Laboratory Beef

[Cactusflower]

https://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/24 ... grown-meat

Couldn't these scientists have found a better way to spend a quarter million dollars? Like working on a cure for ALS or something?

[Fancy]

If they were interested in something else I would think they would choose to do so.

[OKkayak]

World's population is going up, we need to eat and find sustainable ways to keep up with the demand. Money well spent. Don't like it, apply for your own grant and spend it how you see fit.

[OKkayak]

Double post.

[Jlabute]

One could trade one evil for another or skip right on to eating bugs which is even cheaper and easier to grow, with much much less energy. So, eat bugs! So long as real steaks are sold, I will occasionally have one :-)

"... The most popular is foetal bovine serum (FBS), a mixture harvested from the blood of foetuses excised from pregnant cows slaughtered in the dairy or meat industries. ... Other animal serums work for one or two cell types, but FBS is a natural all-rounder. And it's absolutely key to growing meat in the lab. - Mar 20, 2018"

[Fancy]

The Good Food Institute in Washington, D.C., awarded the team US$250,000 over two years to pursue the project in an announcement made earlier this month. It's one of 14 projects to receive the inaugural grant for plant-based and cell-based meat research and development, and the only cell-based project winner from Canada.

Hope they accomplish what they set out to do.

[Omnitheo]

https://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/249807/Mmm-lab-grown-meat

Couldn't these scientists have found a better way to spend a quarter million dollars? Like working on a cure for ALS or something?

You realize there are more scientists today than in all of history combined? There are a wide range of scientists each specialized in specific fields conducting research. Here is a recent report from the university of Alberta in regards to ALS
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 123120.htm

A new drug could significantly slow the progression of ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, according to new research by University of Alberta biologists. Current treatments slow progression of the degenerative disease by only a few months, and these findings could revolutionize the treatment of patients suffering from ALS, extending and improving quality of life.

The drug, called telbivudine, targets a protein that misfolds and does not function correctly in patients with ALS. "SOD1 is a protein that is known to misfold and misbehave in most cases of patients with ALS," explained Ted Allison, associate professor in the Department of Biological Sciences and co-author on the study. "We showed that telbivudine can greatly reduce the toxic properties of SOD1, including improving the health of the subject's motor neurons and improving movement."

The research team used computer simulations to identify drugs with the potential for targeting the SOD1 protein. From this shortlist, the scientists identified and tested the most likely candidates -- including telbivudine -- using animal models.

"ALS is not well-understood," said lead author Michele DuVal, who recently completed the PhD portion of the Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry'sMD/PhD program under the supervision of Allison. "We don't yet know exactly what goes wrong first in the motor neurons or how the misbehaving SOD1 causes toxicity. Because there is still much to learn about the disease, the ALS research community focuses on both understanding ALS and on developing promising therapies."

Would you say "shouldn't they have spent their time researching cancer instead?"

Back to the topic at hand though, Meat production is not sustainable. It takes 10x as much water, land, and energy to produce a pound of meat vs a pound of vegetables. As nations around the world continue to develop, and income and quality of life goes up, so too does the demand for meat. If India or China ate meat in the same quantities as western nations, we would see massive problems.

Those problems include deforestation, redirection of resources such as water. increased CO2 and Methane production, superbugs with increased immunity to drugs (as antibiotics are used on livestock), and the potential for increased suffering of animals.

Lab meat can provide an ethical and efficient way of producing meat which does not require antibiotics, could be made to be healthier, produces a more consistent product, and without negative impacts to consumers used to a specific quality of life (being able to eat meat).

So why not have scientists continue their research into lab meat?

[Cactusflower]

^^It just sounds creepy to me........and not very ethical either. But of course I would never dream of standing in the way of progress (if that's how the rest of the world sees it). As long as I still have a choice of what kind of protein I'm allowed to eat, I'm a happy camper.

[Omnitheo]

^^It just sounds creepy to me........and not very ethical either. But of course I would never dream of standing in the way of progress (if that's how the rest of the world sees it). As long as I still have a choice of what kind of protein I'm allowed to eat, I'm a happy camper.

Why do you think it sounds creepy or less ethical?

If you are farming beef, you need to take care of a cow. The cow needs to be cared for and fed, and much of that food goes not just towards the meat, but the cows bones, it's digestive system, cardiovascular system, nervous system, brain etc. The cow needs to be treated humanely, grown to maturity, and then slaughtered. This involves several steps too in order to get from producing feed->growing cow->slaughtering, butchering cow->market.

Now lets say that you have a system which can produce meat protein without the rest of the cow. You need a facility that can produce the meat. This facility could be much smaller than the farms and slaughterhouses and grazing pastures required for cattle. All of the energy can go directly into producing meat protein. The meat would not be exposed to contaminants or bacteria in the same way a wild cow might. The meat can be grown, extracted, and packaged all from one location. Furthermore, the feed wouldn't need to be tailored to a Cow's digestive system, and therefor more efficient methods of feed could be produced as well.

I'll give the example of insulin. Previously Insulin for diabetics needed to be extracted from pigs. They would be slaughtered, and their pancreases turned into insulin. Then we figured out a way to have bacteria produce insulin. This meant that it could now be mass produced in vats in lab facilities. With the rise of diabetes, imagine if we were still using the inefficient older method? Does the new method sound creepy or unethical?

[Omnitheo]

I'll add in something, that lab meat would not replace normal meat. It may in things like processed foods, maybe some fast food meals, but if you were to go to a steakhouse, you would likely still have a choice just like today. Just like with "Organic foods" a market would still exist for "organic meat". Though you may find that it is cheaper to just purchase lab meat. In fact, as with some organic foods, you may find you get a much better product when you opt for the less expensive, not "organic" labelled product.

I'll also add, that lab meat is still a ways a way. Currently a challenge with producing lab meats as has been seen in burger patties, is that they are still working on proper marbelling, creating a good consistency of meat with fat mixed in. This isn't an impossible hurdle, it's just the next part of the development cycle. The next part, once a sufficient product has been produced, will be in scaling production so that the price of a patty can go down from $10,000 to $1. Again, while this sounds pretty extreme, this is not an impossible hurdle either, and is quite in line with what we see with emerging technologies.

[Jlabute]

Mmmmm, bugs.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/iron-deficient-edible-bugs-pack-minerals-sirloin-steak

[OKkayak]

Mmmmm, bugs.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/iron-deficient-edible-bugs-pack-minerals-sirloin-steak

Mmmmm, nope

[Fancy]

What seems to be forgotten is the texture and taste of foods and that should be considered.

[Omnitheo]

What seems to be forgotten is the texture and taste of foods and that should be considered.

Nobody is forgetting this

[Cactusflower]

^^It just sounds creepy to me........and not very ethical either. But of course I would never dream of standing in the way of progress (if that's how the rest of the world sees it). As long as I still have a choice of what kind of protein I'm allowed to eat, I'm a happy camper.

Why do you think it sounds creepy or less ethical?

If you are farming beef, you need to take care of a cow. The cow needs to be cared for and fed, and much of that food goes not just towards the meat, but the cows bones, it's digestive system, cardiovascular system, nervous system, brain etc. The cow needs to be treated humanely, grown to maturity, and then slaughtered. This involves several steps too in order to get from producing feed->growing cow->slaughtering, butchering cow->market.

Now lets say that you have a system which can produce meat protein without the rest of the cow. You need a facility that can produce still have this "the meat. This facility could be much smaller than the farms and slaughterhouses and grazing pastures required for cattle. All of the energy can go directly into producing meat protein. The meat would not be exposed to contaminants or bacteria in the same way a wild cow might. The meat can be grown, extracted, and packaged all from one location. Furthermore, the feed wouldn't need to be tailored to a Cow's digestive system, and therefor more efficient methods of feed could be produced as well.

I'll give the example of insulin. Previously Insulin for diabetics needed to be extracted from pigs. They would be slaughtered, and their pancreases turned into insulin. Then we figured out a way to have bacteria produce insulin. This meant that it could now be mass produced in vats in lab facilities. With the rise of diabetes, imagine if we were still using the inefficient older method? Does the new method sound creepy or unethical?

No, and I totally understand your position on this. However, some of us still have those old 'mad scientist' movies etched into our psyche and remember that book, "1984". Don't criticize us seniors for being influenced at a tender age by fictional books and movies.

Of course I know how horrible abattoirs are, and knowing that, I should never eat meat again, but if Science can't come up with a better solution to provide the populace with the protein they need, I just can't be on board with this solution.