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

Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 272 posts

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#81

Post by chris_wot »

jere wrote: post #40
pdelgallego wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to another BBC article the environmental impact is significantly smaller. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23576143

>An independent study found that lab-grown beef uses 45% less energy than the average global representative figure for farming cattle. It also produces 96% fewer greenhouse gas emissions and requires 99% less land. I'd really like to know how something that is 200,000 times more expensive could currently have less of an environmental impact. I just don't see how you move that much money and don't make an impact.

I suppose you'll need to see the published findings... Oh wait. There aren't any.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#82

Post by freehunter »

kleiba wrote: post #63
bowlofpetunias wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think marketing will be a problem if you consider the industry has no problem selling crap that is made from far more distasteful things than synthetic meat. It initially won't be sold as "synthetic meat". It will be sold as "sausage", "hamburger" and countless other products of which the labeling isn't protected and which are basically "mystery meat" anyway. It has been done before, just look at the wide ran…

Well, as long as they make it clear on the label that their "hamburger" or "sausage" product is made from lab-meat, not real meat, I'm all for it.

Why? That's the same as labeling food made with GMOs. If there's no provable difference between the two, putting it on the label is just spreading FUD about the product.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#84

Post by mistercow »

mapleoin wrote: post #20

This is awesome, but I'd really hate to be a beta-customer for synthetic beef. It might cause a lot of really bad side-effects while the whole industry matures, figures out what standards it should set and implements them.

I'm pretty sure they will have to test it by feeding it to animals for a long time before they can even think about selling it to humans.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#85

Post by philwelch »

wprl wrote: post #77

How about a return to traditional agriculture, which would provide more jobs, cleaner food, and decentralization and localization of food infrastructure? Why the relentless pursuit of industrialization and homogeneity at any cost?

Because it doesn't scale to feeding 7 billion people for one. Because most people in industrialized countries don't want to be farm labor for two.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#86

Post by wprl »

paganel wrote: post #51
sdoering wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, just maybe buying animal-products, where the animals didn't suffer, where they were raised species-appropriate, would help, as it would be a ecological signal as well. If more people would do that, a lot more incentives would be there, to not let animals suffer just for human consumption. Since I switched to only eating animal products, where I know, how the animals lived, I do eat a lot less meat. i do pay a…

> Maybe, just maybe buying animal-products, where the animals didn't suffer, where they were raised species-appropriate, would help, as it would be a ecological signal as well. This is very hard to do in most of the "first world" places because agriculture or raising animals doesn't scale that well unless you do it on an industrial scale. Now, you and me and a couple of others maybe can afford to pay extra for meat p…

When you consider the real costs of unsustainable, industrialized agriculture† a very different picture emerges. The convenience of industrialized, globalized, corporate food infrastructure doesn't outweigh the long-term costs.

This basic misunderstanding of how food gets to your plate was featured prominently in a recent NY Times piece claiming the McDouble was the "cheapest, most nutritious" food ever.

The upfront cost reflects the way the food economy is structured. The food economy could be, and is being, restructured in small steps to bring the price in line with industrialized agriculture, if people would make the rational choice for health and lower long-term cost over convenience.

I can buy local pork for the same price as industrialized grocery store pork if I buy in bulk, but that does require a chest freezer. (Patchwork Farms, Columbia, MO)

† e.g. lower nutritional value, centralization, fewer jobs, lower wages, taxes for subsidizing fast food, questionable human rights and environmental practices, reduced biodiversity, etc., etc.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#88

Post by philwelch »

freehunter wrote: post #82
kleiba wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as long as they make it clear on the label that their "hamburger" or "sausage" product is made from lab-meat, not real meat, I'm all for it.

Why? That's the same as labeling food made with GMOs. If there's no provable difference between the two, putting it on the label is just spreading FUD about the product.

I'm pretty sure you could taste the provable difference were you unfortunate enough to buy it.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#89

Post by div »

sdoering wrote: post #35
icebraining wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We eat things made this way every day. Almost every food product nowadays contains synthetic components. This is just a step further.

Does this make anything any better? I don't know about a lot of others, but I cringe as well, when reading such a headline. There was once a nice Eureka-Episode, regarding this "just a step further". And I just wouldn't want to be a human guinea pig for that kind of "non clinical trial".

Does women being allowed to vote make anything better if you're a man ?

If this could become a viable alternative to regular meat, it has the capability of reducing a massive amount of suffering.

Re: Sergey Brin invests in synthetic beef

#90

Post by wprl »

philwelch wrote: post #85
wprl wrote: post #77

How about a return to traditional agriculture, which would provide more jobs, cleaner food, and decentralization and localization of food infrastructure? Why the relentless pursuit of industrialization and homogeneity at any cost?

Because it doesn't scale to feeding 7 billion people for one. Because most people in industrialized countries don't want to be farm labor for two.

Perhaps it's true that you can't feed the whole world without industrialized food, but you could feed the vast majority of people who live in cooperative climates. It's debatable whether the rest couldn't be fed as well.

Also, it wouldn't take "most people" to support small-farm agriculture. Many would gladly raise organic produce and livestock, and sell locally if the food economy were not stacked against them. It also provides more financial independence than minimum wage jobs, and many full-time jobs. Not to mention it would create many jobs.

Post reply on HN