave basically empty so they can graze. Also, it's not about the planet, it's about us. The planet obviously will be fine, but a lot of humans won't be.

The land consumption is enormous, hence why I mentioned it (farming of livestock). There are different opportunities for optimizations here. But I don't think it falls in line with cultures of industrialization.

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#212

Post by 9dev »

starkd wrote: post #199
9dev wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't have to burn everything good and old to the ground to make way for tech bros of HN creating fake meat. No. But maybe we can become a species smart enough to avoid the suffering of other beings just for the joy of eating something that tastes nice.

>> just for the joy of eating something that tastes nice That is an example of assuming the worst about someone else with whom you disagree. Taste is not a minor factor. It is a major part of life. Life rituals, commmunity are built around it. It gives life much of its diversity.

The animals robbed of their life entirely for that major part of yours would like to have a word with you. It's not like meat is the only thing tasty or joyful in life.

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#213

Post by pella »

illiarian wrote: post #183
pella wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb: """ I am scared of living in a society that doesn't find it obvious that things perfected by nature over millions of years are scientifically speaking, safer than things made by some "scientists" in a lab. Statistically, the "large n" of nature makes it > scientific. """ https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1172495876717273088

> I am scared of living in a society that doesn't find it obvious that things perfected by nature over millions of years are scientifically speaking, safer than things made by some "scientists" in a lab. This is the "natural corn" you consume vs. the actual natural corn: https://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/670657 Same goes for all "natural things" you eat.

https://necsi.edu/the-precautionary-principle

"Our analysis makes clear that the PP is essential for a limited set of contexts and can be used to justify only a limited set of actions. We discuss the implications for nuclear energy and GMOs. GMOs represent a public risk of global harm, while harm from nuclear energy is comparatively limited and better characterized. PP should be used to prescribe severe limits on GMOs."

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#214

Post by 9dev »

stametseater wrote: post #163
9dev wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody described "food" as a doomed industry, but the practice of slaughtering animals for protein if better alternatives become available (which they definitely are not yet, not even long term).

[flagged]

Yeah. I always forget that billions of animals suffering is somehow okay if it's about reputation or tasty food. My bad.

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#215

Post by blululu »

illiarian wrote: post #166
blululu wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty sensible policy. Things that are ‘natural’ typically have a much longer period of human and animal use. The amount of data that is latent in their extensive history offers much more certainty about their long term safety than a few short term studies. The real concern with GMOs is not about something like a genetic collapse but the fact that the technology is only really capable of enabling the use o…

> Things that are ‘natural’ typically have a much longer period of human and animal use. Most of the hybrids you're consuming are nowhere to be found in nature. But since they are "natural" somehow they are absolved of most sins. And then boom and E. coli outbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Germany_E._coli_O104:H4_o... or listeriosis outbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_States_listeriosis... > T…

This is a total false equivalence. Crossing two apples falls within the same neighborhood. Crisper blasts it to another continent. There is a reason you don’t need to harden classic seeds produced from fruit for 6+ generations. This is like comparing a jetliner to a bicycle. Sure they both travel - great. same thing, same speed limits, same regulations.

As for GMO’s letting us forgo pesticides? When is that going to happen? Currently that is their main application in ag (synth bio for chemical precursors is more interesting but totally different). The more fanciful dreams of geneticists have not yielded a panacea of new options.

And this is a purely political issue over agricultural policy. Farm subsidies are directly related to this discussion. If it were just a science project it would not concern me in the slightest. The fact that there are a large number of unwitting subjects has clear ethical implications and pretending that this is not a political issue is just obtuse.

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#216

Post by Eumenes »

stametseater wrote: post #171
dangwhy wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> populist vote-grabbing sorry but how is this different from just democracy ? we have democracy here in USA that allows NIMBY homeowners opposing any new development. Is that also just 'populist vote-grabbbing'

Democracy is termed "populist" when it enacts something counter to a deeply unpopular progressive agenda, such as replacing Italian food with bugs and lab-grown abominations.

Exactly this ... or you forgot their favorite F word, Fascism

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#217

Post by __void »

000ooo000 wrote: post #11

If food heritage is so important to the people of Italy, and they agree that lab-grown meat is vastly inferior for all of the claimed reasons, I imagine lab-grown meat as a product would just flop. Why ban it, unless it's all just political theatre?

because in government right now are far-right populists who have to distract the masses from the fact that they are not doing anything they promised in the election campaign

in recent months the issues have been banning rave parties, banning documents for children of lgbt couples and war on cricket flour

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#218

Post by Retric »

simondw wrote: post #169
Retric wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grains are grasses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poaceae The difference is we are feeding them grass seeds vs grass leaves.

That commonality doesn't seem sufficient (to me, a non-expert) to show that there is no difference in meat nutrition.

It definitely makes a difference, cows gain a lot of fat on a grain diet. The original reason people did this was the meat tasted better, but we’re extending that time period because subsidized grains are so cheap.

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#219

Post by tomp »

illiarian wrote: post #116
pella wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but if lab-grown meat is proven to be a safe We need to fully understand its safety, nutritional content, and long-term health effects. Our understanding of the full biochemical spectrum of our diets is still limited. Therefore, it's important to ensure that lab-grown meat adequately replicates the complex array of nutrients and other beneficial compounds found in conventionally produced meat. Long-term effects: Si…

> We need to fully understand its safety, nutritional content, and long-term health effects. This is the same "reasoning" that ultimately led to ban on most GMO foods like actual long-term tasty tomatos. For some reason we demand significantly stricter controls over anything "lab-grown" than on anything "natural". Note: I'm not calling for lax controls. I'm callling for controls that are not more stringent than those…

"Natural" basically means local optimisation, whereas "artificial" means global optimisation. Note also that most companies aren't optimising for nutrition or satiety, but instead for low cost and high addictiveness.

It's the same reason we worry about (artificial) nuclear weapons - despite "natural" reactors also existing.

Re: Italy moves to ban lab-grown meat to protect food heritage

#220

Post by mnky9800n »

deergomoo wrote: post #13

This seems no different than the ridiculous laws proposed in some US states recently that would ban EV sales to protect the oil and gas industries. I’m sorry that people could one day lose jobs over this, but if lab-grown meat is proven to be a safe and cost/energy/carbon efficient alternative to raising and killing animals, then it would be insane to not pursue that.

people should be able to lose their jobs but not their ability to live. that is the actual problem. if losing your job simply meant having less to do during your day until you find a new job, then it wouldn't be much of a problem to obsolete industries that are destructive (e.g., oil and gas).
Post reply on HN