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

311–320 of 474 posts

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

#311

Post by beepbooptheory »

marcyb5st wrote: post #114
beepbooptheory wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that obvious? At least in the U.S., there is a pretty high chance that nonrenewables are charging your battery.

Power plants are more efficient than engines crammed within the trunk of a car. They have no limitations in space and weight and so you can do fancy things like heat recovery (you use the exhaust to pre-heat your fuel mix or reuse said heat for nearby industries), always have the combustion chamber at the best temperature for efficiency, ... . Plus, you can install much better filtration systems for combustion byprod…

Got it, that all makes sense. I know its certainly got to be an improvement, I guess I just thought it was more qualified an improvement than it is! Even if still highly tied to geography I guess.

We should definitely take what improvements we can get!

(Also, sorry for injecting stupidity into the discourse in general. I didn't mean to anger people or say something wrong.)

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

#312

Post by timeon »

dangwhy wrote: post #193
krastanov wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Populism is part of democracy and some people even like it. But riling up your voter base to be excited about one bombastic law without (1) considering second order effects or (2) talking about what might be more pressing but unpopular problems, is not something I (and, seemingly, OP) like. And this does not even go into the usual malicious uses of populism.

> riling up your voter base But where did you get that this happened in italy . I didn't see that in the bbc article.

You went from:

> sorry but how is this different from just democracy

to:

> But where did you get that this happened

Which seems like example of moving the goal-post.

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

#313

Post by meepmorp »

riffraff wrote: post #5

fun fact, the draft decree (yet to be presented to the parliament and voted upon, and likely to get lost there as this is mostly a propaganda stunt) seeks to ban "food derived from cultured vertebrate cells". So technically if you can derive meat from slugs, you're good.

> So technically if you can derive meat from slugs, you're good.

That's basically escargot, right?

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

#314

Post by C-x_C-f »

ben_w wrote: post #291
xdennis wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an abomination to eat natural food. Any carnivore/omnivore would eat a cow if it could. The fact that you perceive something natural as an abomination is a symptom of a society that's too successful and needs to invent problems where there are none.

> It's not an abomination to eat natural food. Any carnivore/omnivore would eat a cow if it could. If the cow could speak, I believe their opinion would be otherwise. Humans don't generally appreciate it when lions, tigers, and bears beat them to the top of the food chain. Perfectly natural, that hypocrisy; as natural as your face being eaten by leopards. > The fact that you perceive something natural as an abominati…

> If the cow could speak, I believe their opinion would be otherwise.

Except cows... Don't speak? That's kind of the whole point. We can't apply human value judgements to other species that work in a fundamentally different way.

> Humans don't generally appreciate it when lions, tigers, and bears beat them to the top of the food chain.

It's safe to say no carnivore/omnivore denies that animals suffer. And I'd bet most of us are not happy that they do. It's just not a deal breaker, seeing as it's outweighed by many benefits.

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

#315

Post by xdennis »

pmontra wrote: post #243

If and when lab grown meat will be a thing for the masses, Italy will follow suit because "Italy would not be able to oppose the sale of synthetic meat produced within the EU when it does gain EU approval, because of the free movement of goods and services." Furthermore governments change and legislation follows them. Anyway, people will decide which kind of meat they prefer. Taste, cost, availability, etc. Italy did…

> Italy would not be able to oppose the sale of synthetic meat produced within the EU when it does gain EU approval, because of the free movement of goods and services.

I'm not a EU expert, but I think freedom of movement means you can't ban based on country of origin, not that you can't ban a product generally.

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

#316

Post by withinboredom »

unixgoddess wrote: post #103
withinboredom wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have nothing but farm for hours just 10 minutes from house in the EU. There's a lot more than "services, tourism, and tech."

are you in eastern europe? for most western europe, europe means western europe unfortunately

Netherlands. Very dense cities surrounded by farm land.

One of my friends is an engineer for food manufacturing equipment. Another for payment processing, and another as a bike mechanic, and another builds gaming rigs (think sim rigs).

I don’t think I know anyone who works in tourism.

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

#317

Post by timeon »

briandear wrote: post #157
mschuster91 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth: this would still make sense today. It's insane how modern cities restrict the freedom and safety of people just so that a few people can drive SUVs more resembling a tank than a car in a city. Shit like Rezvani Vengeance should not exist, period. It's insane that the top leader in accidental death of children and adolescents involves automobiles [1]. [1] https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/00191…

[flagged]

Only vehicle I experienced freedom with was bicycle. Car is further from freedom. Driving in line of cars or finding parking place is not freedom. You are not completely free with bicycle either but everything is more instant with bike. Motorbike is close but since it is so heavy it can be bit of burden.

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

#318

Post by franciscop »

bluGill wrote: post #175
CalRobert wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead, we made our cities so unpleasant and poorly designed that walking doesn't make sense.

But we made it possible to get to a lot more things in our cities than you can by walking, and enjoy a lot more space. A walk only city is not a pleasant place to live. Your counter to the above should be building more transit. However in the English speaking world we are incompetent in that these decades, and we refuse to learn from anyone else.

> A walk only city is not a pleasant place to live

There's plenty of towns and small cities in Europe (specially the "center") that could be considered walk-only and people are pretty happy there, for example Toledo (Spain) or Venice (Italy).

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

#319

Post by xdennis »

9dev wrote: post #212
starkd wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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.

Food is tasty and no amount of your religious preaching is going to change that.

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

#320

Post by kelipso »

9dev wrote: post #296
_zpij wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this need to push eating insects onto people. The "intellectual" point of view makes it even funnier. Food is not just the sum of proteins and carbohydrates. It is wrong on so many levels to suggest that because insects are protein rich then they must be good. I was honestly shocked by Americans not being aware of the quality of their food - it's horrible. Even in Whole Foods, or more expensive sup…

Jokes a bit on you, though, for I'm no American, and I certainly value good cuisine. But reflexively excluding insects from your meal options just because they "look scary" is just... not that smart. I suppose you eat shrimps just as fine as anyone, don't you?

Of course it's smart. I reflexively exclude dog from my diet too. Dung beetles and crickets will be way down that list.
Post reply on HN