Steven Brust's LJ (RSS Feed)
04-19-2008, 04:55 AM
So I was reading the latest article (http://futurismic.com/2008/04/18/meat-futures-redux-just-leave-the-brains-out/) I’ve found in the “vat-grown meat (http://futurismic.com/2008/04/15/all-hail-the-new-flesh-in-vitro-meat-on-sale-within-a-decade/)” debate, (found over at the excellent Futurismic (http://futurismic.com) blog) and I just can’t keep quiet on the subject any longer. The article discusses a proposed solution to future meat protein production and consumption that involves, instead of growing meat in vats in labs–which is apparently an icky concept to some–that we genetically create “more efficient organisms that generate muscle tissue with the properties we want” by “genetically paring away the less commercially viable bits, like the brain”.
Most of you are probably having an atavistic reaction to the visualization of this concept every bit as icky as some people find vat meat, but no worries, the words will still be here for you to read when you recover. For the few left now who are less easily squicked and interested in the argument, read on.
All due respect to the scientist writing the proposal, but they are obviously not familiar with animal science or the production end of meat theory. The very first counter-argument that leaps to mind–to rebut the idea that brainless grazing cattle are superior either physically or psychologically to meat grown in a lab tube–involves the ratio of pounds consumed per pound of gain. One would hope that the scientists would work on improving that ratio while they’re busy deprogramming the brain stem, but I don’t see anyone in these articles even giving a nod to the issue.
Put simply, a cow takes 6-8 pounds of feed, on average, to put on one “commercially viable” pound of muscle tissue. (Pigs 4-6:1, Turkey 2-4:1, Catfish 1.1:1 are other examples I recall, hopefully correctly, from my classes a decade ago.) The brain is an energy-draining organ, so sure, removing the brain is bound to improve the ratio to some extent. But on the levels that we need to be considering if we are to achieve long-term, sustainable, non-scarcity food production, it seems to me that the brainless cow model overeats quickly.
Scientists are much more likely to be able to engineer a catfish-level efficiency of pounds consumed vs. pounds gained with a variety of tissue type and texture if they can control the systems directly in the lab. A lab set-up could easily have one industrial-sized set of heart and lungs and other maintenance systems keeping large numbers of meat-vats (10?25?50? more?) churning out hundreds of pounds of consumable muscle tissue on a regular time schedule. Though vat meat is in the beginning stages of development now, and the most differentiated tissue available to date resembles the consistency of ground chuck, other research is being directed toward developing the ability to grow specific cuts of meat in quantity in the lab. The potential resources saved by removing the animal from the meat production process add up to large quantities quickly.
Vat-grown meat isn’t icky, squicky, or gross; it’s energy efficient, ethical, and ecologically friendly. Sure, the next couple of generations will have their “real meat” superiority complex, and there will exist for some time to come a specialty market for “organically grown meat” at specialty prices. But for everyday tastiness, convenience, and responsible social footprint issues, well vat me, baby! I’ll take my burger as a vurger no problem.
(Originally posted at Words Words Words (http://dreamcafe.com/words/2008/04/18/vat-me-baby/) by reesa. Please leave any comments (http://dreamcafe.com/words/2008/04/18/vat-me-baby/#comments) there.)
(Original Post) (http://skzbrust.livejournal.com/83412.html)
Most of you are probably having an atavistic reaction to the visualization of this concept every bit as icky as some people find vat meat, but no worries, the words will still be here for you to read when you recover. For the few left now who are less easily squicked and interested in the argument, read on.
All due respect to the scientist writing the proposal, but they are obviously not familiar with animal science or the production end of meat theory. The very first counter-argument that leaps to mind–to rebut the idea that brainless grazing cattle are superior either physically or psychologically to meat grown in a lab tube–involves the ratio of pounds consumed per pound of gain. One would hope that the scientists would work on improving that ratio while they’re busy deprogramming the brain stem, but I don’t see anyone in these articles even giving a nod to the issue.
Put simply, a cow takes 6-8 pounds of feed, on average, to put on one “commercially viable” pound of muscle tissue. (Pigs 4-6:1, Turkey 2-4:1, Catfish 1.1:1 are other examples I recall, hopefully correctly, from my classes a decade ago.) The brain is an energy-draining organ, so sure, removing the brain is bound to improve the ratio to some extent. But on the levels that we need to be considering if we are to achieve long-term, sustainable, non-scarcity food production, it seems to me that the brainless cow model overeats quickly.
Scientists are much more likely to be able to engineer a catfish-level efficiency of pounds consumed vs. pounds gained with a variety of tissue type and texture if they can control the systems directly in the lab. A lab set-up could easily have one industrial-sized set of heart and lungs and other maintenance systems keeping large numbers of meat-vats (10?25?50? more?) churning out hundreds of pounds of consumable muscle tissue on a regular time schedule. Though vat meat is in the beginning stages of development now, and the most differentiated tissue available to date resembles the consistency of ground chuck, other research is being directed toward developing the ability to grow specific cuts of meat in quantity in the lab. The potential resources saved by removing the animal from the meat production process add up to large quantities quickly.
Vat-grown meat isn’t icky, squicky, or gross; it’s energy efficient, ethical, and ecologically friendly. Sure, the next couple of generations will have their “real meat” superiority complex, and there will exist for some time to come a specialty market for “organically grown meat” at specialty prices. But for everyday tastiness, convenience, and responsible social footprint issues, well vat me, baby! I’ll take my burger as a vurger no problem.
(Originally posted at Words Words Words (http://dreamcafe.com/words/2008/04/18/vat-me-baby/) by reesa. Please leave any comments (http://dreamcafe.com/words/2008/04/18/vat-me-baby/#comments) there.)
(Original Post) (http://skzbrust.livejournal.com/83412.html)