Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
carnap
Anti-Vegan Troll
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by carnap »

Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm "Cellular mush" is just semantic nonsense. Clean meat IS cow tissue that happened to be cultured and produced in a laboratory. They are equivalent to the cells that are present in cows (it doesn't require genetic modification).
I'm really not sure what you mean by "semantic nonsense" but you're ignoring the key issue here. Meat as people know it isn't just muscle cells, its a collection of various cells, compounds (nutrients, etc) and fatty acids. Your claim here is like suggesting a bike tire is equivalent to a bike because it has the same type of tires on it.
Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm This is no different from conventional hamburgers. Beef fat, "pink slime" (boneless beef trimmings) and other food additives/fillers are used in meat products to enhance the flavor and texture.
This isn't true, a conventional hamburger patty is just ground beef. I'm sure you can find ones with fillers, additives, etc but it would all have to be listed on the ingredients.
Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm Most start-ups are focusing on chicken or beef which have textures that are relatively easy to mimic in labs. You're "cellular mush" comment alludes to this. It's easier for researchers to produce ground beef than it is to produce chicken wings with bones and all.
Except that cultured meat doesn't mimic the texture of whole chicken or whole beef. Its a mush like substance that can be formed in ways that can mimic processed meat products much in the same way you can do with plant-proteins.

Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm If you can convince billions of staunch meat lovers to switch from meat to legumes, go for it! :D The more rational alternative would be to create a nearly identical product sans all of conventional meat's disadvantages. Plant-based proteins are getting close, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, but most of them do not taste enough like meat to convince non vegans to become vegan. These products exist largely for current vegetarians.
Why would convincing them to eat some fortified, flavored, etc lab-created meat product be any easier? As I said earlier, to really address this issue you first have to understand why people are driven to eat meat in the first place. Is it purely taste? Is it merely a cultural preference? Is it about power and status?

And its by no means just vegetarians that buy mock meats.

Also there is a dubious premise here, namely, the idea that people need alternatives that taste just like what they are currently eating. Why would that be the case?

Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm People eat meat because it's cheap, tasty, convenient, or because of tradition.
And this is based on what exactly? The cost of meat is, in general, expensive compared to whole plant alternatives. Meats have to be cooked carefully so aren't very convenient. And taste is subjective and cultural. Its pretty obvious that there is more to the story than this but I don't pretend to have the answer, why people eat meat and how they think about it is an anthropological question that would have to be rigorously researched. I don't know of any work that has really done this, just various articles that address some topics (e.g., the book "Human diet - Its origins and evolution").
Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm In terms of getting consumers warmed up to the idea of in-vitro meat, it may be best to first introduce them to other lab-produced products, like clean leather or "clean spider silk."
There are already alternatives to both that are cheaper, leather and silk clothing are largely purchased for status so the "real thing" would likely always be in demand.

For example look at the market for gems, many gems can be created synthetically but there is still a large market for the real thing. People prefer natural gems despite not being able to tell the difference. In fact the average person cannot even tell the difference between a diamond and cubic zirconia yet they are driven to pay dramatically more for diamonds.

Lay Vegan wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:44 pm This is irrelevant, considering that his book is thoroughly sourced and relies on research of actual experts in the field.
I think its very relevant, you need expertise in a field to be able to meaningfully survey and understand the current research and findings. As such when I read books on areas that I don't have strong expertise in I want to make sure the person writing it has strong credentials in the area and doesn't have any obvious bias.
carnap
Anti-Vegan Troll
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by carnap »

brimstoneSalad wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2018 3:06 pm I think it just being animal protein will make a lot of people more receptive to trying it who are more skeptical of mock meats otherwise. Even if it's just a gimmick to start and otherwise no different from mock meats, it could be a foot in the door for a lot of new customers.
It would be animal protein but it would also have a stigma of being a synthetic product. I think products like almond milk tell a different story, what people care about are functional replacements that they think are tasty. But despite this being probably the biggest success story in alternatives, people seem to be driven to try to replicate the taste of meat rather than the function of it.
User avatar
Canastenard
Junior Member
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:20 pm
Diet: Vegan
Contact:

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by Canastenard »

After this recent discussion I added a section in the "Practical Skepticism" part I named "Taste and texture". I mentioned the importance of the right cell type ratio for the taste to be convincing, and concerns about the texture.

We might compare clean meat with something similar that happened recently, children receiving a lab-grown ear
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/5474581/children-new-ears-3d-printer-human-cells-china/). It's said in the article that the new ear comes "close to restoring the ear structure", but cartilage is more rigid than muscle. I suppose getting a specific shape for a whole clean meat product won't be a huge problem, but again texture is the unknown. Maybe it could compress itself as it grows inside the mold after occupying all the available space? Or could we compress the mold to simulate the physical activity that happens to the muscle in the animal's body assuming it has any effect on the texture of the final product in the first place?

And there's also the fact it will probably not be a satisfying replacement for things like Thanksgiving turkey to take an extreme example, especially because it's such a deeply rooted tradition. Even if we manage to give lab-grown turkey the right shape and a satisfying texture, growing the skin on it sounds like a nightmare, so is growing it somewhere else then wrapping the turkey with it, and we should grow the bones too. Unfortunately for this specific example I think we will more likely have to kill the tradition outright rather than replace it by an in-vitro alternative if we want the end of animal agriculture.
Appeal to nature: the strange belief that what is perceived as "natural" is necessarily safer, more effective or morally superior compared to what isn't.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

We hopefully could at least replace all of the more processed meat products in the short term. That in itself would make a huge dent in animal agriculture.

All of the sandwich slices, hot dogs, hamburgers, chicken nuggets, etc.

And if it were the case that these processed meat products weren't worse for people than unprocessed meats, maybe people would be willing to increase their reliance on them over time. People eating turkey as a family once a year is a small fraction of consumption.
carnap
Anti-Vegan Troll
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by carnap »

Canastenard wrote: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:45 pm We might compare clean meat with something similar that happened recently, children receiving a lab-grown ear
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/5474581/children-new-ears-3d-printer-human-cells-china/). It's said in the article that the new ear comes "close to restoring the ear structure", but cartilage is more rigid than muscle.
This is I think is the issue which I mentioned earlier, the popular notion of "lab-meat" (e.g., a replica of whole meats produced in a lab) is technologically and scientifically very similar to producing human organs which we cannot currently do at any cost and that isn't likely to change anytime soon. But the barriers for lab-meat will be even higher, not only do we need the technology but we need productive systems that will produce the meat at costs that are very low.

Lab-meat in the serious sense is science fiction....
carnap
Anti-Vegan Troll
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by carnap »

brimstoneSalad wrote: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:44 pm We hopefully could at least replace all of the more processed meat products in the short term. That in itself would make a huge dent in animal agriculture.
I doubt that this possibility would exist in the "short-term". It seems we mostly have the technology to create some sort of cultured meat processed product but we lack the production systems to make it affordable. Will that barrier resolved anytime soon? I doubt it....processed meat products are rather cheap. Also I see no reason to believe that the taste/texture will be any better than the plant-based alternatives that exist today and the mass market has largely ignored these products for decades (admittedly, they've gotten a lot better over the last 10 years or so).
esquizofrenico
Junior Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:54 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by esquizofrenico »

I agree completely with you carnap, clean meat sounds like nuclear fusion. Best case scenario I can imagine is that clean meat reaches the unitary price of a drug, and that would mean it would be ridiculously expensive. And as it has already been said by carnap, the most feasible application (for processed meat), is the one that needs the lowest unitary cost to substitute real meat.

Not to talk that there would be a huge backslash against the technology. We are talking about something that was used in "Space Merchants" as the ultimate manifestation of a distopic world (the main character works in a meat factory in which meat is obtained from a giant mush). Who is going to put money into that?

It's ok if you support clean meat, but frankly I don't think you can in any way defend the argument that it is a more realistic future alternative for meat than vegan mock meats.
User avatar
Lay Vegan
Senior Member
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:05 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by Lay Vegan »

esquizofrenico wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:21 am I agree completely with you carnap, clean meat sounds like nuclear fusion.
Only it isn't nuclear fusion. Dr. Mark Post, a researcher at Maastricht University, has already unvieled the world's first lab-grown burger in 2013. There are quite a few start-ups currently producing lab brown meat. Modern Meadows is even growing "steak chips." Yes, researchers are working to improve the taste and texture, but these can be perfected with adequate funding and further research.
esquizofrenico wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:21 am Best case scenario I can imagine is that clean meat reaches the unitary price of a drug, and that would mean it would be ridiculously expensive. And as it has already been said by carnap, the most feasible application (for processed meat), is the one that needs the lowest unitary cost to substitute real meat.
Bringing the price down would involve lowering the product's cost. At the time, the cost for his burger was over $3,000,000. Just in 4 years, the cost has dropped dramatically by 80% to just over $11 per burger. http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2015/s4205857.htm The biggest culprits behind the high cost are the animal-based serums used to culture the meat (like FBS) and the bioreactors which the cells are placed in to mature.

By 2021, Post himself wants to reduce the price to about $10 per patty. Hopefully, with more venture capital funds, start-ups will be able to afford larger and more efficient bioreactors that can produce meat at the scale of a brewery. In terms of the serums, research has shown that synthetic (and even plant-based extracts are shown to be just as efficient as the blood-based serums. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551074/ I'm confident that over the years, the price will continue to drop, perhaps even below the unit price of "conventional" factory farmed meat.
esquizofrenico wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:21 am Not to talk that there would be a huge backslash against the technology. We are talking about something that was used in "Space Merchants" as the ultimate manifestation of a distopic world (the main character works in a meat factory in which meat is obtained from a giant mush). Who is going to put money into that?
This is a legitimate concern. I find it odd that consumers find lab-grown meat to be "icky" while eating meat that was produced by a brutally slaughtered animal, who was likely injected with hormones, fed antibiotics, and whose corpse is riddled with lethal intestinal pathogens.

I've spoken in detail about this father back in the thread. One of the main tactics to familiarize cosnumers to the idea of lab-grown meats is to offer other lab-grown products first. Consumers have already shown that they have no problem wearing lab-produced synthetic leather/fur. These can serve as entry products into the market that warm consumers up to clean meat.This start-up Modern Meadow has put clean meat on the back burner, and is looking to bring lab-grown "clean leather" into the market within a few years.
http://www.modernmeadow.com Perfect day is producing animal-free dairy milk, produced with bioengineering. http://www.perfectdayfoods.com Once consumers are warmed up to the idea of lab-produced materials like leather, fur, wool, gelatin, and other animal products, they may begin to express interest in lab-grown meat and dairy. You may be underestimating the willingness for consumers to educate themselves about the science of lab-grown meat.
esquizofrenico wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:21 am It's ok if you support clean meat, but frankly I don't think you can in any way defend the argument that it is a more realistic future alternative for meat than vegan mock meats.
It's a more realistic alternative for staunch meat eaters and those not wiling to substitute animal protein for plant protein. In this sense, clean meat is the exact same product (sans the animal suffering).
carnap
Anti-Vegan Troll
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by carnap »

Lay Vegan wrote: Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:35 pm Bringing the price down would involve lowering the product's cost. At the time, the cost for his burger was over $3,000,000. Just in 4 years, the cost has dropped dramatically by 80% to just over $11 per burger.
Until someone actually creates a production system and starts selling products these numbers are just crude estimates and they should be received skeptically. After all, these are start-ups trying to attract investors. Start-ups aren't known for their truthfulness.
Lay Vegan wrote: Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:35 pm This is a legitimate concern. I find it odd that consumers find lab-grown meat to be "icky" while eating meat that was produced by a brutally slaughtered animal, who was likely injected with hormones, fed antibiotics, and whose corpse is riddled with lethal intestinal pathogens.
This is hyperbolic, the vast majority of people prefer humane slaughter methods, don't want meat from animals that have been fed antibiotics and so on. Major companies have responded to this sentiment, for example, see Tyson:

https://www.tysonfoods.com/news/viewpoints/antibiotic-use

Lay Vegan wrote: Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:35 pm It's a more realistic alternative for staunch meat eaters and those not wiling to substitute animal protein for plant protein. In this sense, clean meat is the exact same product (sans the animal suffering).
What is currently being produced is nowhere near "the same product". There is a clear bait and switch here, if you could produce an identical for the same or lower cost than people would likely buy it. But that isn't what is happening....not even close.
I'm here to exploit you schmucks into demonstrating the blatant anti-intellectualism in the vegan community and the reality of veganism. But I can do that with any user name.
User avatar
Lay Vegan
Senior Member
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:05 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

Post by Lay Vegan »

carnap wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:03 am This is hyperbolic, the vast majority of people prefer humane slaughter methods, don't want meat from animals that have been fed antibiotics and so on. Major companies have responded to this sentiment, for example, see Tyson:

https://www.tysonfoods.com/news/viewpoints/antibiotic-use
Does this mean that you (like vegans) temporarily boycott the industry until you can find ethically sourced meat, or that you sit back and let the horribly underfunded branch of the USDA attempt to enforce protection, all the while continuing to purchase the product?


Spot the irony? Some polls reveal that 50% of American consumers prefer not to eat factory farmed meat, yet factory farms raise and sell 99% of chickens, 99% of turkeys, 95% of pigs, and 78% of cows to the American public.

https://www.aspca.org/animal-cruelty/farm-animal-welfare

http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/americans-want-to-ban-slaughterhouses/

Things don't look much better globally, 42% of pork, 67% of poultry, and 50% of laying hens globally were raised in factory farm conditions.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1250e/a1250e00.htm

The page you linked discusses antibiotic use mainly for its chicken. Tyson Foods still injects its cattle with growth hormones to stimulate milk production and feeds them antibiotics to help them survive crowded, unsanitary factory farm conditions. Tyson Foods, like many other food companies, normalizes and legalizes abuses like debeaking, and removal of teeth, tails, horns and genitalia without anesthetics. Are you aware of these practices, or just hopelessly apathetic? Or do you delude yourself to the reality of the industry?


If consumers are truly appalled with animal suffering, they too should invest in clean meat technology.
carnap wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:03 am What is currently being produced is nowhere near "the same product". There is a clear bait and switch here, if you could produce an identical for the same or lower cost than people would likely buy it. But that isn't what is happening....not even close.

The goal is for researchers to produce a product that has a similar (or even better) in taste and texture as meat. Genetically, clean meat is identical to the muscle cells growing "naturally" in the cow. This is what I meant when I said the clean meat currently being produced is identical to beef. There is no genetic modification required. Obviously, it can be quite costly nurturing cells outside of an animal. Doing this at a commercial scale would pose even greater challenges. This doesn't mean that it is impossible, just that researchers are still looking for ways to make it happen.
Post Reply