Clean Meat: Meat of the Future
 

Bill Gates and Richard Branson both invested in this company. They grow meat from stem cells. This is pretty interesting technology. I think in about 5-8 years, we will starts seeing this hit the grocery shelves.

Gross.

Just because they can steal an idea from Steve Jobs and sell records doesn't mean they are brilliant.

Eminem sells a lot of records......

I want meat I can kill !

This is very interesting but the race for an ideal world is shrouded with a certain irony. Some animals are only found on farms where they are farmed to eat. To eat the lab grown meat without killing animals might well lead to the extinction of these – so instead of killing some animals for ‘dirty’ food, do we kill off the entire species for clean food?

The video refers to saving water. Food production does use a massive amount of water (around 70% of the world’s freshwater) but the amount of water on the planet is constant. It might be more accurate to say this process would save water processing. However, perhaps the money spent on developing the meat could be spent on making desalination more cost effective.

H.G. Wells would be all over this one - as we race towards dependency on processing technology, a trip in his time machine might show a catastrophic technology failure in the future leading to our own extinction. :hmm::hmm::hmm::hmm::hmm::hmm::hmm::hmm::hmm:

Bingo.

Saving water (wasting water) is a scare tactic that is used for control, just like the other one.

I like my meat produced naturally.

Chicken washed in chlorine and beef pumped full of growth hormones. ;)

Apparently, I'm in the minority but I am all for this.

This finally validates the organic advertising . Synthetic meat has arrived . Now , if only we could do this with plants ......

Soylent Green.

It's people.........

:wild:

It also takes attention away from the real problem which is very far from constant. Population.

I don’t think “saving water” is a scare tactic. We do face challenges in regards to access to potable water. It is very expensive to make ocean water drinkable, so it is wise to slow consumption of accessible, drinkable water, and to reduce the fouling of drinkable water that occurs due to animal waste leaching into watersheds.

Obviously, clean meat will stir a lot of reactivity...as this thread is already showing. Nonetheless, it is a good idea, and an appealing alternative to mass produced antibiotic-laced, chemically treated meat of mass commercial production.

Personally butchering your own animals will not disappear...but that is not an alternative for most people.

Seems a whole lot easier just to remove meat, or a large percentage of meat from one's diet. Less impact, less cost, better health.

So you are still buying in on this very old and disproven concept .
Population is a constant . It is constantly increasing . There is plenty of food . The problem is that certain people are willing to starve others .
This ventures far too close to a banned subject matter . For that reason , I will now leave this thread because I know where this is headed .

And Soylent Green? Oh yummy!

A lot of folks, in fact the majority, do not wish to remove meat from their diet. Whether it makes sense to me is none of my business.
We also have the freedom (thank goodness) to choose our lifestyle, healthy or otherwise.
Chicken without antibiotics is readily available where I live and I believe it is everywhere. The industry has responded to current trends because it is in their best interest to do so.
Personally, if anyone wishes to eat "synthetic" chicken, by all means have at it.
Otterhound is right. This thread is doomed.
Live and let live.

Not sure how making an observation is anything but live and let live or an incursion on your freedom. You are free of course to do what you like, and I don't know anyone who would want it another way. That said, it really does surprise me that one would regard my comment as an abridgment of their freedom.

To be clear I said remove or reduce. Both are viable options if someone is concerned about the problems this tech is trying to solve–whether it be available water resources, animal waste pollution, cost of feeding the planet, or the host of other issues with animal agriculture. If you're not concerned, not a problem. For me it's a simple issue of personal health, so I avoid meat, and have learned how to eat more simply and healthfully.

Right now the tech is at $9000 per pound of meat produced. They have a long way to go before they're viable. I think beyond that there are a lot of questions about this approach in terms of health. It seems super creepy to me, but I'm willing to stifle that and keep an open mind about the reality of this approach.

Interesting thread for sure. Thanks for posting Larry.