It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Coming soon, the test-tube burger: Lab-grown meat 'needed to feed the world'

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:26 PM
As long as it stays in fast food. They are all ready cloning cows and feeding the meat to us. Why do they need to do this.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:27 PM
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

I guess in some ways it goes back to the old debate of whether or not humans were meant to be meat eaters.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:45 PM
reply to post by Blazer

They are doing that, the problem is that it is more of an ethical question than a scientific one. We know that because of hormones in cytoplasm and the cell membrane tell the stem cell to develop into whatever tissue is around it, for the most part it works. Tumors can be grown using the stem cell method they're benign growths.. However the way of obtaining the stem cells for now goes against the beliefs of some people, a renowned geneticist Sam Rhine said that there are ways to clone the stem cells which offer no ethics debate. I also mentioned the Human organ printer Science is trying to create organs but it is a tough venture.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:58 PM
reply to post by rufusthestuntbum

That doesn't matter though, as mechanically separated beef is inedible anyways as mandated by the FDA in 2004 in a response to Mad cow, I believe what you are referring to is called pink slime. Mechanically separated chicken and poultry is edible as mandated by the FDA.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:10 AM
If it tastes at least decent..

Why not? it would greatly reduce inhumane practices, pollution.. ect.

I doubt it will taste like natural.. But if it works, it's probably much healthier. We could easily control fat content and keep our food much more pure through this method.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:47 AM

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by AuranVector

What caught my eye: "corn that makes 'anti-sperm antibodies'" -- you know that's done on purpose.
Depopulation anyone?

Speaking of which. Here's a link to that. And there's a link on that page for more reading.
anti-sperm antibodies...

Thank you for that link. I bookmarked that page.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by MegaMind
Just one more thing that confirms I made the right choice to become a vegetarian.

Enjoy your steak - BTW what cut of meat is that?

edit on 27-6-2011 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

But this solves the problem, doesn't it?
You can eat meat guilt free,

Your assuming I am a vegetarian for moral reasons - I am not.

Nothing immoral about eating meat in my book.

I am a vegetarian for health reasons.

Like I said before what cut of meat is that?

Beef with a squid texture - hmmmmm yummmy.

You couldn't pay me to eat that lab meat.

edit on 29-6-2011 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:23 AM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Wow... what an original thought. Ebeneezer Scrooge from "A Christmas Carol" said the same thing about it being a good thing people dying and decreasing the surplus population. Bah Humbug...

Population is not the problem. Raising responsible families is not the problem. Hunger should be extinct by now because we have the knowledge, skill and means to do it. However, greedy, lazy & selfish attitudes like your own have raised a generation of greedy, lazy and selfish business professionals who can't find a way to squeeze money out of the poor and destitute in many 3rd World countries... so, in their minds, they should just die off since they possess no value.

How humanistic of you... how hopeless of you.. how short-sighted of you.

You will be glad to know that Europe adopted your mentality of reduced births and is now being repopulated by other nationalities. China did this too and faces a major population implosion within the next 50 years. The USA is barely replacing itself (and like Europe) is slowly being replaced by other nationalities who will one day tell people like you what to do with yourself.

As for lab grown meat, if you don't mind that these same greedy, lazy & selfish business professionals heading all this don't add little "extras" to your burger to make you more docile, stupid and compliant to doing their bidding... I say "Go for it... couldn't happen to a better person!" They have been doing it for decades with our water... food is just a natural extension... whoever controls these control the world.

Technology without morality is a horror movie in which the audience are the characters being stalked.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:24 AM
Don't know about lab grown meat...have to taste it first, but I did see on the news a story about how they want to use excess geese to feed the homeless.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:25 AM
Meat grown in a Lab, is a brilliant idea :-)

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:09 PM
This interesting and ridiculous at the same time. First off, do any of you know what meat would taste like had it never eaten anything itself? Neither do I, nor do I know what the consistency or nutritional value would be. You also can't simply consume muscle tissue with no fat, ask the Eskimos who have to ingest whale blubber to compensate for the lacking fat content of seal meat. Just because they can create it doesn't means it's palatable. Here's their quote-

n 2009 scientists from the same university grew strips of pork using the same method. They admitted it was not particularly appetising, being grey with a similar texture to calamari. Fish fillets have been grown in a New York laboratory using cells taken from goldfish muscle tissue.

Even if the initial results do not taste quite the same as proper meat, scientists are convinced the public will soon get used to it, especially if they do not have a choice.

Especially if they don't have a choice. Really? That says a lot.

So we know the 1st batch of meat tasted awful and had the consistency of squid. Albeit the meat produced was pork.

We don't know that the nutritional value will be.

We don't know the feasibility of mass producing it.

We don't know of any health related or genetic issues with the cloned meat.

I grew up on a farm. We ate what we killed, we killed what we ate and we ate what we grew. To all of the people talking about the killing of animals for consumption being evil, your delusional. Our world has herbivores, omnivores and carnivores. They all exist in a symbiotic relationship. They exist in their present forms partially because of their diets. Since complex life evolved on this planet this has always been so. Animals eating other animals is part of the food chain and the natural order.

Health problems can come from eating meat but vegans are not exempt. The only proven health advantage for vegans is a 6% decrease in ischemic heart disease vs the occasional meat eater.

Cloned meat is NOT APPROVED FOR CONSUMPTION ANYWHERE ON THIS PLANET. So folks are jumping the gun with all of this it's so wonderful talk.

I find it interesting that the cost to clone a cow is about 20,000 us dollars. How is this even remotely financially feasible?

In the US some farmers have cloned some of their elite cows. Yes they spent 20 grand to clone a $1000 animal? Why? Because they aren't just cloning meat, these cows are born and fed normally. These cloned cows are breeders and via in vitro fertilization give birth 10-20 times per year. The offspring of these cloned cattle, well odds are you've already eaten it here in the US. But again it's not simply cloned meat grown in a lab. It's the offspring of a cloned cow and a naturally born bull, or vice versa. Doesn't taste any different because it's been raised the same as any other cow, fed the same, etc....

But you haven't eaten a cloned cow, because it isn't approved for consumption.

Humans have NEVER BEEN NATURALLY VEGETARIAN. EVERY HOMO ERECTUS EVER FOUND HAD THE TEETH OF AN OMNIVORE. Quite simply you are built to eat plants and meat, not one exclusively.

And being as the cloned meat nor are cloned animals approved for consumption, being as it isn't cost effective, being as it looks and tastes awful and is nowhere even remotely close to being mass produced expensively much less in a cost effective manner.... There is no need to give this a second thought for a long time.

Do any of the advocates of the cloned meat even understand what impact all of a sudden not killing and consuming these animals would have on the environment? DO you care?

Please tell me why killing animals for food is wrong. I don't believe it is.

posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:39 AM
How do we know we aren't eating the damn stuff already? Ever wonder what they been putting in them TV dinners all them years? Is the question, "What part of the chicken does a McNugget come from" reallly invalid after all? Have you ever seen or eaten a Steak-Um? SPAM? Corned Beef froma can? I don't think this is new technology, I think it's just a false flag to let us down easy from telling us were all those so called "Potable" meat products come from !!

posted on Nov, 15 2011 @ 01:02 PM
Here's an update:

The $345,000 burger grown in a petri dish: By the numbers

Lab-grown meat is coming. But growing a burger in a petri dish won't be cheap, at least not at first, says Mark Post, a vascular biologist determined to grow "cultured meat" in his lab. Eventually, though, costs will drop as the process is refined. Then in vitro meat could have a huge economic impact, helping satisfy rising global demand while saving land, water, and energy costs. It could even be a solution to global warming. Here's a look at how the sausage of the future gets made, by the numbers:

The estimated cost to produce the first lab-grown burger. Post says he hopes to accomplish the feat within a year, "just to show it's possible."

The average cost of a McDonald's Big Mac in the United States as of June 2011, according to The Economist

In inches, the length of pale, muscle-like strips Post has been able to grow in petri dishes. Each is a centimeter wide and thin enough to see through.

The number of these artificial meat strips that will be needed to layer together a burger patty

218 million
In tons, worldwide annual meat production from 1997 to 1999, according to the World Health Organization

376 million
In tons, worldwide annual meat production estimated for the year 2030 — with demand likely being much higher

34.2 million
In 2010, the amount of cattle counted for U.S. commercial slaughter, according to the USDA

26.4 billion
In pounds, the amount of beef consumed in the U.S. in 2010

Grams of vegetable protein fed to cattle to produce every 15 grams of edible meat from livestock

Percentage of agricultural land currently being used to raise livestock, says Post. "It's simple math. We have to come up with alternatives."

Percentage of global greenhouse-gas emissions contributed by the meat industry, according to a report by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization

35 to 60
Percent energy lab-grown meat would save compared to traditionally farmed livestock, according to the journal Environmental Science and Technology

80 to 95
Percent greenhouse-gas emissions lab-grown meats would save versus conventionally produced animal meat

Percent land lab-grown meats would save versus conventionally produced animal meat

I'd eat one!

posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 03:24 AM

Yum! semi-clear meat?!? The translucent burger, sounds delicious!, just think the first batch will be dyed with a deadly red dye, I wouldn't eat one of those burgers if it was free.

posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 03:31 AM
Problem I find with this is the process will be owned by a corporation (probaly Monsanto ) and as people become less reliant on cattle and there numbers dwindle then another monopoly on another food source will come into effect

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in