Hacker News Reader

Comment by NeoBasilisk | Hacker News Reader

I think lab-grown meat (if it ever becomes economically feasible) is the only thing that can ever put a dent in factory farming.

View on HN

It seems the meat and dairy industry is subsidized by the government. One source[1] quote $38 billion yearly while only $17 million goes to the fruit and vegetable industry (The US).

Shifting subsidies to greener and more ethical industries would be a good start. The "fake-meat" improves all the time and if it actually were cheaper (in-store) than the meat option things could start to happen. Typically that's not the case[2]. Probably due to a combination of scale, subsidies, willingness to pay amongst vegans and health concerned customers and store policy (key product might be sold at very low margins/loss to attract customers)

Estimates of the external cost caused by the meat industry (health, pollution) is also quite high. Special taxes can be used here, while cutting taxes on better products.

[1] https://www.peta.org/living/food/10-things-wish-everyone-kne... (admittingly not the most objective source)

[2] Based on Norwegian stores

We talk about that a bunch! I agree, though it's possible before that we'll figure out how to combine plant products in ways that make them taste very similar to meat. Impossible Foods is already impressively close.

> though it's possible before that we'll figure out how to combine plant products in ways that make them taste very similar to meat

I think the major barrier to mass adoption of this will be convincing the masses that they should try it. Too bad it can't be marketed as meat, at least not for long before getting caught.

In principle, it's possible that plant-based meat substitutes could become cheaper than real meat, simply because raw plants are always cheaper per calorie than meat. So the question is whether the conversion from raw plant to meat substitute can be done for cheap enough.

Actually, I'm thinking of some of my, uh, close-minded relatives who would refuse to eat such a thing out of 'principle.' The only way to convince them would be to trick them for several years.

Yes this is a problem, though also serious for 'clean meat'. :)

Interestingly, consumers are more likely to try out vegan products if they don't say they're vegan on the front of the package...

What's the nutrition content of the impossible foods burger?

The NYT article neglected to discuss that iirc

Hi Richard - the nutritional information is listed on their FAQ: https://www.impossiblefoods.com/faq/

They've made it similar to ground beef I think.

One great thing I foresee with lab grown meat is that the discussion changes. Suppose you can get your labgrowns to be cheaper yet indistinguishable from the meat that was once part of a sentient being. In that world you have to be especially sadistic to still want slaughters variant.

Investors seem to notice too.

"Why Bill Gates And Richard Branson Invested In 'Clean' Meat" https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2017/08/25/why-bil...

"Richard Branson predicts the world will no longer need to kill animals in 30 years" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/indyventure/memph...

By the way, if anyone who reads still consumes dairy: that stuff is undermining your health. Replacements are getting close, and given that the replacements are WAY more healthy it is just not the same story as meat. (Similar, but less convincing, case can be made for eggs)

If lab grown meat can "in the future" make a dent in slaughtered meat consumption (can attract "us" away), then plant-based dairy alternatives should be able to do so today.

And they do -- https://www.google.nl/search?q=dairy+consumption+is+down -- all over the western world. Their best strategy: sell it to new markets of people that are, unlike those of European decent, much more likely to be lactose intolerant.

I'm all for lab-grown meat but I do question if you'll ever fully satisfy the meat lovers. In my opinion, a better approach would be a hybrid meat/fake meat option which would still make a huge dent in factory farming but appeal to the palates of those who love their cheeseburger.

If we can cut down "real" meat consumption by even half, you could in theory make all cows free range.

Why don't you think that lab-grown meat will satisfy meat lovers? Lab grown meat is still biologically meat.

perhaps it's my ignorance as i haven't tasted it.

Okay. I was wondering if you thought the labelling would turn people off. (America has a lot of random fear-of-science. See: anti-GMOs, anti-vaccine, anti-evolution sentiments.) Or maybe that it would be that people wouldn't actually be able to reocognize what cut of meat it was from, and it would be some kind of uncanny valley problem. Or a kind of macho attitude like "if a pig didn't die, it doesn't count as breakfast". (I've seriously heard a guy say that!)

Yeah, if you're only concerned about taste/texture/juiciness, I think that's the easiest concern. lab grown meat is still the same muscle cells. I would bet a lot of money that it's going to taste awesome.

It's even better. Unless you really want to have it attached to a rib, or fat chunks in between for some reason, I believe it's going to be the best quality steak meat. Basically a mass produced perfect filet.

>America has a lot of random fear-of-science. See: anti-GMOs, anti-vaccine, anti-evolution sentiments.

these sentiments are not random when you consider the history of Monsanto, of DuPont, the tuskegee syphilis experiments, etc. You don't need to look far to find reasons to distrust global corporations and governments.

Lab-made synthetic flavors* are readily distinguished from non-lab flavours. Getting lab-made flavors right must be an easier problem than growing a steak in the lab... and we still still can't do it.

* a.k.a. artifical and natural flavours - the only difference between artificial and natural is the starting ingredient in the synthesis

Idk, I'm not convinced. You're comparing two very different processes--- artificial flavors are a matter of organic chemistry and if we [humans] are guiding the process, then we have to get every single fraction of chemicals exactly right.

Whereas, when you have cells, you already have a system that grows and does the chemistry via it's own enzymes. The dream is that you "just add sugar / water / salt" and it'll grow. I'm not saying that there won't be problems. (Like, maybe the meat tissue think that it's stressed or has been cut, if it's exposed to water/air? Maybe stressed tissue will taste bad or produce bad hormones?) But they will be very very different problems.

Okay, fair enough. Do you agree that getting factory farm meat to taste as good as pastured meat is an easier problem?

As an example, given a pastured chicken, a factory chicken, and a lab chicken, is it easier to get the factory chicken to taste like the pastured chicken, or to get the lab chicken to taste like the pastured chicken?

I have never tasted a factory chicken that compares to a pastured chicken, and I'm skeptical about whether it's possible. But nevertheless I believe that's an easier problem than getting the lab chicken right, which of course implies that in my opinion a good-as-pastured lab chicken is exceedingly difficult.

But I'll readily agree we can make something that most humans would identify as meat in the lab and that a large number of them would be happy to eat it. After all, people enjoy eating all sorts of processed food as it is.

Given this, I guess the real question is, can you make a lab chicken taste as good as a factory chicken? I don't know, probably...

I don't know about other meat lovers, but yours truly can't wait for lab-grown meat to be a thing so he can finally stop killing animals for food.

Out of curiosity, what's stopping you from going vegan or vegetarian in the interim?

Pretty much only this equation:

meat tastiness * degree it affects me > immorality of killing animals * degree it affects me

Yeah, "vegan in the head but not in the plate", I think our ranks are growing haha

Exactly that. One of these days, someone will give me a choice between a normal, horrifyingly-grown slab of meat and a slightly-more-expensive-but-ethically-grown one, and then we'll see who's a hypocrite!

I'm all for lab-grown meat but I do question if you'll ever fully satisfy the meat lovers

I dunno, how much worse could it be if it is substituting the meat in, say, a McDonalds hamburger? By the time the cheese and special sauce are added, does anyone notice the difference? Sure, one might have special occasions when you go spend $200 for a real, dead cow dinner. But I’ll bet most meat consumption isn’t in the form of “slab of ribeye” but ground up to be unrecognizable Taco Bell meat and chicken nuggets. I’m also willing to bet the person placing the order at Taco Bell is not in meat conisseur mode, but in “fill the hole so the grumbling sounds stop” mode.

Why doesn't a billionaire just buy up 95% of all the factory farms and start converting them to free range, while lowering output and raising prices? Why don't we as a society subsidize the cost?

Would save a lot of lives from suffering.

Whatever argument you make against this can also be made in favor of making more cramped prisons and working human prisoners to the bone.

Capitalism is designed to exploit externalities, including animal welfare as well as antibiotic resistance.

Couldn't the old owners just open new factory farms and outcompete the now-free range ones by being cheaper?

Well can't the same argument be made for cutting costs in prisons and working inmates to the hilt?

Of course. That's why you need regulations, not billionaires, in both cases.

So can advocates of capitalism admit that it needs to be regulated? How would factory farms have been abolished under anarcho capitalism? How would child labor or sweatshops be abolished? They say that under the NAP there would be no coersion, but clearly there is.

They say private ownership of animals will prevent their extinction, like commercial bees. That may be true but what about their welfare?

A better answer is hiding in your posts. It's that: We believe that humans, even criminals, have dignity and should be treated decently despite their wrongdoings. The argument, then, is that we could extend that "deserving of decent treatment" to animals.

It doesn't need a billionaire to make this happen (which is why you're confusing me), it just needs culture to change.

My question I guess is this:

Does unregulated Capitalism have the mechanisms to abolish such things with time? If there remain even 10% of meat eaters who want to pay $1 for a hamburger, who can stop the factory farms??

The only thing I can think of is a billionaire buying all the animals the way slaves were redeemed for money in some countries. After that no competing farms could start because they wouldn't have the animals to start with.

Not sure how serious your suggestion is, but one quick answer is that a lot of the factory farms are owned by billionaires and publicly traded ag conglomerates who are making good money and wouldn't just need the capital back, they'd need an investment that gave the same steady returns.

Seems like a good plan, but the problem is that the available land is scarce and we only have one planet.

So we'll have to choice either to undig (and uncontaminate) the fertile lands under the roads and streets in the urban areas, that is a way;

or instead burn the last forests and give our precious natural areas to the pigs, literally. The pressure to ocuppy still relatively intact areas and the last protected sanctuaries for biodiversity would be irresistible and inescapable.

And is a wrong (but much repeated) idea than we'll stop the suffering. Is just that they are conveniently dismissing the suffering caused to the ecosystems. "Gazillions" of savage animals, plants, trees and fungi will suffer inmensely if we scalate the solution to all our cattle.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com