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

371–380 of 474 posts

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

#371

Post by mrguyorama »

illiarian wrote: post #196
eimrine wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the same "reasoning" that ultimately led to ban on most GMO foods like actual long-term tasty tomatos. Long-term tasty tomatos are a good thing but what about impossibility to breed my own tomato seeds if GMO will win 100% of the market?

> Long-term tasty tomatos are a good thing but what about impossibility to breed my own tomato seeds if GMO will win 100% of the market? That is a great question and a very valid concern. Because there are two things at odds with each other: - We don't really want GMO plants (or even animals and fish) to interbreed with non-GMP plants/animals because wide-spread effects on the ecosystem could be disastrous. We've liv…

Or we could just use the damn anti-trust regulations on the books to actually keep markets open and competitive. There doesn't have to be a worry that Monsanto will lock down seeds if they get split into different companies and some of those companies continue to sell seeds that aren't locked down.

I think any market segment without at least 10 comparably sized companies AND the option to just not transact with ANY of them is not competitive and will not benefit from any "free market" supposed benefits.

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

#372

Post by Retric »

modo_mario wrote: post #300
Retric wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a wildly misleading take on nutrition. Basically all foods are cells so they contain all the normal cellular machinery like DNA. As long as lab grown meat is just normal animal cells nothing new is going on. Where you need to care about each individual molecule is if we where creating food one molecule at a time via a replicator or something so we could have wildly unusual ratios of these individual components…

>Basically all foods are cells so they contain all the normal cellular machinery like DNA. As long as lab grown meat is just normal animal cells nothing new is going on. We managed to fuck this up without going that far for vegetables and there's no considering additives or lab grown differences there. It's definitely all cells and dna. https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conserv...

Yes, but that’s not a new issue. My point is lab grown meat is basically a new kind of yogurt/fermented food.

Yeast requires a huge range of chemicals to grow, but we mostly ignore all the details when we mix flower, water, and starter because flower is already a really complicated thing.

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

#373

Post by sterlind »

wankle wrote: post #357
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'

I Googled NIMBY. It seems like a non-conversation enhancing passive aggressive term.

it's a real phenomenon. like, methadone clinics for instance. a lot of people support offering methadone treatment to recovering heroin addicts. it keeps them clean. a lot fewer people are okay with a methadone clinic opening up shop in their neighborhood.

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

#374

Post by deergomoo »

eimrine wrote: post #170
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.

> 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. You the city people are so cocky in teaching me the village guy about how to live the life. What if I do not want my meat addiction to be controlled by some big corps? For example, they may decide to put in their meat products something I do not want t…

I didn’t say you shouldn’t be allowed to raise cattle. You should absolutely be allowed.

I said it would be insane to prohibit what is potentially a better alternative, just because some people raise cattle.

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

#375

Post by marcosdumay »

krastanov wrote: post #159
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'

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.

> Populism is part of democracy and some people even like it.

Populism is how people react to democracy failures. It happens when people are disenfranchised.

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

#376

Post by mrguyorama »

xdennis wrote: post #306
burkaman wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> it's the enormous amount of land we clearcut and leave basically empty so they can graze. This is typical vegan misinformation to appeal to people who are concerned about global warming (as we should). Land that's used for grazing is typically land which can't be used for other purposes. People don't grow grass on flat fields of black soil because it doesn't make economic sense. Additionally, animals are also fed t…

There is an entire economy around growing feed for cows. They do NOT get waste products from other industries and are primarily fed with stuff grown ONLY for feeding cows. Welcome to industrialized farming.

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

#377

Post by mrguyorama »

starkd wrote: post #190
stametseater wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Italians recognize that food is just as much about taste, enjoyment and life satisfaction than it is about nutrition. Suppose we could have all our meals with just a pill and still fulfill all our nutritional needs, would it be better? Not if the taste is inferior. Or it interferes with our daily rituals.

Some of my friends would 100% use food pills, and have enthusiastically expressed that opinion for several years. Soylent and Huel exist and are somewhat profitable businesses. Lots of people don't really care about food and just want to get back to things they care about.

Your food opinions are not everyone's food opinions and forcing your opinions on others is not freedom.

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

#378

Post by mschuster91 »

stcroixx wrote: post #353
briandear wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Quite a few places you would never even be able to even reach in a reasonable amount of time via bus/bike/walk. Would be like the part of the world accessible to you just radically shrank overnight.

Counterpoint: decent public transport could eliminate this - and make even more places actually reachable, as you don't have to take care of making breaks to not fall asleep on the wheel, refueling stops, or having to search (and pay for) parking spots.

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

#379

Post by beepbooptheory »

bluGill wrote: post #188
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.

That depends. If you live in Iowa, or Kansas there is a high chance your EV is charged entirely from wind power. Both states are exporting to other nearby states (which are also building more wind). Texas also has a lot of wind generation (more than the above two combined), but their population is larger so overall it comes out to less. CA has a lot of solar power (more deserts should), though I'm not sure how much.…

Im confused, every one is telling me I am wrong and downvoting me, but saying different things.

Am I wrong because even if you charge the batteries with power that comes from nonrenewable energy, its still more efficient, and in that becomes different from nonrenewable power?

Am I wrong because, in the U.S., its about 50/50 renewable/nonrenewable so the claim that your likely to charge your battery with nonrenewable energy is laughable?

Am I wrong because it depends where you are in the country?

I'm really just trying to understand, I didn't think I was making such a huge claim. I just thought it wasn't controversial to say most of our energy comes from nonrenewables still, bracketing whatever economic or political or logistical forces have made it that way.

Regardless, I will definitely think twice before talking about any of this on here. Lesson learned.

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

#380

Post by beepbooptheory »

yamtaddle wrote: post #331
beepbooptheory wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

"Some form of power" != oil and gasoline. > Thanks for being patient with my stupidity. No problem.

So, just to be clear, if you are in some random place in the united states, the energy you will use to charge your car's battery is most likely to come from renewable energy like solar, wind, geothermal, and very unlikely to come from oil/gasoline, natural gas, or coal?

And I should, in fact, feel stupid because this is an extremely apparent/obvious fact to actually smart people?

Post reply on HN