Lab grown meat advances to steaks (small ones)
 

We know that lab meat, cow and chicken, it's no longer a science news, at least for a hamburguer, as grond beaf, or nugets for chicken. Anyway steaks was still a challenge, since only very small filaments was produced, requireing thousand to get something similar to ground beaf pice and so create a hamburguer.

But Israeli company managed to create small steaks grows in lab, small thin like the size of credit card :

https://youtu.be/bjSe-0vSRMY?t=235

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=txFN1qr1dWU

https://www.aleph-farms.com/

This advances makes me wonder how they managed it. It could perhaps be used to help develop larger pieces of laf grown skin for burn victims.

Anyway if they till use bovine fetus serum to grown the cells, they are still hurting anymals somehow. I remamber a news about some scientists had found a way to use vegetal proteins, in a special serum made with vegetal extracts, to grown the cells, but I don't know if this israely company it's using this technology.

What about if they discover that human cells are easier to grown in lab?

I read about this in a sci-fi novel in the 1950s, according to Wikipedia* possibly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Space_Merchants.

To achieve that level, they will have to move from self-organized steak medallions to a mass of muscle tissue in a vat that they just slice fillets off of as it grows.

The cannibalism question is the reducto ad absurdum.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultured_meat#In_fiction

Pepsi Cola have a chemical, not sure if it's one of many sweetners or whatever, that was originally extracted from one aborted fetus. They isolated that chemical and replicated it.
There are no abortions going to produce Pepsi Cola, but some religious people insist there are and refused to buy Pepsi. Even the first aborted fetus wasn't aborted for the Pepsi, but was already aborted and someone took a sample to study that chemical compound.

For human meat, honestly, I see no problem since nobody would be killed to produce the meat. In case if the human cell it's better, why not? It's just a cell sample replicated. It's more moral than torture and kill animals.

https://blogbeautifuldreams.files.wo...jg41qebtcj.gif

One problem of many lab meats is that they need bovine serun, extracted from bovine fetus to work as a nutricious mix from where the cell would take the nutrients they need. So for each 100kg of lab meat I suposed thay need to kill more than one bovine fetus.

Some new researchs pointed that was possible to use a vegetals extracts as a environement for cell culture. That would be the only way to lab meat be harmless to animals. I suposed synthetic nutrients (aminoacids, vitamins and minerals) are too expensive.

https://dioknox.org/wp-content/uploa...ucharist04.jpg

Do you remamber James Cameron's documentary about they supposed had found the bones of Jesus Christ?
If they could extract DNA from it, they could in theory recreate Jesus's meat, and all dinners would celebrate the body and blood of Christ. Holy dinners...

A new startup could emerge : Holy Meat.

LOL

There's nothing morally wrong with eating human tissue grown in a lab, though it would take effort on my part to get past the uncomfortable idea. It would be best to feed it to me without saying what it is, and tell me later. Heck, I'm not entirely comfortable eating lengua yet, and would be uncomfortable eating cuy if it still largely resembled the guinea pig.

Torturing animals isn't right, but slaughtering them for meat is no problem. It's inefficient though, so I suspect we'll be eating lab meat in the future.

It tastes like chicken...

:D

Meat production it's not eco friendly and it's not necessary to live. And it increase disease rates. I'm vegan for health and for the well being of animals.

But I think you will quote me saying that by cell phones it's also animals exploitation, since a lot of people in poor asian countries works like animals to produce such devices. After all humans are als animals.

Voluntary labor isn't exploitation, regardless of who benefits, or by how much.

My company pays me because they deem my contribution to be of greater worth than the cost to employ me. Are they exploiting me since they see a greater benefit than they pay?

Likewise, I have determined my time is worth less than the amount they compensate me.

How can voluntary mutual benefit be deemed exploitation? It's either an abuse of the definition of exploitation, or ignorance.

Voluntary??? Do you forgot that manytimes people have no alternative?
Many asian workers works up to exhaustion.

Need is subjective. I might "need" my relatively high pay because that's what I have subjectively decided. Perhaps someone making millions would consider me exploited and deprived. It's not up to them to determine though, and they have no say in the matter because it isn't their time or money to negotiate with. They are equally contemptible to say I deserve less or deserve more, or that my needs are met or not met.

I haven't kept up with it, but pretty exciting! I'd pay a few bucks more as long as it doesn't have any weird in it like the latest fake meat contenders.

Still need to try one of those burgers where mushroom is mixed into the meat, has anyone here had one?

How do you feel about honey? I hear it's a point of contention.

Needs don't always align with choice. :(

Rarely do needs align with choice. Most of us "need" to not die, or to not have our bodies wear out over time. That's entirely beyond our choice.

Ok, some needs are more immediate, like breathing oxygen or drinking water. We're the principle actor responsible for securing those needs. Others have a role, but we're the most invested.

My point though is that the individual is responsible for defining need, and the individual is responsible for seeing that those needs are met. Most would agree that having needs minimally met is still better than failing to meet needs, or to meet them at even lower levels.

Everyone's got to work to meet their needs. Even those that have a large inheritance must work to manage it, because that's no easy task.

Either everyone who voluntarily exchanges their time for money is exploited, or nobody is. I'm fine defining it either way (BTW, everyone being exploited is the same as nobody being exploited, just as everyone winning is the same as nobody winning), but it must be consistent; the alternative is arbitrary.

I lived in the back of a Subaru for nearly 2 years. If someone says my needs were not being met, I'd tell them "that's just, like, their opinion, man". Likewise, if I lived in a mansion and someone said it's too extravagant... well I'd probably agree with them, but that too is just, like, their opinion, man.

And if you want to get down to it, there is the end our universe. Even religion doesn't promise forever for the physical.

I don't use to eat honey. I confess I'm not well aware of how much honey production harm bees. Not sure if they harvest all or most honey up to let bees dies of hungry. I know the producer have no interest in kill much bees, since the bees are needed to produce more honey. And sicentists says that today bees population are in danger, and all or most of the food depends of bees to polinization. We can't survive without the bees.

Anyway bees are the society dream of feminist universe, since almost all male bees die trying to win the chance of copulate with the queen bee.

Hamburguers... You have the box with forzen hamburger in supermarket, sold with relative low price, and you have the high quality burger of special burger houses, made with better meat with no or few artificial things.

Supermarket burgers have fake meat since they took many pieces that are quite nerves (white fibrous thing on muscle) cartilage, fat, things a good chef would take away but the industry want to cash over, and so industry adds artificial flavors to it get the taste of the red meat portion, red muscle portion. They use the lowest quality meat for burgers, with all bad parts, and also the bad parts removed from other pieces of meat like from better meat pieces for products of higher value. So, to fool consumers they developed fake flavors and fake scent to cover such things.

I saw reviews and some people told the second generation burgers (impossible foods and Beyound Meat) come very close to supermarket burgers, specially Impossible Foods last version. But for high end burger houses...

Impossible Food's Imposssible Burger have a vegetable hemoglobin, while Beyound Meat's Beyound Burger have no such thing. Impossible Burguer now it's made with soy protein, while the earlier version used potato protein and wheat protein. Soy protein it's much less expensive than meat, but the vegetable hemoglobin it's still somewhat costly, I guess.

I mention it because I saw some discussion about it. Bees only live for a week and they live to make honey. Smoke is an anesthetic to them, they don't even miss the honey, they just make more. We just let them be all they can be. :)

Also, cows like being milked.

The bees are fed sugar water to replace the honey they would normally consume.

Honey is their way to preserve energy for future consumption, but it's not needed because humans provide their energy as needed.

I'm always amazed that we rely so heavily on animals to produce things that are useful to us. I'd have thought we could artificially create the chemistry and mechanical processing required to make synthetic honey, for instance. Or how about spinning silk?

You at dinner with your wife :

_Honey, I have a new dish today specially for you, sandwiches of fried lengua.

_Are you crazy??? Do you believe I'm going to eat something that comes out from cow's mouth??? Bring me some eggs!

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ae/10...9bb0708388.gif

http://cdn0.wideopenpets.com/wp-cont...-a-Chicken.png

Cows are killed when they can no longer reproduce or no longer produce milk. Even chicken used to produce eggs are killed when they no longer can produce eggs.

Cows was the first "vaccine", since a type of bovine smallpox was passed from cows to humans, but in humans it only gave some harmless lesion on hands, but it gave imunization against the human smallpox that was lethal.

Do you know about the African Bees invasion on USA?
Well, you can blame Brazil for that, since there was no african bees on American Continent until a brazilian university start a project to try to breed different bees varieties to increase honey production, many decades ago, and they brought from Africa some samples of african bees. They alowed, by accident, one queen bee to scape and they started to reproduce and migrate from South America, Central America until reach North America USA.

Interesting... Maybe there are no moral objection for vegans to eat honey. Unless there is something else we don't know. Some people don't eat arguing that it's a product originated from animals.
But the arguments against animalmproducts, besides the morals, are about toxins, like from meat, and other compounds that may be less health than products from vegetables. But I don't think honey have toxins or more toxins the beans and other grains. Indeed may be better than brown sugar.

Edited : I did a research and found many bees are killed by the smoke and during centrifugation of honeycombs.
That's why many vegans don't eat honey.

Spider webb fibers are stronger than kevilar. You may don't notice cause you can broke it easily, but it's just because you broke ultra fine microscopic fibers. Scientists are tring to replicate in laboratory.

http://cdn0.wideopenpets.com/wp-cont...-a-Chicken.png

No wonder chickens can't fly, look at those lungs. They have to be short-winded.

Well, chickens can fly, just not long, and not very far.

I blame Brazil for most things...

https://ecomodder.com/forum/attachme...1&d=1561357219

The only other thing that I can find about artificial honey is that it can be emulated with corn syrup, but of course, it isn't as good as the real thing.

Also, supposedly cheap brands use fillers.

Scientists have been making silk from goats for perhaps a decade. It still requires animals, it just doesn't kill them.

https://phys.org/news/2010-05-scient...ider-silk.html

Goat silk isn't as strong.

I expect most synthetic things to be superior at some point than the original. For instance, synthetic diamonds are flawless. Color and size has been a challenge, but that too will probably get solved.

...now, how to synthetically age Scotch to perfection, instantly.

This is entirely dependent on how much thrust you apply to the chicken.

How about turkeys? Can they at least fall with style?

[WKRP]

Synthetic diamonds already reach the point to be as good, as clear, and in some aspects even better, more pure, than natural diamonds, and without cost so much and without help promote war in some african countries.
But for use in hard harp tools (drills for example) they prefer the yellow earlier genertation artificial diamonds, since the process it's more affordable than the last generation artificial diamonds.

But I'm not sure if the last generation modern artificialç diamond are a bit cheaper comparing to the final diamonds price on market, or if it's compared to mining diamonds price, since a relevant portion of the natural diamonds's price are due the marketing surrounding it and not jut due the rarity and mining work be expensive.

Chikens can do wingsuit fly :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idDtTGEbyGA


Maybe evolution just did chickens too fat to fly, like Homer Simpson :

https://youtu.be/cDCTSovf18g?t=240

Corn syrup it's terrible, since it flyrocket obesity.

More like selective breeding, wild (prairie) chickens fly just fine, same with turkeys. In fact both are fond of roosting in trees.

When I was a kid my older brother routinely wore a shirt that read "With enough thrust pigs fly just fine" with a picture of a pig strapped to an Acme rocket.

My guess is that mined diamonds will undergo a marketing campaign to say something like nothing is as unique and special as a hand selected natural diamond, while synthetic will compete on price and perfection. Synthetic diamonds will eventually drive the price of mined ones down, and the wedding industry will find something else that is the must have symbol of marriage.

If diamonds are forever, and since the human population cannot grow indefinitely, at some point everyone will have their diamond jewelry, and there would be little need to sell more.

Diamonds,jewelry... all it's about possession of female, fel=male laves of the past (early wifes). The women needed something to show they belonged to a rich man, so they were painted, treated without heavy work and so preserve better hands and skin, and jewelry to show it more explicitly. Women would be proud of something at least, a "compensation" for have no power, so they would feel superior top other women and also give a message to poor man, the message rich women was not for them, like such women had a high value. Even the sensual slyle of arristocracy women, in clothes with jewelry and some cleavage, was to show rich women was not for poor man, in a way to rich people express their power.

With time diamond changed the symbolic a little bit and started to represent "credit card love" or "family".

I think it's ridiculous the small diamonds and people pride of it, such small pieces you can't even see. Just use to say they can handle the price.

We're creatures of hierarchy because we're descendants of creatures of hierarchy. It seems to have worked out well at advancing species into the future.

I understood the marketing and social aspects of what a diamond is when I decided to participate in the ritual of purchasing a diamond ring for my wife. She wanted one and it brought her joy, so that's enough justification for me. I paid cash for it; much less than I could "afford" too.

Fortunately we have more than just food, water, and shelter to spend money on. Simply existing isn't fun.

Makes sense: C + O[sub]2[/sub] + Heat -> Co[sub]2[/sub] or 2C + O[sub]2[/sub] + Heat -> 2CO

Speak for yourself.

Beyond self-perfection, there's just being alive in the generation that saw the advent of the personal computer. Remember the Cult of the Dead Cow?

boing boing: Cult of the Dead Cow: the untold story of the hacktivist group that presaged everything great and terrible about the internet

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Dcs0hnsIK.../s640/ouhi.JPG
http://justacarguy.blogspot.com/.../6-foot-long-f-35-lightning-ii-fighter.html

What I mean is that nobody is satisfied to merely exist. The evidence is that nobody provides the absolute bare minimum to live (water and potatoes) and sits around in a cave all day, thrilled to be living.

We busy ourselves with activities which aren't required to live, and that gives our lives meaning.

My point is that some people derive enjoyment out of jewelry and other unnecessary things (most things are unnecessary) and I'm fine with that.

Well, I would like to see what uncle Jordan.P would say about it...
Expend such money in a very pricey thing for a woman.

Would he say : What if man would demand such pricey thing as a symbol of love?

About hierarchy... couldn't we have hierarchy about less stupid and more noble things, like winsdom, intelligence, gifts, knowledge?

Use our Homo Sapiuens nature as excuse it's a dangerous things, since things like murder instint, rape instint and even torture, also belongs to human nature.
Must I remamber that human nature it's a sh...t ?

You're describing my life, except it's a mega-rare Airstream instead of a cave.

All of my neighbors are all up in arms about something they saw on TV....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zfBwMLext8