Why Don't More Vegans Support Clean Meat?

[VGnizm]

Hi Lay Vegan,

I will share my personal view only because I have not researched the topic in detail.

About actively supporting laboratory meat production to reduce animal slaughter I would think it is like supporting laboratory morphine production to reduce opium consumption. It will not stop the habit and it will probably keep those who enjoy the substance interested in having the real version of it anyway if they can.

If it is for vegans to enjoy eating it, then out of my personal experience I can observe that I do not enjoy eating meat anymore and I have only been vegan for a year now. But I do enjoy eating well seasoned, crispy and tender, hot and sizzling food items in a sandwich with salad for example. But meat in that state is a mouthfeel of flavors and textures and is very far removed from the original raw material anyway. And it is more enjoyable when it is not meat because it is more digestible

People have a very intimate relationship with food and the trend is away from artificial substances. Laboratory meat is not only an E number ingredient, it is the major food ingredient.

My personal hunch is that this is an uphill battle but then again no one knows.

[Lay Vegan]

I will share my personal view only because I have not researched the topic in detail.

I suggest you check out some of the links in my previous posts, and read Paul Shapiro's Clean Meat .

About actively supporting laboratory meat production to reduce animal slaughter I would think it is like supporting laboratory morphine production to reduce opium consumption.

Unfortunately, clean meat will not completely eradicate factory farming any time soon. For something like this to happen, clean meat would need to be identical to conventional factory farmed meat (or perhaps better) in taste and texture. It's price would also be lower than conventional meat. This means reducing the cost of the technology used to produce it. You'd also have to overcome the "ick-factor" that is associated with lab-grown products.

It will not stop the habit and it will probably keep those who enjoy the substance interested in having the real version of it anyway if they can.

I'm not interested in the habit. I'm interested in the harm produced by the habit. If purchasing clean meat produces significantly less harm to animals, I'm all I favor. Also, this same argument can made for plant-based protein. Many vegetarians claim that the Beyond Burger tastes strikingly like meat. Does the Beyond Burger indirectly cause vegetarians to relapse and purchase the real thing? I have been vegan for 3 years, and I still occasionally crave meat and dairy. To compensate, I seek out plant-based protein like the Beyond Burger and the Impossible Burger, which adequately simulate the taste and texture of meat. To compensate for the loss of dairy, I spread Miyoko's butter on my toast in the morning and add in Almond creamer in my coffee.Does this just enable my past habits? Am I likely to relapse? If so, I'd need evidence.

If it is for vegans to enjoy eating it, then out of my personal experience I can observe that I do not enjoy eating meat anymore and I have only been vegan for a year now.

Clean meat's target market is meat-lovers, owners of obligate carnivores (cat-owners) and those with rare medical conditions that make it difficult to give up meat.

And it is more enjoyable when it is not meat because it is more digestible

What do you mean by this? Plant material would probably be more difficult to digest because of the higher fiber content.

Laboratory meat is not only an E number ingredient, it is the major food ingredient.

My personal hunch is that this is an uphill battle but then again no one knows.

Agreed, this is certainly an uphill battle. Further research (and education) is certainly needed.

[VGnizm]

Digestive benefits of fiber:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/fiber/art-20043983

[Lay Vegan]

Digestive benefits of fiber:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/fiber/art-20043983

Dietary fiber, also known as roughage or bulk, includes the parts of plant foods your body can't digest or absorb.

The page you linked to explicitly states that plant fiber cannot be digested by the body. Sure, it helps to normalize bowel movements, but the fiber itself cannot be broken down by the body. Meat on the other hand can certainly be broken down by the body and converted into energy.

[VGnizm]

Yes it is not digested but that is why it helps with digestion.

The result is that the food consumed becomes easier to digest becasue of it

[Lay Vegan]

Yes it is not digested but that is why it helps with digestion.

The result is that the food consumed becomes easier to digest becasue of it

Are you saying that a high-fiber diet slows down digestion and helps increase nutrient absorption? If so, I understand what you're saying.



It seemed that you were saying plants are easier to break down than meat. Which I'm not sure is the case.

[brimstoneSalad]

A high fiber diet can speed things up. It actually reduces *some* nutrient absorption in the stomach (not by very much if you chew well or the food is well cooked or blended), but increases others through prebiotic effects on intestinal flora.

Fiber is not so much important for the stomach as for everything that comes after.
Your body needs fiber kind of how an engine needs oil (crude analogy, but you won't have a good time if you don't eat any fiber).

Meat is commonly thought of as "heavy" and meals like that create a certain feeling in the stomach that's hard to quantify, and eating like that often can jam up the works with very stubborn customers.

More plant fiber is almost always good. It's satiating, calorie free, and keeps the pipes clear.

About actively supporting laboratory meat production to reduce animal slaughter I would think it is like supporting laboratory morphine production to reduce opium consumption. It will not stop the habit and it will probably keep those who enjoy the substance interested in having the real version of it anyway if they can.

I agree with Lay Vegan there, I don't think it will necessarily keep people interested in cruelty based meat, at least not more than it displaces it.

Look at faux leather; replacement is so common that I can't imagine the social effects of making people more interested in real leather are more common.

It's possible, I just don't think that's something we've seen before. Most likely it will be competition, and more conscientious consumers will gravitate toward it.

In terms of personal health, surely that is a concern, but people have a right to harm themselves if they wish (it's not good, but there's not much we can do about it). There are still junk foods, cigarettes, etc.
As long as they don't harm others, the environment, animals, in the process I think there are other issues we should worry about. It's surely sad when somebody dies because of bad choices, and maybe some day there will be more help, but I don't think it's effective to fight the libertarian mindset on that one.

[VGnizm]

I think that we are basically creatures of habit and our desires are based on an effort to re-create a certain pleasure experience and to maximise it as much as possible.

We have a desire for faux meat because we desire real meat. Indulgence feeds desires and keeps them alive. Heavily investing in faux meat so as to reduce meat consumption makes no sense but in an effort to reduce harm to animals yes.

But ideally it is best to stop the meat eating habit altogether since it has a more durable effect.

People generally look for excellence in what they like. They want the best of it. It is enough to see how marketers rush to clearly mark their products with a real leather stamp to understand how it increases it's value in non-vegan consumer eyes. The same logic applies to eating Kobe or Angus beef compared to regular beef.

[Lay Vegan]

Meat is commonly thought of as "heavy" and meals like that create a certain feeling in the stomach that's hard to quantify, and eating like that often can jam up the works with very stubborn customers.

More plant fiber is almost always good. It's satiating, calorie free, and keeps the pipes clear.

I alluded to this, but I'm not sure it's accurate to say your stomach finds it more difficult breaking down meat for energy than breaking down plant fiber. Obviously if we're talking about bowel movements its beneficial in that sense.

[brimstoneSalad]

Meat is commonly thought of as "heavy" and meals like that create a certain feeling in the stomach that's hard to quantify, and eating like that often can jam up the works with very stubborn customers.

More plant fiber is almost always good. It's satiating, calorie free, and keeps the pipes clear.

I alluded to this, but I'm not sure it's accurate to say your stomach finds it more difficult breaking down meat for energy than breaking down plant fiber. Obviously if we're talking about bowel movements its beneficial in that sense.

In terms of digestion, fiber isn't an energy source of course so it's a non issue. In terms of getting past the fiber to the energy containing substances... that's complicated, and an area of study. Breaking things down in digestion is a topic we're still learning about dealing with solubility and enzyme availability, stomach acid, etc.

Once digested, metabolically speaking, protein is harder on your body to break down for energy, which is why we don't want to consume protein in significant amounts for energy. Fat is better (of course unsaturated fats being healthier), and carbs are best. Without enough carbohydrates, most people go into ketosis, and that's probably a bad thing long term.

Not sure if there are significant differences between proteins in terms of difficulty of extracting energy from them and sensations produced from the metabolic byproducts.