Philosophical Vegan Forum

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 30, 2018 2:25 pm There's also the issue of working around European Laws. They've already got some pretty strict GMO laws. Plus, taking a biopsy from a live animal is considered an animal experiment in the European Union. This would pose some serious drawbacks to Mosa Meat, and any other company trying to find animal cells to culture in a lab. Perhaps scientists could work around this by taking samples from recently slaughtered animals? Though this could benefit slaughter houses.

Overall, I'm not sure how this technology could prosper in Europe.

Have you read "Clean Meat" yet? They do go into this a bit in the book - European researchers generally DO have to source material from recently slaughtered animals. Ultimately, if European laws make it too difficult to do this, then the research will simply be done elsewhere. They'll catch on eventually if it's successful - just like they have with GMOs, though it's taken a while.

ModVegan wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 11:42 am Have you read "Clean Meat" yet? They do go into this a bit in the book - European researchers generally DO have to source material from recently slaughtered animals. Ultimately, if European laws make it too difficult to do this, then the research will simply be done elsewhere. They'll catch on eventually if it's successful - just like they have with GMOs, though it's taken a while.

Yes, I'm nearly finished with the book. Excellent review by the way on your channel After I saw your video, I decided to check it out from the library. One of the best decisions I've made recently.

New radio show episode on this with Caryn Hartglass:

It’s All About Food E01: Paul Shapiro, Clean Meat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1MnkywRXfs
http://responsibleeatingandliving.com/paul-shapiro-clean-meat/

Once we finish incorporating any relevant info from the book and elsewhere into the Wiki, we should contact Shapiro for a text interviews to see if we can get any useful quotes or have any outstanding issues answered.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2018 7:52 pm Once we finish incorporating any relevant info from the book and elsewhere into the Wiki, we should contact Shapiro for a text interviews to see if we can get any useful quotes or have any outstanding issues answered.

Great idea. As I conclude the book, I can draft a list of outstanding issues not, fully addressed in the book, for you to present to Shapiro.

So far he hasn’t really addressed how these clean meat start-ups plan to create immortal cell lines. This poses ethical and sustainability issues if researchers have to perform continuous biopsies from live animals to meet demand. However, if this is addressed I’ll add it to the wiki.

I haven't bothered to read Paul Shapiro book yet because it seemed more like an effort to hype "clean-meat" rather than go over the science and various issues.

Start-ups are always trying to sell investors are some snake oil...."clean-meat" seems to be no different in this regard. What is being produced with current technologies is really nothing like meat but instead a mush of cells that has to be flavored, colored and fortified. Creating a product that is anything like a whole meat would require similar technology as organ production....something we cannot do yet at any cost.

And really....what is this even achieving anyways? Is it really going to be easier to get people to eat some lab created mush than some mock meat made from plant proteins?

You haven't provided a single counter-argument against clean meat.

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:05 am I haven't bothered to read Paul Shapiro book yet because it seemed more like an effort to hype "clean-meat" rather than go over the science and various issues.

This is a groundless claim could be easily refuted if you bothered to pick the book up and read it. OR if you bothered to read my original post, or the Philo Vegan Wiki article based on this discussion thread. http://philosophicalvegan.com/wiki/index.php/Clean_Meat I'd suggest you take the time to at least read the blurb. Rejecting his book and all of the arguments put forth in it, solely on personal whim, is silly. If not, perhaps condescending.

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:05 am What is being produced with current technologies is really nothing like meat but instead a mush of cells that has to be flavored, colored and fortified.

Incorrect. Clean meat is nearly identical to meat taken directly from an animal. Muscle tissues are collected from cows (via biopsy), treated with animal-based serums and placed in a bioreactor, all to promote cell growth. Maitake mushroom-based medium is shown to be just as effective as the animal based ones. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551074/ The tissues are then placed in scaffolding trays until they mature. The entire proccess only takes weeks. http://www.gfi.org/clean-meats-path-to-commercialization It's much more efficient than waiting years to bring a cow to sufficient weight for slaughter, and loosing a massive amount of resources the process. Either way, the end product is meat.

Are there minute differences that make it taste different from a "traditional" factory farm produced hamburger, like a lack of fat and gristle that make it hyper-palatable? Sure, but essentially what you have is cow muscle cells, identical to the ones growing in cows. Plus, the fat molecules (or plant-based fat molecules) could probably be grown and added. Paul Shapiro speaks about this on this podcast. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1MnkywRXfs&t=134s

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:05 am Creating a product that is anything like a whole meat would require similar technology as organ production....something we cannot do yet at any cost.

Making meat commercially viable is certainly an obstacle to be overcome. To render this product feasible, we would need far less expensive growth factors. We'd also need to increase the size and efficiency of bioreactors (also costly) and ditch the blood-based serums. ModVegan talks briefly about this in her video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5bM2jynDhA&t=114s Time stamp: 5:26 Be sure to give it a look.

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:05 am And really....what is this even achieving anyways?

The goal is to produce an ethically sourced, environmentally friendly, and slightly healthier alternative to meat products. Clean meat can satisfy the world's growing hunger for meat while reducing environmental cost and protecting the welfare of animals.

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:05 am Is it really going to be easier to get people to eat some lab created mush than some mock meat made from plant proteins?

That depends on how tasty and inexpensive clean meat is when compared to factory farmed meat. Most die-hard meat lovers concede that animal-based mock meats are not equivalent to meat. Though they are getting closer (as is with the Beyond Burger) they are not sufficient replacements for animal protein. It may be easier to convince them to eat clean meat, which is literally meat (sans the animal). In terms of warming up consumers, it might be best to familiarize them with other in-vitro products first, like clean leather, and even in-vitro spider silk, used in clothing as fabric.

Please read the links I've provided, and drop the assertions. You may learn something, or change your mind.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:40 pm This is a groundless claim could be easily refuted if you bothered to pick the book up and read it. OR if you bothered to read my original post, or the Philo Vegan Wiki article based on this discussion thread.

The comment isn't "groundless", I've read briefly about the book and read the interview with the author and wasn't impressed. Another issue for me is that I'm interested in the science but Paul has no expertise in science. So for me there is little motivation to read it.....but perhaps one day I'll get to it.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:40 pm Incorrect. Clean meat is nearly identical to meat taken directly from an animal. Muscle tissues are collected from cows (via biopsy), treated with animal-based serums and placed in a bioreactor, all to promote cell growth.

That claim is decidedly wrong. Current "clean meat" is no where near identical to meat because meat isn't just muscle tissue but rather a collection of various cells, fat and nutrients. Meat is also structured muscle tissue which occurs from actual use of the the muscle where as "clean meat" is just a cellular mush grown on a scaffold.

Contrary to what Paul claims in the quote, the differences aren't "minute" and its comments like this that have lead me to believe he is just hyping clean meat start-ups.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:40 pm Making meat commercially viable is certainly an obstacle to be overcome.

The obstacles are even greater if you're honest about what is actually being produced, namely, a mush of muscle tissues that are flavored and fortified. When these products are sold they ingredient won't be "chicken"...but a long list of fortified nutrients, dyes, flavoring, etc.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:40 pm The goal is to produce an ethically sourced, environmentally friendly, and slightly healthier alternative to meat products. Clean meat can satisfy the world's growing hunger for meat while reducing environmental cost and protecting the welfare of animals.

That has existed for thousands of years, they are called legumes. So what is being done here is an attempt to create a replacement for a product that is popular merely due to some cultural preferences. But will "clean-meat" actually fill that same cultural niche? To answer that you'd have to come to understand why people want to eat meat in the first place.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:40 pm That depends on how tasty and inexpensive clean meat is when compared to factory farmed meat. Most die-hard meat lovers concede that animal-based mock meats are not equivalent to meat.

And "clean-meat" won't be equivalent either, both "clean-meat" and plant-based meats have to rely on various flavorings and compounds to achieve the desired taste. So what reason is there to believe that people will prefer "cultured chicken muscle cells" (or whatever it will end up being called) on the ingredient list rather than "pea protein"?

And I'm not sure in what way you think the links you provided conflict with what I've. Though I'm really only interested in hearing from scientists with expertise in the field....not people with no expertise in biology and groups hyping the technology. The one serious article you linked to seems to support what I've said, namely, creating realistic "meat products" by tissue cultures is merely a proposal that we lack the ability to execute.

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.

Worst case, it requires binders and processing similar to what products like beyond meat already use. The taste, anyway, would probably be more similar to dirty meat without flavor additives since many of the taste components derive from the combination of amino acids present in animal cells which plant proteins are lower in (that's how the meat flavors are made).

It's interesting criticism, though, and it would probably be worth including in the article. It's true that textures will probably be harder to replicate. More processed things like hamburger and chicken nuggets will be easy (which is what people are starting with), and while those are already pretty easy with plant based options, consumers may be more open to trying them if they're animal based.

Also: the end product will not need to be fortified if the serum that grows it is strongly fortified (which it needs to be for cell growth anyway), so it probably wouldn't show up on the ingredients list.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:45 pm Current "clean meat" is no where near identical to meat because meat isn't just muscle tissue but rather a collection of various cells, fat and nutrients. Meat is also structured muscle tissue which occurs from actual use of the the muscle where as "clean meat" is just a cellular mush grown on a scaffold.

"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). While getting lab-produced meat to mimic the texture and taste of meat from animals presents a challenge, because of the lack of fat, researchers can add in fat (or plant-based) fat molecules.

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.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:45 pm The obstacles are even greater if you're honest about what is actually being produced, namely, a mush of muscle tissues that are flavored and fortified. When these products are sold they ingredient won't be "chicken"...but a long list of fortified nutrients, dyes, flavoring, etc.

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.

I also find this comical, considering the vast array of fillers, preservatives, and dyes currently put in conventional meat to alter its consistency and flavor (especially ground meats).

https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/food-safety-education/get-answers/food-safety-fact-sheets/food-labeling/additives-in-meat-and-poultry-products/additives-in-meat-and-poultry-products

Researchers would use similar additives in clean meat.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:45 pm That has existed for thousands of years, they are called legumes. So what is being done here is an attempt to create a replacement for a product that is popular merely due to some cultural preferences. But will "clean-meat" actually fill that same cultural niche? To answer that you'd have to come to understand why people want to eat meat in the first place.

If you can convince billions of staunch meat lovers to switch from meat to legumes, go for it! 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. Clean meat's target market however, is meat eaters.

People eat meat because it's cheap, tasty, convenient, or because of tradition. The goal is to produce an alternative that retains all of those qualities AND is the exact same product (from a cellular standpoint).

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." They may not begin viewing lab-produced meat as foreign or bizarre.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:45 pm And "clean-meat" won't be equivalent either, both "clean-meat" and plant-based meats have to rely on various flavorings and compounds to achieve the desired taste. So what reason is there to believe that people will prefer "cultured chicken muscle cells" (or whatever it will end up being called) on the ingredient list rather than "pea protein"?

Most of these plant-based alternatives do not taste enough like meat to convince most non vegetarians to forfeit meat. They're great for those who are already vegetarian, though.

Hopefully, we can get plant-based proteins that taste close enough like meat not to need clean meat. The Beyond Burger tastes remarkably like a real hamburger, in my opinion.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:45 pm Though I'm really only interested in hearing from scientists with expertise in the field....not people with no expertise in biology and groups hyping the technology. The one serious article you linked to seems to support what I've said, namely, creating realistic "meat products" by tissue cultures is merely a proposal that we lack the ability to execute.

This is irrelevant, considering that his book is thoroughly sourced and relies on research of actual experts in the field. But I guess you wouldn't notice this because either 1; haven't heard him speak on the issue, (he frequently mentions Dr. Mark Post, PhD of Pulmonary Pharmacology, who conducts cultured meat research, or 2; You haven't bothered to do any research on the book itself.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es200130u
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551074/
http://www.new-harvest.org/mark_post_cultured_beef
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FITvEUSJ8TM