First synthetic beef burger is eaten

[Fakeblock]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/close-to-meat-foodies-underwhelmed-by-first-synthetic-beef-burger-to-be-eaten-in-public-8746066.html


Professor Post hopes to improve the efficiency of growing the stem cells in a culture medium so that the first cultured beef products could be sold in supermarkets within 10 or 20 years.

“It’s going to take a while. This is just to show that we can do it. I think it’s a very good start,” Professor Post said.

Cultured beef would in theory have only a small fraction of the environmental footprint of real beef. It needs less energy, land and water and does not produce anywhere near the greenhouse gas emissions of cattle farming, Professor Post said.

“What we are trying today is important because I hope it will show cultured beef has the answers to major problems that the world faces. Our burger is made from muscle cells taken from a cow. We haven’t altered them in any way,” he said.

“Potentially you can do this in your own kitchen, although you’d have to know what you wanted to eat in eight weeks’ time,” he joked.

“Eventually I think we’d be able to replicate all the cuts of an animal, but it will take some time. Taste is actually a very complex issue,” he added.
Quite an invention and it seems like it has huge potential. Perhaps we can finally solve some of the environmental and ethical problems concerning our diets.

edit: a different perspective from vice: http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-reviews-for-the-first-lab-grown-burger-arent-bad

[D-A-C]

I'm all for it personally.

Obviously the medical effects have to be carefully studied in case there are short or long term problems caused by its consumption, but for me at least, this is progress.

A further step in controlling and moulding our enviroment is progress towards communism in my opinion, no matter what economic mode of production the advance takes place in.

What we as Marxists now have to do is have an adequate theoretical and political position in response to this new developement.

Plenty of exciting possibilities though.

[Brutus]

Synthetic burgers for the workers!

[rednordman]

I would be interested in what the nutritional content of that burger is? However, all this really would be is a way to charge super high prices for real meat, as the synthetic meat would be loads cheaper. This is playing right into the hands of the supermarkets and fast food chains so to hell with it. If meat becomes scarce, just eat vegetables. Hopefully real ones too.

[Ele'ill]

go vegan and stop giving a shit about any of this

[Fakeblock]

Undoubtedly capitalists will use this to their advantage. I still think it's a positive way of reducing meat consumption and thereby production. Capitalists use plenty of could-be-great scientific advances for their own benefit, but I don't think that means that we should disregard them altogether.

Although, we might want people to only eat vegetables we can't ignore the real demand for meat. When meat becomes so scarce that we have to exclusively fruits and vegetables the meat industry will probably already have done tons of irreparable damage to the environment.

[Fakeblock]

go vegan and stop giving a shit about any of this

The present day meat industry is problematic even to vegans. I doubt the entire human population will turn vegan anytime soon.

[Münchhausen]

If they had spent the enormous amounts of time and money they spent on this on improving plant-based meat-(and dairy-)alternatives, I'm quite convinced they'd have come up with something far more delicious. Also they could go into production right away. Apparently it's going to take another 10 years or so of research to find a way to produce synthetic meat in quantities that make it available on a large scale.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

I read about this somewhere else.

They've apparently gotten the texture down right, but the flavor still has much to be desired.

But until they can successfully replicate the flavor of authentic angus beef, they're just chasing after rainbows here.

[D-A-C]

I would be interested in what the nutritional content of that burger is? However, all this really would be is a way to charge super high prices for real meat, as the synthetic meat would be loads cheaper. This is playing right into the hands of the supermarkets and fast food chains so to hell with it. If meat becomes scarce, just eat vegetables. Hopefully real ones too.

That has to do with the organization and distribution of this new product and is why I suggested a theoretical and political position will be needed eventually if synthetic products become more readily available.

I would also encourage you not to mistake how capitalism appropriates things and turns them into a source of profit as somehow being a cause to say that the product in question is necessarily bad.

I have noticed alot on these boards how people seem to be slightly negative to certain things based on the way capitalism monopolizes their cost, production and distribution.

That fact is inevitable when living under capitalism and is why we engage in political struggle against capitalism.

To somehow suggest the production of synthetic meat is negative based on how capitalism effects it is extremely false and unproductive IMO.


go vegan and stop giving a shit about any of this

I don't think so. I like eating meat thank you very much and happen to think its necessary to consume a certain amount of meat for a healthy lifestyle.

I also happen to think its beneficial for humans to eat meat and see no reason to imagine a future where its consumption should be stopped.

For people opposed to eating meat on ethical grounds synthetic meat has great possibilities. It also has great potential for solving food crises due to overpopulation or weather/geographical factors.

Stopping scientific progress because people are vegans isn't something I would even consider taking seriously.

[Ele'ill]

That has to do with the organization and distribution of this new product and is why I suggested a theoretical and political position will be needed eventually if synthetic products become more readily available.

I am glad I didn't thank your post because I thought you were making a really funny self-deprecating left joke.



I don't think so. I like eating meat thank you very much

lifestylist


and happen to think its necessary to consume a certain amount of meat for a healthy lifestyle.

myth to support a lifestyle that ignores suffering of sentient creatures, I don't eat meat and I am healthy.



I also happen to think its beneficial for humans to eat meat and see no reason to imagine a future where its consumption should be stopped.

For people opposed to eating meat on ethical grounds synthetic meat has great possibilities. It also has great potential for solving food crises due to overpopulation or weather/geographical factors.

overpopulation is a myth so is meat being necessary


Stopping scientific progress because people are vegans isn't something I would even consider taking seriously.

I like this common hysterical reaction to criticism of something where it's like WOOOOW u criticized something that I like the taste of u r now against all science and human progress across the board forever you also probably like the band nickleback and stop in the middle of doorways at grocery stores to text on your phone. How about actual scientific progress showing how meat isn't necessary instead of capitalist science. I love it when revolutionary leftists talk about capitalist assimilation and then declare science as being a red satellite untouched by empire. Science is business.

[Consistent.Surprise]

overpopulation is a myth

Please, clarify this? 7 Billion people. Depleting resources. I'm curious about your sources

As for the beef (to others) once it "tastes" like beef after testing it on college students, the wealthy will want it all, & possibly lower the cost of the real thing. I want lamb back to being a poor mans food. Because I love lamb & can't afford it

[Invader Zim]

go vegan and stop giving a shit about any of this

Fuck veganism and pass me a burger.


overpopulation is a myth

Indeed it is, and with it the argument that a non-meat diet is necessary for anything and requires only a flawed conception of evolutionary biology and the socio-historical development of human civilisations.

[Ele'ill]

Fuck veganism and pass me a burger.

get it yourself you lazy asshole

I'm not interested in non-meat diets I'm interested in the abolition of animal industry because I wouldn't want any living creature to suffer that kind of emotional and physical pain.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

Fuck veganism and pass me a burger.

A hamburger without cheese is bourgeoisie revisionism.

But getting back on topic: As I said before, one of the biggest obstacles here is going to be flavor. You can grow all of the synthesized meats you want, but if tastes no better than the packaging it comes in, it just won't work. Much of the meat we eat here in the U.S. these days is already of low quality due to the factory farming practices. If you want to get people to eat this stuff, you need to: 1. Make it affordable, and 2. MAKE IT TASTE GOOD.

[Prinskaj]

I'm not interested in non-meat diets I'm interested in the abolition of animal industry because I wouldn't want any living creature to suffer that kind of emotional and physical pain.
But wouldn't this development in synthetic meat do exactly that? Since growing the meat in a lab will not entail any suffering for these living creatures.

[Invader Zim]

get it yourself you lazy asshole

I'm not interested in non-meat diets I'm interested in the abolition of animal industry because I wouldn't want any living creature to suffer that kind of emotional and physical pain.

Emotional pain? Do you regularly converse with the birds and beasts? Do they explain to you, with their sad drooping eyes their current state of emotional wellbeing? Did they vocalise it? Or perhaps it was transmitted in the form of a lengthy written treatise?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is why vegans are not to be taken seriously.

[Ele'ill]

But wouldn't this development in synthetic meat do exactly that? Since growing the meat in a lab will not entail any suffering for these living creatures.

Who even cares meat is unnecessary. I am rejecting the entire line of thought in this thread so far which is entirely about meat culture.

[Ele'ill]

Emotional pain?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is why vegans are not to be taken seriously.


emotional pain and distress isn't something unique to humans

[Ele'ill]

Emotional pain? Do you regularly converse with the birds and beasts? Do they explain to you, with their sad drooping eyes their current state of emotional wellbeing? Did they vocalise it? Or perhaps it was transmitted in the form of a lengthy written treatise

what does this have to do with emotional pain and distress, physical pain?


other animals are studied in animal testing (which is animal industry) because they exhibit symptoms of physical pain and emotional distress, I am capable of observing beyond language/culture to attempt to understand with the help of science and you denying that other animals (EXCEPT FOR HUMANS WHO SPEAK WORDS THAT I UNDERSTAND) feel emotional distress and physical pain :rolleyes:

[Prinskaj]

Who even cares meat is unnecessary. I am rejecting the entire line of thought in this thread so far which is entirely about meat culture.
Stop being so puritan about it. Most of the worlds population eats meat on a regular basis and this development in artificial meat could prove invaluable to reduce the pain and suffering, that these animals experience. But I agree that a total vegan conversion of the population would be a far greater choice, but it is, sadly, not likely to happen anytime soon.

[Polaris]

Emotional pain?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is why vegans are not to be taken seriously.
:glare:
I really want to respond with a snarky one-liner, but I've decided not to.
There are a million and one example of animal emotion: grieving elephants, birds, primates, etc.; whales/dolphins trying to rescue their beached kin (coincidentally scientific research has shown that whales have the necessary equipment to produce emotional responses); most animals definitely have fear.

Emotions provide an evolutionary advantage. Do you honestly think that no other animal has developed them besides humans?

[Ele'ill]

Stop being so puritan about it. Most of the worlds population eats meat on a regular basis and this development in artificial meat could prove invaluable to reduce the pain and suffering, that these animals experience. But I agree that a total vegan conversion of the population would be a far greater choice, but it is, sadly, not likely to happen anytime soon.

I'm not saying good things are going to occur at all, I'm criticizing the ideas that contribute to that, the ideas and status quo mass opinion that is present in this thread.

[Fakeblock]

Who even cares meat is unnecessary. I am rejecting the entire line of thought in this thread so far which is entirely about meat culture.

Some people enjoy the taste of meat. If synthetic meat allows people to have an experience they enjoy, without harming any animals or humans in the process, why would you be against it?

[Ele'ill]

Some people enjoy the taste of meat. If synthetic meat allows people to have an experience they enjoy, without harming any animals or humans in the process, why would you be against it?

I wouldn't be against alternatives. I am against what I have been vocal against in this thread. Animal industry with alternatives is still a world with animal industry.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Death to veganism.

Eat meat every day.

[Ele'ill]

Death to veganism.

Eat meat every day.

how brave

[Ele'ill]

what's funny about this discussion every time is that as someone who has hunted for food I am 100% positive that most of the people trolling the 'mmmmm meat in my mouth' insecure symptoms of society one liners would go vegan forever if they had to watch their meal die in front of them let alone kill it themselves or tour an industrial agriculture facility

[Fakeblock]

I wouldn't be against alternatives. I am against what I have been vocal against in this thread. Animal industry with alternatives is still a world with animal industry.

My hope is that synthetic meat, after its development has advanced enough, can grow to replace the meat industry or at least reduce it to have a smaller role in people's diets. Of course it would have to feel and taste like the real deal. This might be a long shot, even in post-capitalist society, but I think it's a lot more realistic than having everyone make the lifestyle changes that veganism require.

I think some parallels can be drawn with (the harder) drugs here. There is always going to be a demand for addictive and/or damaging drugs, so instead of trying to turn everyone clean, it's better to minimise the damages as much as possible.


Death to veganism.

Eat meat every day.

You might not have any ethical qualms about eating meat, but the meat industry will have negative effects on humans, if it continues to function on as large a scale as it does. Cutting down on meat production and eating less meat is a necessity in the long run. Hopefully synthetic meat will someday be able to replace real meat, at least in part.

[Ele'ill]

but I think it's a lot more realistic than having everyone make the lifestyle changes that veganism require.

it is as realistic as the abolition of our current society



I think some parallels can be drawn with (the harder) drugs here. There is always going to be a demand for addictive and/or damaging drugs, so instead of trying to turn everyone clean, it's better to minimise the damages as much as possible.

Some would say that as long as there is authority over suffering then there will be revolt and insurrection. I don't think banning stuff works but dialogue and understanding of issues is a start. Something that is greatly lacking within 'the left' regarding this issue.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

what's funny about this discussion every time is that as someone who has hunted for food I am 100% positive that most of the people trolling the 'mmmmm meat in my mouth' insecure symptoms of society one liners would go vegan forever if they had to watch their meal die in front of them let alone kill it themselves or tour an industrial agriculture facility

Actually, my great-grandparents used to own a farm (before they died, anyway). My grandmother used to slaughter hogs when she was a young woman.

My great-grandmother once cut the head off of a hen that she was making for dinner that evening. I watched the whole thing happen....the blood spurting from the neck, the wild shivers and flapping of wings afterwards.

We ate that chicken that night.

I still eat meat regularly.

[Fakeblock]

it is as realistic as the abolition of our current society

Maybe. I wouldn't rule out "mass veganism" of a sort being a consequence of the abolition of class society, but I can't really see what basis this sort of development would have. The meat industry would most likely change for the better, since the profit motive is no longer keeping it the way it is, but I don't see how this would spread veganism, rather than just make people eat less (but still some) meat.

Maybe I just read more into your post than I should and you were just saying that the chances are slim, I don't know.


Some would say that as long as there is authority over suffering then there will be revolt and insurrection. I don't think banning stuff works but dialogue and understanding of issues is a start. Something that is greatly lacking within 'the left' regarding this issue.

Agreed. Discussing the issue is of course critical to harm reduction in regards to drug addiction, the meat industry and pretty much anything, really.

[bcbm]

go vegan and stop giving a shit about any of this


Death to veganism.

Eat meat every day.

verbal warning for trolling

[Buzzard]

interesting, wouldn't this be good for vegans? I mean an animal is not being harmed to bring it to you, and a lot of vegans eat meat substitutes already

[Ele'ill]

Actually, my great-grandparents used to own a farm (before they died, anyway). My grandmother used to slaughter hogs when she was a young woman.

My great-grandmother once cut the head off of a hen that she was making for dinner that evening. I watched the whole thing happen....the blood spurting from the neck, the wild shivers and flapping of wings afterwards.

We ate that chicken that night.

I still eat meat regularly.

Why?

[bcbm]

i don't understand why when people bring up ethical considerations about meat the response is always about 'taste,' which has literally nothing to do with ethical considerations in my view. can i keep my dog in a too-small kennel and regularly kick it, cut it, prod it with a taser and make it live in its own filth as long as it tastes good when i eventually kill it and eat it?

[helot]

Please, clarify this? 7 Billion people. Depleting resources. I'm curious about your sources


It's not a problem of overpopulation but of inequality. Using food as an example, according the UN's Food and Agricultural Organisation in 2002 they claimed that there's enough food to secure everyone on the planet 2700 calories a day. Overpopulation is merely shifting blame from capitalism onto the poor for having children.


I find it funny how meat eaters claim meat is necessary for a healthy diet. Of course, certain geographical areas do not naturally produce plants that compensate for the nutrients gained from meat yet others do and with modern technology climate is not an issue for growing plants. If it was all the cannabis in the UK would be imported as opposed to huge amounts grown under artificial light and heat. Btw, yes i do eat meat but i'm not going to claim it's because of health reasons, that's just nonsense. It's more a matter of upbringing.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Emotional pain? Do you regularly converse with the birds and beasts? Do they explain to you, with their sad drooping eyes their current state of emotional wellbeing? Did they vocalise it? Or perhaps it was transmitted in the form of a lengthy written treatise?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is why vegans are not to be taken seriously. Can I eat the french so long as I never learn french

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

get it yourself you lazy asshole

I'm not interested in non-meat diets I'm interested in the abolition of animal industry because I wouldn't want any living creature to suffer that kind of emotional and physical pain.

You do realize that synthetic meat doesn't come from real life synthetic cows right?

[Sasha]

Let's keep it civil all, verbal warning to anyone getting riled up.

Anyways, like I said elsewhere;
in an interview the scientist leading the research admitted they are a long way from making "meat" meat, we will never see a steak made in a petri dish in our lifetime probably. But grounded meat is easy and makes up the majority of our meat consumption, from pattys to sausages etc etc. Even only cutting that will make a huge dent on everything from water and fuel consumption to global warming,grazing space, etc etc. Not to mention that making the cheapest meat non-animal sourced will have the biggest impact on animal welfare, Kobe beef is just better treated than McD chickennuggets...

[Quail]

I remember when I read about this a year or so ago, the article mentioned both research into meat grown in labs and research into super-realistic plant based meat substitute. I wonder how the latter research went.

I'd rather see a world where people chose plant-based alternatives to meat (which would be more energy and water efficient and wouldn't require the use of animals) but I don't think we have enough time to win that argument. Anything that will drastically reduce the amount of resources used by and emissions from the meat industry, as well as being better for the welfare of animals is, overall, a good thing (or perhaps I should say the lesser evil if the options are "continue as we are doing" or "replace some meat with synthetic meat"). The meat industry is really bad for both the environment and the animals that suffer unnecessarily. I would like to see it abolished, but I don't think that's possible within the framework of a capitalist society. It wouldn't make sense to liberate animals without also liberating humans.

[UncleLenin]

It sounds unhealthy to me.

[Sasha]

It sounds unhealthy to me.

Why? They can lower the amount of fats (in fact that was why the testers found the taste lacking, not enough fat cells) or even engineer it so you only get good fats and no bad ones, sterile environment means no antibiotics etc no guts means no shit bacteria contemination danger, no bonemarrow/brains means no BSE etc etc...

[Invader Zim]

The effects of hormones like oxytocin do not emotions make, and they certainly do not add up to being able to analyse, conceptualise or understand why they have the instinct to feed their young, copulate with their mate, form herds, hunt together, etc. The people anthropomorphising animal behaviour need to learn to understand that they are indulging in confirmation bias.


Can I eat the french so long as I never learn french

Are you suggesting that language is the same thing as emotion?

[ckaihatsu]

It's not a problem of overpopulation but of inequality. Using food as an example, according the UN's Food and Agricultural Organisation in 2002 they claimed that there's enough food to secure everyone on the planet 2700 calories a day. Overpopulation is merely shifting blame from capitalism onto the poor for having children.


Big thanks for this part.

[Ele'ill]

The effects of hormones like oxytocin do not emotions make, and they certainly do not add up to being able to analyse, conceptualise or understand why they have the instinct to feed their young, copulate with their mate, form herds, hunt together, etc. The people anthropomorphising animal behaviour need to learn to understand that they are indulging in confirmation bias.

For the seven thousandth time, nobody is saying that sheep, dogs, cats, whatever are humans and feel things the way humans do. Humans don't even feel things the way other humans do. Our argument doesn't rely on this. What we're saying is that other animals feel emotional distress/pain and physical distress/pain both of which are a spectrum, not 'a single thing'.

[RedBen]

if this is true. i think it is progress... we must push forward. we can work toward the unfair treatment of animals, work to end the farming of living things for food and many other applications, even medical i would be willing to bet modern man would support

[RedBen]

if this is true. i think it is progress... we must push forward. we can work toward the unfair treatment of animals, work to end the farming of living things for food and many other applications, even medical i would be willing to bet modern man would support
when i say work toward unfair treatment of animals i mean work toward better treatment.... i clarify we must not abuse livestock

[Lord Hargreaves]

I'm hugely sceptical... In order for this to work, the synthetic meat will not only have to be "viable" in a weak sense but must also be cheaper, easier to produce in large amounts, and taste better, for it to bring an end to the meat industry. Fail in any one or more of these three categories, and there is still a demand for real meat.

This project does nothing to raise awareness of the ethical issues involved, but instead tries to make an alternative commodity to out-compete real meat in the marketplace from the producer's side, so that no one has to be challenged at all in their dietary or lifestyle choices as a consumer. Is this really the way forward to a more just treatment of animals in general?

[ckaihatsu]

I'm hugely sceptical... In order for this to work, the synthetic meat will not only have to be "viable" in a weak sense but must also be cheaper, easier to produce in large amounts, and taste better, for it to bring an end to the meat industry. Fail in any one or more of these three categories, and there is still a demand for real meat.

This project does nothing to raise awareness of the ethical issues involved, but instead tries to make an alternative commodity to out-compete real meat in the marketplace from the producer's side, so that no one has to be challenged at all in their dietary or lifestyle choices as a consumer. Is this really the way forward to a more just treatment of animals in general?


All that has to happen is for there to be a 'blend' on the market that mixes 50% real meat with 50% synthetic meat -- or whatever ratio -- for society to realize a 'savings' on its use of animals for food.

[synthesis]

Emotional pain? Do you regularly converse with the birds and beasts? Do they explain to you, with their sad drooping eyes their current state of emotional wellbeing? Did they vocalise it? Or perhaps it was transmitted in the form of a lengthy written treatise?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is why vegans are not to be taken seriously.

I'm not a vegan by any means, but by this logic, we should also be allowed to eat newborn children and the developmentally disabled. Many animals show a capacity for emotional intelligence far beyond that of a small child, and the ability to communicate is not a prerequisite for empathy.

Also, why are they going straight to synthetic burgers? I would think synthetic bacon would be a better first step.

But mark my words, if this becomes a more viable technology for end-user food, the meat industry's propaganda/lobbying machine will come out in full force. Gas stations used to refuse to service Japanese cars with reasonable gas mileage, and the history of the dairy industry trying to destroy margarine producers is fucking crazy. This will probably be even more of an issue because of the cultural association of "red meat" with conservative values.

[Lord Hargreaves]

All that has to happen is for there to be a 'blend' on the market that mixes 50% real meat with 50% synthetic meat -- or whatever ratio -- for society to realize a 'savings' on its use of animals for food.

World meat consumption is rising steadily and is predicted to go through the roof - even doubling - in the coming years, so much so that even if 50% of all meat consumed in the future is synthetic, there is no guarantee of a reduction in animal suffering in real terms (though it would be half what it could have been)

From a vegan perspective that wants to completely end the use of living animals for food, rather than simply minimize it, synthetic meat doesn't seem like the magic bullet

[Lord Hargreaves]

But mark my words, if this becomes a more viable technology for end-user food, the meat industry's propaganda/lobbying machine will come out in full force. Gas stations used to refuse to service Japanese cars with reasonable gas mileage, and the history of the dairy industry trying to destroy margarine producers is fucking crazy. This will probably be even more of an issue because of the cultural association of "red meat" with conservative values.

Yeah you can imagine the "buy the real thing here!" marketing campaigns, and the hysterical health scaremongering over synthetic meat fuelled by the tabloids

[ckaihatsu]

World meat consumption is rising steadily and is predicted to go through the roof - even doubling - in the coming years, so much so that even if 50% of all meat consumed in the future is synthetic, there is no guarantee of a reduction in animal suffering in real terms (though it would be half what it could have been)

From a vegan perspective that wants to completely end the use of living animals for food, rather than simply minimize it, synthetic meat doesn't seem like the magic bullet


Well, I *was* going to make a joke about creating a Matrix-like virtual reality neural link-up that keeps all factory-farmed livestock mentally preoccupied, but it's not a light-minded issue, so I won't.

What if it turns out that they're able to create synthetic *fat* fairly easily, for the perfect synthetic burger -- ?

[o well this is ok I guess]

Are you suggesting that language is the same thing as emotion? it is not me suggesting that. It is you.


Do you regularly converse with the birds and beasts? Do they explain to you, with their sad drooping eyes their current state of emotional wellbeing? Did they vocalise it? Or perhaps it was transmitted in the form of a lengthy written treatise?

[Skyhilist]

I have 4 main problems with meat (and beef specifically). This eliminates some but not all of these.

Health -- in the USA, male omnivores have a 50% chance of developing heart disease at some point. 14% for vegetarians and only 4% for vegans. So, the way I see it (as long as you aren't a "junk food vegan" and actually eat the vegan foods you meet to get nutrients) veganism is healthier. Seeing as this is pretty much identical to meat, I don't think it really eliminates that.

Animal rights -- in this category this is great and should be absolutely supported. If animals don't need to be exploited then that is certainly much better.

Human rights-- Over 70% of grains in the USA are used to feed factory animals. This is energy efficient because on the average, only a tenth of this energy (in the form of food) is taken out of the animals. So enough meat to serve one would be about 10 servings on the average if the grains were fed directly to humans. This input:output ratio of energy on the average is actually an astonishing 16:1 with beef (quite wasteful). This cuts 50% of the input, so the ratio should therefore be 8:1. This is much better but still wasteful and insufficient.

Environment-- This partially fixes this also. Currently the animal product industries put out more greenhouse gases in the USA than all transportation combined. This could reduce the percentage of greenhouse gases put out by the "meat" industry down to 4% (assume we're not on clean energy by then). This is much better but still not a complete fix.

All in all, definitely an improvement, but it doesn't alleviate all the problems associated with meat. Perhaps the biggest problem with this being implemented in the first place though is that so many people are for some reason squeamish about eating food that has been grown in a lab.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

yeah its weird. ironically enough, i'm happier eating a burger made from the undesirable parts of a dead cow that's been slaughtered than one that's been made in a lab. this just keeps reminding me of that article about a japanese scientist who made a synthetic burger out of feces or something like that.

[Sasha]

Except the Japanese feces story was a hoax...

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

still stuck in my mind though. a synthetic burger would be objectively safer and freer of shit as you pointed out but i have an irrational fear of eating a feces burger thanks to that article

[Sasha]

My uncle worked in a cattle feed company in England (pre-bse) and told me many stories about what ends up in there, trust me, you are already eating shit and worse burgers...

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

i know. there was that mcdonald's rep (i think) who said something like 'of course a bit of shit ends up in the burgers'.

[synthesis]

There was famously that regulation in New York that specified exactly how much rat feces could be present in any street vendor's hot dogs. That wasn't more than a few years ago, if I recall correctly.

[Invader Zim]

it is not me suggesting that. It is you.

I didn't suggest any such thing, even if you are to take my comments out of the facetious context in which they were clearly written.

[Luisrah]

Why?

Because we have needs. We desire things that we consider pleasing.
I'm not saying I support animal slaughter like they do it.
I've seen pigs getting killed at my grandparent's house (6 or 7 guys round him cutting it with a knife until it died and stopped 'screaming') and seen my grandmother kill chickens by twisting their necks and slitting their throats.

I have to say, it made an impression on me. I still eat meat though, because I really like it.

Let's face it, animals eat animals all the time. Some animals ONLY eat other animals. Some times they eat them alive, and they end up dying from their wounds, sometimes they eat the cubs and the mothers lose them (which may lead them to become stressed etc) and so on.

This is completely natural. I see no problem in eating meat. Should/can we minimise animal suffering when their purpose is to feed us? Of course, that is a perfectly legitimate demand. But if we can make them live a normal life and die without even knowing what happened to them...I really find it hard to see the problem.

If we go down the road of "no eating meat to stop animal suffering" then we should stop buying other unnecessary things such as nice clothes, computers, iPods etc because they were made by some poor worker that gets minimum wage or less, and works all day in the other side of the world.

I think we all know that's not what's going to change the world.

[piet11111]

Laws and sausages are the two things nobody really wants to know how they are made.

That is a saying i always enjoyed but it doesn't make me stop eating sausage.

And while such artificial beef could be far healthier then real meat if it doesn't taste as well i would still stick to my slice of dead cow.

Also lol at the suggestion that eating meat is a lifestyle while advocating a total vegetarian diet.

[Ele'ill]

Because we have needs. We desire things that we consider pleasing.

We don't need meat. Some people desire it. Some people are desensitized to and desire really terrible things. Fuck them. I'm not interested in what mass society has rendered normal.


I'm not saying I support animal slaughter like they do it.
I've seen pigs getting killed at my grandparent's house (6 or 7 guys round him cutting it with a knife until it died and stopped 'screaming') and seen my grandmother kill chickens by twisting their necks and slitting their throats. I have to say, it made an impression on me. I still eat meat though, because I really like it.:rolleyes:






Let's face it, animals eat animals all the time. Some animals ONLY eat other animals. Some times they eat them alive, and they end up dying from their wounds,Do they have a choice biologically/physiologically? Do they have that decision making capability to the degree that we do as a highly evolved sentient being? Do you sprint down slabs of steak and pork in the meat aisle of the grocery store and gorge yourself on it or are you capable of curbing your desire? Of curbing your desire through critical thinking/exploration of the world around you more so than a typical boss or a cop?




sometimes they eat the cubs and the mothers lose them (which may lead them to become stressed etc) and so on.Are you suggesting this as inspiration for a future world or what? Like we won't be able to let kids/dogs/cats leave their house or the adult neighbors might run them down and feed on pint after pint of fresh blood?


But if we can make them live a normal life and die without even knowing what happened to them...I really find it hard to see the problem.god would be my enemy



If we go down the road of "no eating meat to stop animal suffering" then we should stop buying other unnecessary things such as nice clothes, computers, iPods etc because they were made by some poor worker that gets minimum wage or less, and works all day in the other side of the world.

I think we all know that's not what's going to change the world.No, we should abolish wage, work, capital, class etc.. and if people don't want to slave away to make 'things' for people then they won't. Those things are not made of flesh and didn't cost a life to make.

[synthesis]

Do they have a choice biologically/physiologically? Do they have that decision making capability to the degree that we do as a highly evolved sentient being? Do you sprint down slabs of steak and pork in the meat aisle of the grocery store and gorge yourself on it or are you capable of curbing your desire? Of curbing your desire through critical thinking/exploration of the world around you more so than a typical boss or a cop?

This isn't an argument against what you're saying, but I think you're overestimating the number of options a lot of people have if they want to eat a hot meal, prepared quickly, that will sustain them throughout the day. Not everyone has access to a decent falafel whenever they want.

[Lord Hargreaves]

The effects of hormones like oxytocin do not emotions make, and they certainly do not add up to being able to analyse, conceptualise or understand why they have the instinct to feed their young, copulate with their mate, form herds, hunt together, etc. The people anthropomorphising animal behaviour need to learn to understand that they are indulging in confirmation bias.

You often hear this kind of argument during animal rights debates, and the more I look at it the more silly it is. There doesn't appear to be any reason at all why science should have to work with these crude 19th century behaviouralist assumptions when studying animals.

How is assuming that animals have a mental life and that this influences behaviour unscientific? I don't get it. As well as being intuitive, it is actually and objectively the most plausible explanation.

[Ele'ill]

This isn't an argument against what you're saying, but I think you're overestimating the number of options a lot of people have if they want to eat a hot meal, prepared quickly, that will sustain them throughout the day. Not everyone has access to a decent falafel whenever they want.



Why can't the hot quick meal be vegan? Why can't the basics of fruits and vegetables become the staple, the entire dish? It certainly is healthy enough to, is less expensive and does sustain throughout the day. Access to healthy foods is a huge issue though as is breaking through societal norms (on all fronts).

[synthesis]

Why can't the hot quick meal be vegan? Why can't the basics of fruits and vegetables become the staple, the entire dish? It certainly is healthy enough to, is less expensive and does sustain throughout the day. Access to healthy foods is a huge issue though as is breaking through societal norms (on all fronts).

It certainly can be, but in most places it's not - in the U.S., anyways. (I think a vegan would do quite well in Ghana, for example. It's not a question of poverty so much as it is a matter of most people historically not having had access to meat and learning to subsist without it, leading to vegetarian meals with lots of protein and flavor, which is culturally the opposite of the U.S., where coal miners and factory workers needed a massive amount of calories to perform at the expected levels, and hence the culinary culture began to revolve almost entirely around deep-fried animals bred to be as fatty as possible. When we transitioned to office and service jobs, the physical workload was drastically reduced, but the diet remained the same, which is the principal reason for obesity in the United States.)

I'd argue that promoting access to nutritious, flavorful vegan foods is just as worthy and productive a goal as attempting to bring down or cripple the meat industry. It's kind of like the difference between creating incentives for people to drive hybrids versus just taxing the shit out of gasoline.

[Invader Zim]

You often hear this kind of argument during animal rights debates, and the more I look at it the more silly it is. There doesn't appear to be any reason at all why science should have to work with these crude 19th century behaviouralist assumptions when studying animals.

How is assuming that animals have a mental life and that this influences behaviour unscientific? I don't get it. As well as being intuitive, it is actually and objectively the most plausible explanation.

Assumptions without evidence are inherently unscientific.

Oh, and oxytocin, which causes mammals to bond with their young, was discovered in 1906 - so hardly 'crude 19th century behaviouralist assumptions'.

[Decolonize The Left]

Fuck artificial meat. Just like fuck GMO veggies/fruits/whatever. Next thing you'll all be going on about how we ought to be drinking some synthetic goop instead of water.

Here's the question: what's wrong with organic meat? With organic veggies? With water? Nothing. Nothing at all. All this stuff is perfectly fine and good for you (vegan arguments on animal treatment aside). The real issue isn't the stuff but the system which produces and manages the distribution of the stuff. The real problem isn't meat, or organic veggies, or water, it's capitalism.

Because we are dependent upon large, mono-cropped, agricultural industries for our food supply, we are forced to deal with problems associated with that industry. Small farms don't have these problems. It's no wonder that the food industry is trying to get us to eat synthetic food: how easy for them! And all regardless of our personal health, as always.

[ckaihatsu]

Fuck artificial meat. Just like fuck GMO veggies/fruits/whatever. Next thing you'll all be going on about how we ought to be drinking some synthetic goop instead of water.

Here's the question: what's wrong with organic meat? With organic veggies? With water? Nothing. Nothing at all. All this stuff is perfectly fine and good for you (vegan arguments on animal treatment aside). The real issue isn't the stuff but the system which produces and manages the distribution of the stuff. The real problem isn't meat, or organic veggies, or water, it's capitalism.

Because we are dependent upon large, mono-cropped, agricultural industries for our food supply, we are forced to deal with problems associated with that industry. Small farms don't have these problems. It's no wonder that the food industry is trying to get us to eat synthetic food: how easy for them! And all regardless of our personal health, as always.


As much as I'd like to sidestep this issue and just blame capitalism -- which *is* valid for most things -- a *post*-capitalist society would undoubtedly be able to produce both plants and animals for food, so the whole issue would still be in front of us then, too.

For now I'd say there's no *political* value to this topic because it's all about lifestyle -- at best we could revisit it after the overthrow of capitalism, but to do anything sooner would be de facto reformism.

[Comrade Jacob]

It really doesn't look that bad.

[synthesis]

Fuck artificial meat. Just like fuck GMO veggies/fruits/whatever. Next thing you'll all be going on about how we ought to be drinking some synthetic goop instead of water.

Here's the question: what's wrong with organic meat? With organic veggies? With water? Nothing. Nothing at all. All this stuff is perfectly fine and good for you (vegan arguments on animal treatment aside). The real issue isn't the stuff but the system which produces and manages the distribution of the stuff. The real problem isn't meat, or organic veggies, or water, it's capitalism.

Because we are dependent upon large, mono-cropped, agricultural industries for our food supply, we are forced to deal with problems associated with that industry. Small farms don't have these problems. It's no wonder that the food industry is trying to get us to eat synthetic food: how easy for them! And all regardless of our personal health, as always.

I don't think the issue has ever been about the personal health effects of either organic or synthetic meat, and I haven't seen anything here about the negative effects of the synthetic meat. The problem is the ridiculous amount of resources that goes into creating a single burger patty, not to mention the effects on climate change; these problems will grow exponentially as more and more of the world is able to afford and obtain a meat-based at least once a day.

Given that there is apparently very little difference between synthetic and organic meat in terms of the health effects, I think this is a great development, given that GMOs are already largely responsible for the aforementioned rise in access to meat.

[Luisrah]

We don't need meat. Some people desire it. Some people are desensitized to and desire really terrible things. Fuck them. I'm not interested in what mass society has rendered normal.

Are you suggesting humans are herbivores? Just some of us are omnivores?
Are we not able to digest meat? Don't most of us feel hungry when they see/smell meat?
And are you suggesting that those omnivores of us are like that because society made them like that?



:rolleyes:

Well, like I said. I suppose you never bought a computer, or clothes or whatever,, right?




Do they have a choice biologically/physiologically? Do they have that decision making capability to the degree that we do as a highly evolved sentient being? Do you sprint down slabs of steak and pork in the meat aisle of the grocery store and gorge yourself on it or are you capable of curbing your desire? Of curbing your desire through critical thinking/exploration of the world around you more so than a typical boss or a cop?

You can also curb your desire for sex and simply not have it. Look what happens to priests when they do it for too long and happen to find a lonely child...
Stopping yourself from satisfacting your desires (wether or not they're good) brings you harm. Smokers and drug addicts have a really hard time quitting and many times need therapy. Deprivation of sleep can make you see bugs climbing a wall where there is nothing.
Of course we are talking about meat, and in the end of the day we get our bellies full, if only of vegetables (or fish aswell? never really understood where you put the line).



Are you suggesting this as inspiration for a future world or what? Like we won't be able to let kids/dogs/cats leave their house or the adult neighbors might run them down and feed on pint after pint of fresh blood?

I can't imagine a way of starting to respond to this



No, we should abolish wage, work, capital, class etc.. and if people don't want to slave away to make 'things' for people then they won't. Those things are not made of flesh and didn't cost a life to make.

Of course they won't, unless they have no other means of survival.
But you reveal in yourself what has been bothering me a lot lately - people caring so much about animals.
10 million people die of hunger every year, another 2 million of malaria, and another 2 million of diarrhea. 14 million deaths that could easily be saved. Cristiano Ronaldo makes more in a day than my parents make in a year. There are people in this world that work all day and get a cup of rice before going to bed. Slavery still exists (and not just wage slavery, slavery in the old way!)
It makes me thinking why we are even talking about animals. I almost can't believe when people yell so much about animal rights and not about human rights. I wouldn't be surprised (actually I would) if they would adopt a stray dog and 10 minutes later refuse to give some money to a beggar.
It is outrageous how there are dogs and cats that are better treated than humans in this world. Fat cats and hungry people. Boy does that make sense.
Reminds me of something:

http://hateandanger.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/free-market-capitalism-homeless-people-peopleless-homes-tent-city-foreclosed.jpg?w=630&h=429

What next? Abolishing the use of animals in agriculture??? :confused:

[Sasha]

@ august/manoir etc

Ehmm, synthetic meat is really a misnomer, its stemcell meat, so just normal meat but cultivated in a petri dish.
It's more like cloning plants, the biggest danger would be that something would be wrong with the tiny bit of source meat that suplied the stemcells and thus spreads a dangerous gene through all of the harvested meat.
But its just meat.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

It really doesn't look that bad.

It doesn't actually.

It kinda reminds me of how a hamburger at a diner looks before the cook smashes it on the griddle. Sort of a little hockey-puck of beef.

[Ele'ill]

Are you suggesting humans are herbivores? Just some of us are omnivores?
Are we not able to digest meat? Don't most of us feel hungry when they see/smell meat?
And are you suggesting that those omnivores of us are like that because society made them like that?

I can't simplify what I originally posted


We don't need meat. Some people desire it. Some people are desensitized to and desire really terrible things. Fuck them. I'm not interested in what mass society has rendered normal.







Well, like I said. I suppose you never bought a computer, or clothes or whatever,, right?

My objection isn't simply to the exploitation of workers but to all animal industry, coercion and death which is the totality of animal industry, it is the finished product every time. Are there equal alternatives to computers and clothes as there is with meat and animal products?




You can also curb your desire for sex and simply not have it. Look what happens to priests when they do it for too long and happen to find a lonely child...

Stopping yourself from satisfacting your desires (wether or not they're good) brings you harm. Smokers and drug addicts have a really hard time quitting and many times need therapy. Deprivation of sleep can make you see bugs climbing a wall where there is nothing.

oh my god you are so bad at this



Of course we are talking about meat, and in the end of the day we get our bellies full, if only of vegetables (or fish aswell? never really understood where you put the line).

Do you know what a vegan diet (what we've been talking about) is?



I can't imagine a way of starting to respond to this

Well if the rest of your responses are anything to go by you could probably just respond with 'yes'




Of course they won't, unless they have no other means of survival.
But you reveal in yourself what has been bothering me a lot lately - people caring so much about animals.
10 million people die of hunger every year, another 2 million of malaria, and another 2 million of diarrhea. 14 million deaths that could easily be saved. Cristiano Ronaldo makes more in a day than my parents make in a year. There are people in this world that work all day and get a cup of rice before going to bed. Slavery still exists (and not just wage slavery, slavery in the old way!)
It makes me thinking why we are even talking about animals. I almost can't believe when people yell so much about animal rights and not about human rights. I wouldn't be surprised (actually I would) if they would adopt a stray dog and 10 minutes later refuse to give some money to a beggar.
It is outrageous how there are dogs and cats that are better treated than humans in this world. Fat cats and hungry people. Boy does that make sense.

yeah but yo there are funguses that control insect brains so that means we should allow all kinds of coercive and manipulative shit cause it is a natural thing and also carnivores butchering their young :rolleyes:

I know what pain feels like, emotional distress, similar conditions to what other sentient animals go through as product of an industry that is unnecessary and I wouldn't want any animal to experience that spectrum of pain and distress.



What next? Abolishing the use of animals in agriculture??? :confused:

What is it exactly that you think we've been talking about?

[Glitchcraft]

[QUOTE=Consistent.Surprise;2648281]Please, clarify this? 7 Billion people. Depleting resources. I'm curious about your sources /QUOTE]

Depends on what you mean by overpopulation. Is there too many people and it`s hard to get tickets to the super bowl and the lines at the store are too long then sure there is too many people.
But can this multi billion people be fed, clothed, educated and housed the answer is yes.
There are more than ample means of production to do this. The problem is they are under utilized. These productive forces are more than capable of being ramped up to meet the needs of all the people but instead of being operated to meet need they are operated to satisfy profit. Food is constantly being destroyed in order to drive up demand (cost) while people starve. Private appropriation is what is creating starvation NOT depleting resources.
So if you believe that, can you think of how these productive forces should be managed in order to make them more efficient in meeting world need? What are circumstances that would allow for a profit driving economy to be replaced by one that meets the needs of all the worlds people.

[Luisrah]

I can't simplify what I originally posted

I asked for clarification since English isn't my main language. Since you refuse to do so I will assume, by your previous post that we eat meat because of society. "Mass society rendered meat eating normal".
That means that before society existed like we know it, we didn't eat meat (or it wasn't normal).
And the first humans didn't even hunt animals, kill them, skin them and eat them raw in the beggining?




My objection isn't simply to the exploitation of workers but to all animal industry, coercion and death which is the totality of animal industry, it is the finished product every time. Are there equal alternatives to computers and clothes as there is with meat and animal products?

Following your line of reason there is! If I desire meat, and eat it often because I like it, and then I stop doing it and start eating only vegetables then I am simply not using something that I could use!
Instead of buying clothes at a shop, you could just make your own or use something else that not clothes but that does the same job. Computers? Well, you have newspapers, letters, libraries...
Ridiculous? I know.





oh my god you are so bad at this

Do you know what a vegan diet (what we've been talking about) is?

Well if the rest of your responses are anything to go by you could probably just respond with 'yes'

yeah but yo there are funguses that control insect brains so that means we should allow all kinds of coercive and manipulative shit cause it is a natural thing and also carnivores butchering their young :rolleyes:

I know what pain feels like, emotional distress, similar conditions to what other sentient animals go through as product of an industry that is unnecessary and I wouldn't want any animal to experience that spectrum of pain and distress.

What is it exactly that you think we've been talking about?

We started talking about synthentic beef burger and (as usual between vegans and meat eaters) ended up talking about which is more important to us - humans or other animals
I perfectly agree with this. If we can make a beef that tastes like a normal one and is completely equal to another one, except that no cow needed to die for us to get it - perfect.
Now I can see few reasons for you to disagree with this but if health problems are the issue then let me tell you that a lot of people still drink alcohol, smoke cigars and do drugs. Is meat worse?

If the synthetic beef doesn't end up being like normal ones then I'm pretty sure cows will continue to die.
You see, the problem here isn't eating cows or not. The problem is capitalism.
Capitalism cages 3 animals where there should be only 1. Capitalism puts lights to make animals think it's day all the time and thus eat more. Capitalism gives altered food to make animals fatten and grow faster. Capitalism kills animals in the cheapest way.
They only care about profit. And they would do (and actually do something similar) to humans if they could.

Not eating meat won't end animal suffering in this society. You have a much better chance at saving animals by ending capitalism.
Changing lifestyles won't bring the system down.

[Ele'ill]

I asked for clarification since English isn't my main language. Since you refuse to do so I will assume, by your previous post that we eat meat because of society. "Mass society rendered meat eating normal".
That means that before society existed like we know it, we didn't eat meat (or it wasn't normal).
And the first humans didn't even hunt animals, kill them, skin them and eat them raw in the beggining?

There isn't any way to simplify what I originally posted (or perhaps it is just out of my capability to do so and for that I'm sorry) and you seem to understand what I posted just fine (by chance, I dunno) We don't need animal industry, it is unnecessary, we have many other options. Perhaps not a direct analogy but it is akin to bosses and cops and their supporters stating that there is no other alternative outside of the systems of control that manages their personal incentives. This is why I find the radical position on this topic to be confusing because we wouldn't compromise on any other front- we wouldn't look to societal norms and mass opinion as a valid thing- at least not without heavy criticism and lengthy dialogue. This auto acceptance occurs with discussion on science and falsely places current science as a whole as being something other than a part of capital. See previous discussions on animal testing.






Following your line of reason there is! If I desire meat, and eat it often because I like it, and then I stop doing it and start eating only vegetables then I am simply not using something that I could use!

What are the implications of maintaining a system or industry such as animal industry simply for luxury given the nature of pain and suffering involved? What else is blinded by societal normalcy that radicals overlook? I think there are a handful of things. One of which that has been discussed heavily over the last several months in various threads is the issue of work, production, industry. As we've seen in the past and in recent flare-ups is the issue of bodily autonomy (all the abortion threads), patriarchy and racism.




Instead of buying clothes at a shop, you could just make your own or use something else that not clothes but that does the same job. Computers? Well, you have newspapers, letters, libraries...
Ridiculous? I know. We started talking about synthentic beef burger and (as usual between vegans and meat eaters) ended up talking about which is more important to us - humans or other animals

The issue perhaps isn't 'buying things' but the industry itself. Fur is a relatively applicable topic here since you mentioned clothes. Fur has no purpose at all and the industry should be wiped off the earth. If we allow it, why? If we over look the physical pain and emotional distress of the other animals used for production of a non-essential luxury items what does the autonomy of our own species actually mean and are we role playing with theory or do we actually desire liberation for legitimate reasons. Do we actually understand ourselves etc..








I perfectly agree with this. If we can make a beef that tastes like a normal one and is completely equal to another one, except that no cow needed to die for us to get it - perfect.
Now I can see few reasons for you to disagree with this but if health problems are the issue then let me tell you that a lot of people still drink alcohol, smoke cigars and do drugs. Is meat worse?

Regarding health problems, if meat and other animal products, or any other food for that matter, is bad for you it doesn't become good for you simply because there are other 'bad' and unhealthy things that you could possibly do. Perhaps I am missing your point here though.



If the synthetic beef doesn't end up being like normal ones then I'm pretty sure cows will continue to die.
You see, the problem here isn't eating cows or not. The problem is capitalism.
Capitalism cages 3 animals where there should be only 1. Capitalism puts lights to make animals think it's day all the time and thus eat more. Capitalism gives altered food to make animals fatten and grow faster. Capitalism kills animals in the cheapest way.
They only care about profit. And they would do (and actually do something similar) to humans if they could.

I obviously disagree that there should be animal industry at all. This is what I mentioned earlier in this post about just assuming 'that's the way things are'. It is honestly like watching someone not familiar with addiction try to kick a habit and all of the excuses they come up with and poorly thought out logic that actually enables their addiction/problem and encourages relapse. (I have had issues with addiction btw)


Not eating meat won't end animal suffering in this society. You have a much better chance at saving animals by ending capitalism.
Changing lifestyles won't bring the system down.

This is a strawman. I never even came close to listing some manifesto or clear path towards animal liberation neither of which is a mandatory prerequisite for criticizing people's points during a discussion. Is there even going to be a communist future ever? I don't know. One without animal industry? I don't know.

[CarolinianFire]

This is a very exciting development, the world's population and meat consumption is going up in an exponential fashion, and unless we find ways to better utilize the land currently used for ranching, we need to synthesize meat or at least something close to it to keep up.

[#FF0000]

Please, clarify this? 7 Billion people. Depleting resources. I'm curious about your sources

I'm curious about yours -- we have the resources to meet the needs of 7 billion people, and the population on every continent except Africa is declining or plateauing (even Africa's is slowing).

[Consistent.Surprise]

I'm curious about yours -- we have the resources to meet the needs of 7 billion people, and the population on every continent except Africa is declining or plateauing (even Africa's is slowing).

My thing is how long? How much in reserve do we have to supply real food to all 7 billion? (If you have links or sites for me to see numbers, that would rock. I'm not ignoring the idea that we aren't depleting resources)

Part of why the population is declining (in the states) is because 20% of women of childbearing age are opting for a childfree life.

& on the subject of the thread, just, yuck. I want real cow.

[Sasha]

Again, it is real cow meat, its just cloned in a petri dish, the word synthetic in the title is a complete misnomer

[Consistent.Surprise]

Again, it is real cow meat, its just cloned in a petri dish, the word synthetic in the title is a complete misnomer

So it's a test tube cow flesh? Or the whole cow?

I'm still unsure. I kind of like seeing them in pastures & thinking "one of you will be my steak at some point" (obviously not one of those specific cows, most likely).

[Fakeblock]

Again, it is real cow meat, its just cloned in a petri dish, the word synthetic in the title is a complete misnomer

Yeah, my mistake. I wasn't sure whether the word applied in this case, but I saw numerous articles (like the one in the OP) call it that, so I assumed.

[Sasha]

So it's a test tube cow flesh? Or the whole cow?

I'm still unsure. I kind of like seeing them in pastures & thinking "one of you will be my steak at some point" (obviously not one of those specific cows, most likely).

Think of it as plant cloning, you take a small bit of meat extract the stem cells (these are specified stemcells, not the neutral ones you can get from embryoses, so they will only form musle tissue, or fat or whatever) these are multiplied and fed like you would farm algae... It's the funny thing of the whole fight above, the way this is made is pretty much how good meat replacements will be made, its just not possible to feed the world population in current society with organic, small, locally grown food, wheter vegan, vegetarian, omnivore or carnivore. But this meat developed by scientists will nescecarly become an evil monopolized capitalist product so pass me another vega burger (with nice GMO soja, produced in Israel settlements, by a big company who tries to pattent their plants, bought in a "alternative" chain that refuses to pay their workers minimum wage and busts unions).

[Consistent.Surprise]

Think of it as plant cloning, you take a small bit of meat extract the stem cells (these are specified stemcells, not the neutral ones you can get from embryoses, so they will only form musle tissue, or fat or whatever) these are multiplied and fed like you would farm algae... It's the funny thing of the whole fight above, the way this is made is pretty much how good meat replacements will be made, its just not possible to feed the world population in current society with organic, small, locally grown food, wheter vegan, vegetarian, omnivore or carnivore. But this meat developed by scientists will nescecarly become an evil monopolized capitalist product so pass me another vega burger (with nice GMO soja, produced in Israel settlements, by a big company who tries to pattent their plants, bought in a "alternative" chain that refuses to pay their workers minimum wage and busts unions).

When isn't something capitalized in this day & age? I can see it being tested on the poor & private studies about its side effects. Once deemed ok, they will up the price & it will be in all the 5 star restaurants.

Welp, if it ends up on my plate & tastes good, I seriously doubt I'll complain.

[Soomie]

We already have synthetic burgers at fast food chains. I think this idea has good intentions (finding a way to end world hunger, etc), but it could easily get out of hand. Capitalists and corporations will see it as a way to make even more money and they'll find a way to mess it up. We don't even know the health effects of this synthetic burger. I mean, look at all the problems that GMOs are causing. Off in China a few years ago, they created cows that could produce human breast milk. We just keep going further and further and it's getting more and more bizarre and disturbing. I'm not religious or anything, but we need to stop playing god. Why do we have to make food in labs so it can rot out in our organic digestive tract and give us colon cancer? We're not machines. Our bodies weren't designed to process this garbage.

[Sasha]

Again, its just meat, its more meat than most meat meat, its pure mussle tissue (ie beef) a 100% exact copy of the original source cell they have taken out of a real live cow (dead cow in this case, they cut a small piece of steak and multiplied it)
It's not genetically engineered, its cloning where you only clone the bits you want instead of the whole animal, its no different than what happens inside a growing cow, just under ideal circumstances and without the cow.
It probably will never be practical but theoretically everyone could grow their own meat at home in a incubator...

[Decolonize The Left]

Again, its just meat, its more meat than most meat meat, its pure mussle tissue (ie beef) a 100% exact copy of the original source cell they have taken out of a real live cow (dead cow in this case, they cut a small piece of steak and multiplied it)
It's not genetically engineered, its cloning where you only clone the bits you want instead of the whole animal, its no different than what happens inside a growing cow, just under ideal circumstances and without the cow.
It probably will never be practical but theoretically everyone could grow their own meat at home in a incubator...

Thanks pyscho. The title is very misleading and I think I'm clear on the topic now.

[Decolonize The Left]

Think of it as plant cloning, you take a small bit of meat extract the stem cells (these are specified stemcells, not the neutral ones you can get from embryoses, so they will only form musle tissue, or fat or whatever) these are multiplied and fed like you would farm algae... It's the funny thing of the whole fight above, the way this is made is pretty much how good meat replacements will be made, its just not possible to feed the world population in current society with organic, small, locally grown food, wheter vegan, vegetarian, omnivore or carnivore. But this meat developed by scientists will nescecarly become an evil monopolized capitalist product so pass me another vega burger (with nice GMO soja, produced in Israel settlements, by a big company who tries to pattent their plants, bought in a "alternative" chain that refuses to pay their workers minimum wage and busts unions).

I would like to add that buying locally grown food is actually much more reasonable than you might think, at least in the states. I've been all over this motherfucker and I can say that I am surprised at the local farmer's markets, meat production, etc... that can be found even in random ass places. For example, right now I'm out in the middle-of-nowhere south and there's a farmer's market every saturday: local veggies, local bread. We even got a local meat dude who sells his beef.

While this development (the OP) may be a nice invention from a certain perspective, it is clear that the healthiest and strongest solution is to develop food chains and resources in your area and not rely on big science or whatever for saving your shit.

[Sasha]

Oh absolutely, it really depends which way we as a society develop, this is def a step in the "startrek'isation" of humanity, it remains very much to be seen if that's the way we end up or more go towards a rural retro society when post scarcity, 3th world development and reliable birth control lead to a massive reduction of the earth population.
But even then, imagine how much land will be freed, wheter for growing organic food or to give back to narure if we could already cut 60/70% of meat farming without cutting meat consumption, if we also do that, by change of culture or by making good alternatives it would have a huge impact.
But for now this seems more sustainable than mass soy production, which also makes us as a species slowely infertail by the way...

[Bea Arthur]

Shame on the people here who are joking about eating hamburgers. Do you not understand that this makes you complicit in the mistreatment, the murder of animals? I am guessing none of you have pets or understand the beauty of nature. Selfish.

[Consistent.Surprise]

Shame on the people here who are joking about eating hamburgers. Do you not understand that this makes you complicit in the mistreatment, the murder of animals? I am guessing none of you have pets or understand the beauty of nature. Selfish.

I currently care for 7 cats.

Pro animal isn't a requirement for vegetarians. Are you vegan? Do you wear leather? Are you aware TVP is a created substance, not plants? How about soy with it being a GMO (yes it is but not all Monsanto).

I eat flesh. I also like pets. What is your point?

[Bea Arthur]

I currently care for 7 cats.

Pro animal isn't a requirement for vegetarians. Are you vegan? Do you wear leather? Are you aware TVP is a created substance, not plants? How about soy with it being a GMO (yes it is but not all Monsanto).

I eat flesh. I also like pets. What is your point?

I am a vegan. A post-vegan, to be specific. No I do not wear leather or use animal-derived products. I prefer wearing organically grown cotton clothes produced by co-operatives but in a pinch I'll sometimes pick up garments made up of synthetic materials like polyester.

You eat animals because you obviously haven't considered whether animals feel pain, have personalities, or deserve not to be slaughtered for nourishment that can be provided in other ways. It is barbaric and will come to an end under socialism.

[Consistent.Surprise]

Your attacks of omnivores is very trollish.


I know they feel pain. I still find them yummy.

[Bea Arthur]

Your attacks of omnivores is very trollish.


I know they feel pain. I still find them yummy.

This makes you a person whose values are inconsistent with his or her behavior.

[Consistent.Surprise]

This makes you a person whose values are inconsistent with his or her behavior.

How so? I value my fellow man more than animals raised to nourish me. Logical to me. You have your logic. I don't treat your vegan lifestyle as wrong, thus you cannot treat my omnivore lifestyle as wrong.

[Ele'ill]

my fellow man

oh jesus christ the last thing we need is another larper



more than animals raised to nourish me. Logical to me. You have your logic. I don't treat your vegan lifestyle as wrong, thus you cannot treat my omnivore lifestyle as wrong.

would you butcher a human being and consume them, or buy one butchered because society says that is what nourishes you

[RedBen]

Shame on the people here who are joking about eating hamburgers. Do you not understand that this makes you complicit in the mistreatment, the murder of animals? I am guessing none of you have pets or understand the beauty of nature. Selfish.
i eat meat, i have a cat and a python. my snake eats rodents, my cat eats animal byproduct as most cats and dogs do. i think nature is beautiful, whether it is an untouched forest, or my lucian swallowing a gerbil. if i can get ahold of a camera, i'd like to post a picture of my teeth, i have 4 naturally pointed canines, they almost don't look natural or like they were modified. i have a set of upper and lower. i suppose those are evolution's way of telling me to eat strictly a plant based diet? i support freedom of choice, i respect vegans but in the spirit of choice, i choose to eat meat from time to time.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

So it's a test tube cow flesh? Or the whole cow?

I'm still unsure. I kind of like seeing them in pastures & thinking "one of you will be my steak at some point" (obviously not one of those specific cows, most likely).

I'm the same way at seafood restaurants, especially the ones where you get to pick out the lobster for your meal (like at Red Lobster)

"Yes....he shall do finely" *drools*

[RedBen]

It is barbaric and will come to an end under socialism.
call me crazy but says who? would i be killed for eating meat? by who?

[RedBen]

Do they have a choice biologically/physiologically? Do they have that decision making capability to the degree that we do as a highly evolved sentient being?
so we should become vegan cause we are superior to animals but not eat them because we are not superior? what am i missing?

[Consistent.Surprise]

I'm no larper mari3L

I live in a city with an atrocious poverty rate & care more about feeding them than a cow. Don't pass judgement on people you don't research.

[Ele'ill]

I've already answered this in this thread. But just because others are better and superior at reading than you, I won't call for your future hereditary lines to be enslaved and have their faces cut off so I can shove them into my mouth because I like the taste of your families burnt flesh.


so we should become vegan cause we are superior to animals

we can understand the physical pain and emotional distress of other animals (we are also animals), other animals have capabilities that we do not have


but not eat them because we are not superior? what am i missing?

being better or more advanced or differently evolved at something doesn't give some inherent right to coercion and full control of another living creature

[RedBen]

just because others are better and superior at reading than you
is it lonely up there on your pedestal?

[RedBen]

I'm no larper mari3L

I live in a city with an atrocious poverty rate & care more about feeding them than a cow. Don't pass judgement on people you don't research.
no shit, i wouldn't tell a hungry person not to eat because they cannot afford vegan fare. food pantries hand out meat to desperate people. i know because i grew up homeless with my mom and 5 siblings, we frequented food charities or we would have gone hungrier. i think it will be a good thing when we get to a point where we stop killing animals for meat but don't shove that religiousity down my throat. freedom of choice.

[Consistent.Surprise]

Mari3L, I've read all your posts on this thread. You keep making assumptions of folks where it seems they are unfounded. No one said YOU must eat meat. Keep your hands off my diet. Before I know it you'll be telling me what my favorite drink is.

[Ele'ill]

is it lonely up there on your pedestal?

no i think most people read the threads they're participating in


Mari3L, I've read all your posts on this thread. You keep making assumptions of folks where it seems they are unfounded.

such as..




No one said YOU must eat meat.

they're better off for it



Keep your hands off my diet.

keep your hands off animals who cannot defend themselves



Before I know it you'll be telling me what my favorite drink is.

I don't really care what it is honestly.

[RedBen]

no i think most people read the threads they're participating in
you know what? you're right, i'm done. it's like arguing a pro lifer, it nevers ends.

[Ele'ill]

I'm no larper mari3L

I live in a city with an atrocious poverty rate & care more about feeding them than a cow. Don't pass judgement on people you don't research.


then do you care more about 'your people', 'the people', than people in my city? Or can you relate to both? If both, then why not also other animals that feel the same or similar spectrum of emotional pain and physical distress? Especially why not when meat and animal products is completely unnecessary for a healthy diet?

[Ele'ill]

you know what? you're right, i'm done

a valiant effort though

[Consistent.Surprise]

All people. Especially the poor & homeless. Maybe YOU can afford to eat vegan & dictate diet to others & still feel warm & fuzzy about yourself but those of us who have gone hungry & are at poverty level: humans trump food industry animals every flipping day.

[Hermes]

i eat meat, i have a cat and a python. my snake eats rodents, my cat eats animal byproduct as most cats and dogs do. i think nature is beautiful, whether it is an untouched forest, or my lucian swallowing a gerbil. if i can get ahold of a camera, i'd like to post a picture of my teeth, i have 4 naturally pointed canines, they almost don't look natural or like they were modified. i have a set of upper and lower. i suppose those are evolution's way of telling me to eat strictly a plant based diet? i support freedom of choice, i respect vegans but in the spirit of choice, i choose to eat meat from time to time.

this is a really small point and really not even worth mentioning, but the fact that you have large canines doesn't really say anything about evolution's opinion of your diet. chimpanzees have gigantic canines and are primarily herbivores.

but also i don't really understand what 'the spirit of choice' has to do with it, if you don't address the suffering of animals. it's the same way that we argue that fascists don't have a right to organize, etc

I've probably made an ass out of myself

[Ele'ill]

All people. Especially the poor & homeless.

but not other animals that would feel the same or similar spectrum of physical pain and emotional distress it is like you collect people groups as trophies :rolleyes:


Maybe YOU can afford to eat vegan

it's less expensive




& dictate diet to others

nope, it can't happen like that




& still feel warm & fuzzy about yourself

I hate myself more than you will ever be capable of



but those of us who have gone hungry & are at poverty level:

I've been houseless and am facing it again now I am unimpressed with your liberal moralizing. :rolleyes:



humans trump food industry animals every flipping day.

but they shouldn't when animal products aren't necessary which is the vast majority of the time, and definitely within the future we desire

[Polaris]

All people. Especially the poor & homeless. Maybe YOU can afford to eat vegan & dictate diet to others & still feel warm & fuzzy about yourself but those of use who have gone hungry & are at poverty level: humans trump food industry animals every flipping day.
I would like to remind you that in many parts of the world meat is a luxury. This is because plant production is generally cheaper. Think about it; an animal needs uptake, consumes more than plants, etc. You are getting a vegan/vegetarian diet confused with someone who shops at expensive health food stores or possibly imitation foods, veggie burgers for example. Foods like that that come in boxes are more pricey than their counterparts, but if you stick to a basic plant based diet you will find it is cheaper.
Maybe check this out: http://www.learnvest.com/knowledge-center/do-vegetarians-save-money/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=lvdaily&utm_campaign=image#pid-2775_aint-0
Although there are probably better sources. Arguably the best one would be from yourself; go to an average grocery store where you live and calculate what it would take for a similar diet, vegan/vegetarian vs. meat-eater. Vegan/vegetarian diets are also cheaper in the long run, due to better health on average (and sometimes health insurance, if you can find one that discounts vegetarians).

I love how you specifically say "industry animals." Like there is a big difference between a pet dog and a pig, or even a chicken kept as a pet and a chicken kept in a cage not even big enough to stand in that had its beak cut off painfully and sloppily, will never see the light of day, and will never get a chance to satisfy its instincts to socialize, care for its young, etc. And as others have said, it isn't even necessary. There is no reason whatsoever that we need to eat meat. Plants can provide all the nutrients humans need, at a cheaper cost. At the very least, there is no reason why animals need to be treated cruelly, sloppily, fed shit diets, and given little space to move-- oh, right, maximizing profits, which in turn supposedly makes the meat cheaper (and less healthy). Yet as I've said, a plant based diet is less expensive anyway, and it does not need to resort to tactics used by the animal industry which cause suffering of sentient creatures.

[Consistent.Surprise]

I've cream: those countries, please?
I also used the language other people used, but yes, there is a difference.
I was a vegetarian for two years & have lived with & am friends with vegans. I don't care if you say it is cheaper, in Michigan, it isn't.

Man has consumed meat for thousands of years; there is no "societal norm" here.

Everyone has moved off of the ORIGINAL topic. You can have your TVP from a lab & I can have my beef.

[Ele'ill]

I've cream: those countries, please?
I also used the language other people used, but yes, there is a difference.
I was a vegetarian for two years & have lived with & am friends with vegans. I don't care if you say it is cheaper, in Michigan, it isn't.

two people walk into a grocery store, one buys brown rice, quinoa, veggies etc.. and the other does the same but also buys meat, which is more expensive?







Man has consumed meat for thousands of years; there is no "societal norm" here.

a lot of societal norms that are really terrible exist for extended periods of time before being discussed and thought about critically and abolished forever

in this case btw meat is no longer necessary

[Consistent.Surprise]

I've stated my views.

Now cut it out & return to the ORIGINAL topic

[Polaris]

I've cream: those countries, please?
Yay, my user name has been butchered for the first time.
China comes to mind. I suppose you are not interested in tales of the past, but as I was typing the defense of my previous Chinese teacher on eating dogs came to mind: meat was too expensive, but most had a dog. However today in China you would be hard pressed to find dog outside of Korean food stores (according to him, anyway).
Currently, meat products are much more expensive in places of the world like China than in the U.S. See this for proof: http://www.businessinsider.com/china-more-expensive-than-america-2010-12 Although I warn that you will have to navigate through a jungle of ads.

Additionally, people in the U.S. (my apologies if you don't live there, but I am arguing from that standpoint since that is where I live) consume more meat in general than in most parts of the world. Go to the question "How much meat do Americans consume compared to other countries?" http://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/frequently-asked-questions/#question_27
Also, take a look at this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/meat.jpg
I also used the language other people used, but yes, there is a difference.
For some reason I doubt that there is a difference between a hen kept as a pet and a hen in a factory.
As far as dogs and pigs: please support your claim, providing studies with a least a little credibility as I have? By the way, I would like to clarify that I am not denying that animals are all different, just that industry animals are not worthless creatures that should be unhumanely slaughtered for no reason.
Here's an article that boasts the intelligence of pigs: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/science/10angier.html
I was a vegetarian for two years & have lived with & am friends with vegans.
"I have black friends, I'm not racist."
I don't care if you say it is cheaper, in Michigan, it isn't.
I didn't just say it was cheaper, I supported it. With evidence. Please do the same. I am a vegetarian currently, and I can tell you that 90% of the time my meals are cheaper than my mother's. Please also consider restaurants. I almost never eat out due to expenses, but I do know that vegetarian entrees are usually less expensive, eg a spinach chile relleno vs a chicken one.
Man has consumed meat for thousands of years; there is no "societal norm" here. You can have your TVP from a lab & I can have my beef.
Man hasn't had the houses of horrors that are factory farms for thousands of years. As far as hunting, there is a big difference between hunting with spears and bows and arrows than with rifles, which haven't existed very long at all.
No thanks, I've been vegetarian long enough that even the smell of meat makes me feel sick, let alone eating it.

Edit: Feel free to not respond then, I agree this has gotten out of hand.

[Consistent.Surprise]

Sorry about that! I have to use my phone! Not insulting you. I will also look over your links. I am not discrediting vegans or people discussing the availability or prices of meat. I'm just trying to remind people we have been omnivores since the beginning of our existence as humans & I see neither side as correct or wrong with their diets but I do ask that we respect those choices.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

What about insects? Most cultures outside of Europe have insects as part of their diet - from China to Cambodia to India to Southern and Central Africa to Mexico and Southern America, spiders and centipedes are roasted, moths are baked, locusts are caught and eaten with tortillas. Many of these insects are also full of protein and other nutrients, being extremely healthy. Because of their size, they're also very renewable and easy to harvest. Aristotle himself makes a note in one his works where he says he is going to 'go outside and pick some juicy cicadas to eat'. Yet most people would positively squirm at the idea of eating cooked grasshoppers.

How's that for a dumb societal norm?


Man hasn't had the houses of horrors that are factory farms for thousands of years. As far as hunting, there is a big difference between hunting with spears and bows and arrows than with rifles, which haven't existed very long at all.
No thanks.

Is there now? So it matters whether an animal is killed with a large sharp projectile that fatally wounds it or a small blunt projectile that also fatally wounds it? What's the groundbreaking difference? Aesthetic?



I've been vegetarian long enough that even the smell of meat makes me feel sick, let alone eating it.

Good for you.

Meanwhile, I'm going to have me some juicy bacon and eggs.

[Polaris]

Is there now? So it matters whether an animal is killed with a large sharp projectile that fatally wounds it or a small blunt projectile that also fatally wounds it? What's the groundbreaking difference? Aesthetic?
No, the difference I was referring to was one of attitudes.

The OP claimed that man has been consuming meat for thousands of years (and at the expensive of furthering an argument against myself, I would like to clarify that the actual figure is around 2 million). I am far from an anthropologist, nor do I care to spend half and hour researching this, but I suspect that in those early years hunting was done for necessity. The leading theory for why humans first ate animals is that is was essential for survival in a forest-fire ravaged or icy environment. And I suppose that it must have been; as I mentioned previously, eating meat makes me, a human who originally could eat meat just fine, sick. Think about how a body completely unacquainted to meat eating would react-- not favorably, which certainly suggests that the only reason a primitive human would continue to eat meat was because there was nothing else. I am not suggesting that early humans had ethical qualms about hunting but were forced into it (but maybe they did, I have no idea), just that they didn't view it like we do today.

Today, where the death of the creatures of the forest can be considered part of an activity done for sport, for fun, as opposed to simply a necessity. Where innocent beings die in vain. How do spears and bows and arrows vs. guns come in? I was using those in a symbolical manner to represent this relationship. I apologize for that was unclear.

Guns do have their place if it became necessary to hunt (although that would mean no protein packed plants, alluding to a desolate future indeed); there is no reason why we should turn back the clock on what has the potential to be a more humane way and coincidentally is more efficient. From my understanding spears and bows and arrows can be more unwieldy than a gun, thus more likely to injure and not kill; this raises the point that animals have less defense against guns than more primitive methods, but it also means that an animal will go through the least amount of pain. If it was essential for a stag to die, it would be better for one to have a quick, painless death than for three to end up with infected gashes they may die a slow and painful death from, in addition to the one that actually ends up immediately killed.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Here's hoping it becomes cheap enough for mass production. Even before then, it could be beneficial for space colonists wanting fresh meat.

I wonder if it could be possible to improve taste and texture by artificially growing a whole animal (sans brain) in a tube or something like that? Tenderness could be controlled by the strength/frequency of electrical impulses during the growth period.

Count me in as long as it's cheaper than carving up old racing nags (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_meat_adulteration_scandal).

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

why grow the whole animal? couldn't they just clone the decent cuts?

who shops in the supermarket for testicles, stomachs or lungs or any other undesirable bits and pieces? produce hearts for science classes tho i guess lol

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

why grow the whole animal? couldn't they just clone the decent cuts?

who shops in the supermarket for testicles, stomachs or lungs or any other undesirable bits and pieces? produce hearts for science classes tho i guess lol

Dude, I'm from the South. I've eaten pretty much every part of the pig that can be eaten at least once. The snout, the trotters, the head meat, the chitterlings, the heart, I've eaten them all.

They're all tasty, if you prepare them right.

[Invader Zim]

other animals that feel the same or similar spectrum of emotional pain

A claim you have still yet to substantiate. And let's say that you are right, and pretend for the moment that your anthropomorphising of animal behaviour isn't total bollocks and that chickens have some basic, limited, emotional functionality, I'm still at a loss as to why I should care. The fox which eats the chicken doesn't, and it has evolved to eat meat just as I have. Open your mouth and look at your teeth (assuming that, after your calcium deficient diet, you still have any - unless of course you cheat and take supplemented soy-milk, etc.) and you will notice that you have incisors. Look at a picture of the human intestinal system and you will notice the vermiform appendix. Both of these, given your appeals to biology and nature, should tell you something.

Of course, the difference is sentience. There is an argument to be made that, as an intelligent, sentient, species we should turn towards vegetarianism because we can. We have the dietary understanding and technology to now make do without meat, and that is environmentally more sustainable and efficient in terms of acreage per calorie. That is a valid argument and one which would solve a vast multitude of the world's problems, worrying that a cow may have feelings is not one of those.

[Glitchcraft]

I don't understand.
Do you vegans/veggies think that vegetarianism is necessary for a socialist revolution or that it will become the practice in a post capitalist society?

What's the point here? You can't be a revolutionary if your not a veggie?

Suffering of the animals aside here for a minute.
The resources argument doesn't work. It's not that cows eat all the grain and make people starve because there is no more grain. That's a way oversimplified view.
The problem is obviously not that we cannot provide enough food for the world, it's that the whole world cannot afford to eat. Scarcity is not the problem with feeding the world. Meat does not deprive hungry people, distribution does. Private ownership does.

Still I am trying to understand what you veggies are saying the relevance of animal rights is to a workers revolution? There's no animal rep in my union hall. I don't see any class line in this fight.

We need to break from the democrats and form a revolutionary party to represent the workers in a social revolution. We need to have democratic/worker control of the means of production, Right? Something like that Right? Aren't we all working on something like that, am I in the wrong forum here?
Where is the relevance of meat in this context?
Not is it right or wrong or morally objectionable or does a duck feel love but where does it relate to the struggle against capitalism?
How does eating veggie empower workers?

[Ele'ill]

A claim you have still yet to substantiate.

I've proven it thousands of times (I am not exaggerating it has to be at least two to three thousand times) you just continue to repeat the same old boring broken criticisms of animal liberation whenever these threads come up. But I know you know you're wrong. You'd like to be able to bully up on a vegan and supporter of animal liberation as some extension of your self-political validation process, a qualifying prerequisite to the in-club of academic who-gives-a-fuck that you've seen your peers do, but you and they can't do that here with me (and a handful of other dedicated folks who aren't complete earth traitors) and it makes you mad. I think it's time for you to improve upon the legitimacy of your complaints or move on from this topic because imho it is getting embarrassing for you



And let's say that you are right, and pretend for the moment that your anthropomorphising of animal behaviour isn't total bollocksThis does not even make sense what is wrong with you. Animals other than humans feel pain and emotional distress. When you step on a cat's paw it makes a noise and recoils and attempts to flee. That isn't because of 'a reflex' other than one of pain and fear of future pain and hey pure coincidence that humans react in the same exact way. When a yellow jacket lands on and stings my friend's dog and the dog reacts, it is because it was stung by a yellow jacket and felt pain. Repeated exposure to stressful situations for animals cause emotional distress, neurotic complexes, dramatic behavioral changes.

Animals play and engage in leisure activities of various sorts. Dogs play with one another and no sorry that is not hunting strategy/practice when the dog lays on its back and rolls around going 'ARRrgga ARRggguugg ARRGGU' with it's mouth open and stomach exposed while the other dog goes 'ARguu agugugu arrgu' laying next to it with it's mouth open. Same with killer whales (although those are aquatic animals much different from dogs if you were unfamiliar with them), and primates do all this too and i assume you accept this unless you believe in god




and that chickens have some basic, limited, emotional functionality, I'm still at a loss as to why I should care. The fox which eats the chicken doesn't, and it has evolved to eat meat just as I have.And you have evolved to understand physical pain and emotional distress and evolved to understand what is and isn't necessary in your diet. You have evolved to have the capacity to experience sympathy and other complex emotions related to interactions with the world around you and other humans. You are not a werewollf. You are not a carnivore. This argument that you are simultaneously conscious of an inner primitive wild beast self but also completely unable to control it is one of the weakest and cheesiest things I have ever read.

also, the spectrum of human mental/emotion various greatly




Open your mouth and look at your teeth (assuming that, after your calcium deficient diet, you still have any - unless of course you cheat and take supplemented soy-milk, etc.)and you will notice that you have incisors.oh hey look how small they are compared to other species of animals that regularly eat meat, look at how white they are because there are tons of vegan sources of calcium from whole foods and who cares if you get some calcium from soy-milk (soy milk, soy, you know what soy is right you know where it comes from?)




Look at a picture of the human intestinal system and you will notice the vermiform appendix. Both of these, given your appeals to biology and nature, should tell you something.I don't know, I am so god damned healthy vegan. I drink like a upset person who wants to get drunk, used to smoke, do lots of drugs, work very long days of physical labor but the vegan diet boosts me right back up and totally keeps me healthy. With whole foods too!


There is an argument to be made that, as an intelligent, sentient, species we should turn towards vegetarianism because we can. We have the dietary understanding and technology to now make do without meat, and that is environmentally more sustainable and efficient in terms of acreage per calorie. That is a valid argument and one which would solve a vast multitude of the world's problems,[WOW OH MY GOD





I am printing this and framing it on my wall.




worrying that a cow may have feelings is not one of those.knowing that cows have feelings and that we have the ability to abolish those industries of torture and murder because they are unnecessary industries

[Halert]

While it is great that are more tasty alternatives to meat(not that there currently aren't any).

The people in the video said "it's not a as juicy as meat" that alone is enough reason for people to eat meat instead and even if it will taste just like meat it wont stop people from eating meat because people care about the emotional value that it's not real meat and just put together in a lab.

i'm a vegetarian myself, i will probably try it out if it is in the supermarket.

[Invader Zim]

I've proven it thousands of times (I am not exaggerating it has to be at least two to three thousand times)

Of course you have. And in that case you should have no trouble providing a short precis of the evidence.


you just continue to repeat the same old boring broken criticisms of animal liberation whenever these threads come up.

I think you must be confusing me with someone else. I've discussed animal welfare on only a relatively few occasions, typically to attack fox hunting as a wretched institution.


You'd like to be able to bully up on a vegan and supporter of animal liberation as some extension of your self-political validation process, a qualifying prerequisite to the in-club of academic who-gives-a-fuck that you've seen your peers do, but you and they can't do that here with me (and a handful of other dedicated folks who aren't complete earth traitors) and it makes you mad.

What? That is largely incoherent. Are you trying to suggest that I need to 'pick' on vegans to make myself look good in front of academics? If so, the answer is no. Academics collect qualifications, expertise and publications as currency in that respect - alien concepts, I know.


I think it's time for you to improve upon the legitimacy of your complaints or move on from this topic because imho it is getting embarrassing for you

And I think it is time for you to put up the evidence or shut up, your posturing isn't getting us anywhere. I'll happily change my mind, and won't be remotely embarrassed if you prove me wrong, that is also part of being an academic.


This does not even make sense what is wrong with you.

Irony. But, regardless, which part eluded you?


Animals other than humans feel pain and emotional distress.

They certainly feel the former, but the evidence that they feel the latter is, as I understand it, sparse, open to debate and far from clear cut. And, as noted, I'm still waiting on you to explain this evidence.


When you step on a cat's paw it makes a noise and recoils and attempts to flee. That isn't because of 'a reflex' other than one of pain and fear of future pain and hey pure coincidence that humans react in the same exact way. When a yellow jacket lands on and stings my friend's dog and the dog reacts, it is because it was stung by a yellow jacket and felt pain. Repeated exposure to stressful situations for animals cause emotional distress, neurotic complexes, dramatic behavioral changes.

This is evidence that animals can feel pain, something I never denied, and that they can learn to recognise sources of danger - which I also never denied. It is not evidence of emotion. If you stepped on my toe repeatedly, I would not merely be caused pain and recognise danger, I would also have an emotional response - such as resentment. Not only would I feel that emotion, I would also be able to intellectually analyse it, understand it and rationalise it. Are you suggesting that a cat can do that, and if so you need to provide the evidence.


Dogs play with one another and no sorry that is not hunting strategy/practice when the dog lays on its back and rolls around going 'ARRrgga ARRggguugg ARRGGU' with it's mouth open and stomach exposed while the other dog goes 'ARguu agugugu arrgu' laying next to it with it's mouth open.

How do you know it isn't? Where is your evidence that it is an emotional response, as opposed to an instinctive response of capitulation?


And you have evolved to understand physical pain and emotional distress and evolved to understand what is and isn't necessary in your diet.

Indeed I have. And without supplements of some sort or other, animal products are generally necessary for a healthy balanced diet.

And I also evolved to like the taste of animal meat.


You are not a werewollf. You are not a carnivore.

Nor am I, or you, a herbivore, we are as a species, by dint of our evolution, omnivores. I see no reason to deny that basic biological fact.


oh hey look how small they are compared to other species of animals that regularly eat meat, look at how white they are because there are tons of vegan sources of calcium from whole foods and who cares if you get some calcium from soy-milk (soy milk, soy, you know what soy is right you know where it comes from?)

A ton? Ha. Been gauging on a dark-leaf diet have you? The fact is that, without supplements, such as those artificially built into typical veggie-life-stylist products like soy-milk, you would not have a balanced diet - or at least struggle greatly. As regards teeth, you are manifestly wrong. While humans have less elongated incisors than other species, we most certainly have both our meat teeth and our herbivore teeth - again, because we are omnivores. We certainly do not have a mouth full of molars, multiple stomachs and a digestive system that indicates that we are designed to have a herbivore diet. The fact that you suggest otherwise is tantamount of prima face evidence that you never passed high school biology - and that if you did, standards have fucking slipped.


I don't know, I am so god damned healthy vegan. I drink like a upset person who wants to get drunk, used to smoke, do lots of drugs, work very long days of physical labor but the vegan diet boosts me right back up and totally keeps me healthy. With whole foods too!

Sure. I have a friend, a vegan too, who can run a half-marathon. Of course, I still beat them even though I drink and smoke, but certainly, with supplements there is no reason why vegans can't survive long and fit lives. The point is that it is a lifestyle choice, and nobody should have to deny the way they were built to suit the half-baked pseudo-scientific claptrap of people like you with a fucking agenda to push. If people want to go vegan, then whatever - if they want to drink soy-milk and eat quorn, probably the most disgusting shit masquerading as food ever developed, and take supplements, then all power to them. Its a lifestyle choice.



WOW OH MY GOD





I am printing this and framing it on my wall.

Why?

My position is built on material realities and actual empirical evidence as I understand it, not self-righteous backslapping and speculation. If a gradual move towards a more vegetarian diet will help prevent deforestation, unnecessary flooding, and climate change, then I'm all for it. But these are actual human concerns, not the shit you are banging on about. See the difference?


knowing that cows have feelings and that we have the ability to abolish those industries of torture and murder because they are unnecessary industries

Why not up stakes and call it genocide?

[Glitchcraft]

Originally Posted by Mari3l
other animals that feel the same or similar spectrum of emotional pain

OK OK I get that animals feel pain.

I am trying to understand what relevance animal rights is to a workers revolution?
Not is it right or wrong or morally objectionable or does a duck feel love but where does it relate to the struggle against capitalism?

I don't see Animal rights mentioned in Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Rosenburg, Stalin, Mao, Kautsky, Che, Bakunin or even Chomsky.
Where does animal rights fit into the struggle against capitalism?

Do you vegans/veggies think that vegetarianism is necessary for a socialist revolution?
Do you think that vegetarianism will become the practice in a post capitalist society?

Why do I never get an answer to this question? No veggie has ever given me a decent response to this, so please tell me.

What is the importance of Animal Rights in the Struggle against Capitalism?

[Ele'ill]

Of course you have. And in that case you should have no trouble providing a short precis of the evidence.


This is evidence that animals can feel pain, something I never denied, and that they can learn to recognise sources of danger - which I also never denied. It is not evidence of emotion. If you stepped on my toe repeatedly, I would not merely be caused pain and recognise danger, I would also have an emotional response - such as resentment.

(if you do this to other animals they react the same way, resentment, recognition, emotion, towards sources of danger and discomfort) :rolleyes:



Not only would I feel that emotion, I would also be able to intellectually analyse it, understand it and rationalise it. Are you suggesting that a cat can do that, and if so you need to provide the evidence.

I'm suggesting who cares. That isn't the measure of emotional distress or physical pain, it has nothing to do with my argument against animal industry. Do they feel emotional distress and physical pain? Yes. That is the point. I don't care whether a cat could put their feelings into a song and pull lead vocals for a band. That is completely irrelevant, and is an anthropomorphizing demand on your part. :)




How do you know it isn't? Where is your evidence that it is an emotional response, as opposed to an instinctive response of capitulation?

This asks the question 'what is play' is it actually leisure (i mean for us as humans too) or is it more than that. I think the answer is that it is more than that. But it is enjoyment. Do a google search for fuck's sake.






animal products are generally necessary for a healthy balanced diet.

Simply false.


And I also evolved to like the taste of animal meat.

So am I unevolved for not liking the taste of meat? What about broccoli? Brown rice? :rolleyes:




Nor am I, or you, a herbivore, we are as a species, by dint of our evolution, omnivores. I see no reason to deny that basic biological fact.

but we are intelligent enough to live heathily without animal products and lying about it just makes you look silly




The fact is that, without supplements, such as those artificially built into typical veggie-life-stylist products like soy-milk, you would not have a balanced diet - or at least struggle greatly.

this is completely false



As regards teeth, you are manifestly wrong. While humans have less elongated incisors than other species, we most certainly have both our meat teeth and our herbivore teeth - again, because we are omnivores. We certainly do not have a mouth full of molars, multiple stomachs and a digestive system that indicates that we are designed to have a herbivore diet. The fact that you suggest otherwise is tantamount of prima face evidence that you never passed high school biology - and that if you did, standards have fucking slipped.

No I failed high school biology and a lot of other classes but anyways we are capable of digesting meat but we do not need it and are intelligent enough to understand the suffering of other creatures enslaved into an industry that is unnecessary.

We don't biologically need meat, we don't need animal industry. Your entire argument falls on us 'needing animal products' and this is false.







Sure. I have a friend, a vegan too, who can run a half-marathon. Of course, I still beat them even though I drink and smoke, but certainly, with supplements there is no reason why vegans can't survive long and fit lives.

Supplements are not necessary.




The point is that it is a lifestyle choice, and nobody should have to deny the way they were built to suit the half-baked pseudo-scientific claptrap of people like you with a fucking agenda to push.

Tell me, what is my agenda.




If people want to go vegan, then whatever - if they want to drink soy-milk and eat quorn, probably the most disgusting shit masquerading as food ever developed, and take supplements, then all power to them. Its a lifestyle choice.

I don't drink soy milk or eat quorn.





Why?

My position is built on material realities and actual empirical evidence as I understand it,

it must be painful at first to come to understand that a academic failure like myself can slice through your 'evidence as you understand it' like a hot katana through a warm tub of Earth Balance vegan butter





not self-righteous backslapping and speculation. If a gradual move towards a more vegetarian diet will help prevent deforestation, unnecessary flooding, and climate change, then I'm all for it. But these are actual human concerns, not the shit you are banging on about. See the difference?

why not to end the pain of other animals?




Why not up stakes and call it genocide?

missed opportunity for a good steak joke here which would have been more worthwhile than what you actually posted

[Hermes]

I thought this was a pretty interesting site from the biology side of things, but I really don't know enough about biology to substantiate it or anything

http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

[Ele'ill]

OK OK I get that animals feel pain.

I am trying to understand what relevance animal rights is to a workers revolution?

I often wonder what the relevance of a lot of the proposed revolutionary strategy is to workers or what a workers revolution is



I don't see Animal rights mentioned in Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Rosenburg, Stalin, Mao, Kautsky, Che, Bakunin or even Chomsky.

when learning kills the act of thinking..


Where does animal rights fit into the struggle against capitalism?

I'm not really interested in animal rights




Do you vegans/veggies think that vegetarianism is necessary for a socialist revolution?

I don't think diet is necessary for revolt, revolution, although I think understanding the similarities between humans and other animals, and human industry and animals locked away in industry, and criticisms of industry, society, and civilization is relevant and seems to always just get accepted as what will be part of some new world



Do you think that vegetarianism will become the practice in a post capitalist society?

I hope everyone switches to a vegan diet and lives a healthy life in harmony with the earth.


Why do I never get an answer to this question? No veggie has ever given me a decent response to this, so please tell me.

What is the importance of Animal Rights in the Struggle against Capitalism?

Again I don't think animal rights is really what we're talking about I think animal liberation is a much better and fully encompassing phrase. I think it's important in dialogue for the reasons I listed above. I think it has environmental impact, the shifting or abolishing of industry as an actual possibility (who would have thought), the challenging of otherwise status quo societal norms, so on and so forth.

[o well this is ok I guess]

I didn't suggest any such thing, even if you are to take my comments out of the facetious context in which they were clearly written. Ridiculous. You say that vegans ought not be taken seriously, then up and say that you yourself ought not be, either?


The fact is that, without supplements, such as those artificially built into typical veggie-life-stylist products like soy-milk, you would not have a balanced diet - or at least struggle greatly. Well, what's wrong with that? Using supplements? Why do you characterize it as cheating?

[Glitchcraft]

uh.. ok Animal liberation then. You still haven't really answered my question.


I often wonder what the relevance of a lot of the proposed revolutionary strategy is to workers or what a workers revolution is

What is the "proposed revolutionary strategy" you have a problem understanding?
Because this is not an answer, it's a deflection.
A workers revolution is when the workers have democratic control over the means of production. When private property has been abolished. What do you not understand there?

There are lots of proposed strategies, pick one and I'll try and explain it to you.
Popular points of contention are:
Vanguard party, Dictatorship of the Proletariat, Electoral Politics, Transitional Demands just to name a few.

What or how is Animal Liberation relevant to the workers taking power?
How does being a vegan empower the working class?

Your answer as far as i can tell is:

I don't understand revolutionary programs.... "I don't think diet is necessary for revolt, revolution", "the shifting or abolishing of industry as an actual possibility" and the "challenging of otherwise status quo societal norms, so on and so forth."

you will have to forgive me if I still can't figure out what you mean. It's relevance is that you can challenge the status quo? It's relevance is you can shift or abolish an industry? It has an environmental impact? So does everything else. Plenty of abhorrent things challenge the status quo, it doesn't make them a sound program for social change.


I don't think diet is necessary for revolt, revolution, although I think understanding the similarities between humans and other animals, and human industry and animals locked away in industry, and criticisms of industry, society, and civilization is relevant and seems to always just get accepted as what will be part of some new world

can you say this in a more simple way please. I just don't get this at all. It's like a jumbled run on sentence. You think diet isn't necessary, understanding animals and it always gets accepted as part of some new world? what?

I would say that under private appropriation animals will never be liberated, profit trumps all in the end.
I would say that the only way to even start talking about the treatment of animals is to remove the profit incentive that leads to inhumane treatment.
Why wouldn't you advocate veggies becoming socialists so these problems can be addressed, why always the other way around.

I just still do not see how being a meat eater and a revolutionary are mutually exclusive.
Or how or why it even matters what you eat. What matters is whose side are you on? Pro revolution or anti revolution. Are you on our side? Because a lot of us are trying to put an end to a horrifying system of racist imperialism and replace it with a sane manageable system that meets the needs of the people. You seem to just be on Team Animal, workers be damned if they eat meat.
No sympathy to the revolutionary omnivores that are trying to save the world? Just condemnation?

Let me ask you this: Who is more valuable to you; a vegetarian executive of the state apparatus or a omnivorous working class union member?

Where does vegetarianism fit into the workers struggle?
I don't believe it does. I don't think it has any relevance what so ever.
I only say this not because I am not sympathetic to the suffering of animals but to put it in context.
Diet has nothing to do with revolution.

[o well this is ok I guess]

From what I understand, he is not saying that veganism is a step towards workers revolution or mass trade unionism or whatever else, but that it is a separate (but no less relevant) issue.

I mean cmon pretty sure we all have things we care about other than revolutionary politics.

[Glitchcraft]

From what I understand, he is not saying that veganism is a step towards workers revolution or mass trade unionism or whatever else, but that it is a separate (but no less relevant) issue.

I mean cmon pretty sure we all have things we care about other than revolutionary politics.

Yeah I like model trains and the Oakland Raiders but I don't accuse people of being murderers if they are 49er fans or prefer slot cars.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Yeah I like model trains and the Oakland Raiders but I don't accuse people of being murderers if they are 49er fans or prefer slot cars. But then again neither of those hobbies involves eating a once living thing.

[Glitchcraft]

But then again neither of those hobbies involves eating a once living thing.

OK I guess I'm out of the revolution then. Let me know when Team People is on again.
Since that's my team. I support revolutionaries that want to free the working class and end starvation and imperialist war. You just work on that Team Animal thing and keep condemning the rest of us, that's working great for your cause.

I wouldn't care so much if the language used by veggies wasn't so aggressive and accusatory but it's always murder and evil and what not. It's hard to listen to what anyone is saying when they just inconsistently babble about animals and don't actually address a legitimate question.

But go ahead, scream bloody murder over every chicken sandwich, I no longer care. You've made me go from "I'm willing to listen" to "Your just trolling". If you really cared about it you would discuss it civilly and make some kind of logical points.

[o well this is ok I guess]

OK I guess I'm out of the revolution then. Let me know when Team People is on again.
Since that's my team. I support revolutionaries that want to free the working class and end starvation and imperialist war. You just work on that Team Animal thing and keep condemning the rest of us, that's working great for your cause.

I wouldn't care so much if the language used by veggies wasn't so aggressive and accusatory but it's always murder and evil and what not. It's hard to listen to what anyone is saying when they just inconsistently babble about animals and don't actually address a legitimate question.

But go ahead, scream bloody murder over every chicken sandwich, I no longer care. You've made me go from "I'm willing to listen" to "Your just trolling". If you really cared about it you would discuss it civilly and make some kind of logical points. It's not about being out of the revolution. I never said you gotta be vegan to be a revolutionary, nor do I think Mari3l did. I explicitly said that the question of diet is a separate issue. How could you say that you were at a "willing to listen" point, when it's quite obvious you haven't been reading well at all?


but it's always murder and evil and what not. The only one saying that is you.

[Glitchcraft]

It's not about being out of the revolution. I never said you gotta be vegan to be a revolutionary, nor do I think Mari3l did. I explicitly said that the question of diet is a separate issue. How could you say that you were at a "willing to listen" point, when it's quite obvious you haven't been reading well at all?

The only one saying that is you.

Because I have been reading this thread.

Originally Posted by Mari3L
We don't need meat. Some people desire it. Some people are desensitized to and desire really terrible things. Fuck them.

Originally Posted by Bea Arthur
Shame on the people here who are joking about eating hamburgers. Do you not understand that this makes you complicit in the mistreatment, the murder of animals? I am guessing none of you have pets or understand the beauty of nature. Selfish.

You eat animals because you obviously haven't considered whether animals feel pain, have personalities, or deserve not to be slaughtered for nourishment that can be provided in other ways. It is barbaric and will come to an end under socialism.

Originally Posted by Bea Arthur
This makes you a person whose values are inconsistent with his or her behavior.

Originally Posted by Mari3L
oh jesus christ the last thing we need is another larper

would you butcher a human being and consume them, or buy one butchered because society says that is what nourishes you

Originally Posted by Mari3L
just because others are better and superior at reading than you

Maybe this last one applies to you. If you had read any of my posts you will see I've been asking the same question and not gotten a response. Just Babble.

What I wanted to know was, what is the revolutionary relevance of veganism.
What I got was babble.
I asked the same question more clearly and got more babble.
I asked for clarification and got babble.
I thought Mari3L made some interesting points I hadn't considered before and I thought she or he might have some commentary on my question but all I got was
"I often wonder what the relevance of a lot of the proposed revolutionary strategy is to workers or what a workers revolution is"

To your credit you did say diet is a separate (but no less relevant) issue. That was the first addressing of my question. Not from the people I was asking but still.
Your wrong when you say "no one is saying that" and your wrong when you say I haven't been reading this thread.

"I mean cmon pretty sure we all have things we care about other than revolutionary politics. "

Except Mari3L, the person I am asking, does say that vegetarianism or veganism has a revolutionary context. I can't understand what that context is but I was trying to.

I'm just the bad guy for trying to figure out what it is. Possibly even a barbaric Larper who is complicit in murder. Or didn't you read the thread.

[Ele'ill]

What is the "proposed revolutionary strategy" you have a problem understanding?

I didn't say I have a problem understanding them. I said I have a problem seeing the relevance of various programs and question if they would actually be beneficial.



Because this is not an answer, it's a deflection.
A workers revolution is when the workers have democratic control over the means of production. When private property has been abolished. What do you not understand there?

There are lots of proposed strategies, pick one and I'll try and explain it to you.
Popular points of contention are:
Vanguard party, Dictatorship of the Proletariat, Electoral Politics, Transitional Demands just to name a few.I hope your entire post and the rest of page 8 isn't going to be based off of you misreading or misunderstanding what I posted. If you are unfamiliar with certain ultra left / post left theory I can direct you to further reading in PM.


What or how is Animal Liberation relevant to the workers taking power?
How does being a vegan empower the working class?When have I said that it did? So what if it doesn't? Just generally I find it difficult to understand how we can talk about our own species (humans) feeling pain and distress and how terrible it is and turn around and literally saying 'oh who cares about those other beings who also feel that we don't give a shit about that'. That is weird moralist quasi-religious cult shit.




Your answer as far as i can tell is:

I don't understand revolutionary programs.... "I don't think diet is necessary for revolt, revolution", "the shifting or abolishing of industry as an actual possibility" and the "challenging of otherwise status quo societal norms, so on and so forth."Animal industry can be criticized and action can be taken against it. It can be a part of radical dialogue tied directly into broader environmental issues and broader criticisms of industry and society in general.



you will have to forgive me if I still can't figure out what you mean. It's relevance is that you can challenge the status quo? It's relevance is you can shift or abolish an industry? It has an environmental impact? So does everything else. Plenty of abhorrent things challenge the status quo, it doesn't make them a sound program for social change.I don't understand exactly what it is that you are confused about. Animal liberation is not a programme, it is a specific criticism about specific industry and aspect of our current society.


can you say this in a more simple way please. I just don't get this at all. It's like a jumbled run on sentence. You think diet isn't necessary, understanding animals and it always gets accepted as part of some new world? what?

I don't think diet is necessary for revolt, revolution,

I don't think diet has to do with revolution.


although I think understanding the similarities between humans and other animals, and human industry and animals locked away in industry, and criticisms of industry, society, and civilization is relevant and seems to always just get accepted as what will be part of some new world I think the criticisms and theory behind a vegan diet, and animal liberation, have a place in radical dialogue. I think they coherently challenge what is regularly accepted but flawed radical theory.




I would say that under private appropriation animals will never be liberated, profit trumps all in the end.
I would say that the only way to even start talking about the treatment of animals is to remove the profit incentive that leads to inhumane treatment.I don't disagree with this


Why wouldn't you advocate veggies becoming socialists so these problems can be addressed, why always the other way around. I never said anything about any of this.


Diet has nothing to do with revolution.I hope my post here clears some things up for you since you are obviously very lost.

[Ele'ill]

OK I guess I'm out of the revolution then. Let me know when Team People is on again.
Since that's my team. I support revolutionaries that want to free the working class and end starvation and imperialist war. You just work on that Team Animal thing and keep condemning the rest of us, that's working great for your cause.

*edit again

I don't think there's any condemnation from radical commie anarco vegan animal liberation folks until people start accusing them of doing shit they don't do and saying things they never said, holding positions they never held etc..







I wouldn't care so much if the language used by veggies wasn't so aggressive and accusatory but it's always murder and evil and what not. It's hard to listen to what anyone is saying when they just inconsistently babble about animals and don't actually address a legitimate question.I can see similarities between animals locked away and suffering pain and distress for their entire lives. As of right now you don't know if I am talking about meat/fur/school/prison/work.



But go ahead, scream bloody murder over every chicken sandwich, I no longer care. You've made me go from "I'm willing to listen" to "Your just trolling". If you really cared about it you would discuss it civilly and make some kind of logical points.okay be a gigantic baby

[Invader Zim]

(if you do this to other animals they react the same way, resentment, recognition, emotion, towards sources of danger and discomfort)

Again, where is the evidence of resentment?


I'm suggesting who cares.

Given that it is a central premise of your 'argument', and you keep repeating the claim, manifestly you care.


That isn't the measure of emotional distress

The ability to both hold and analyse 'emotional' distress are the fundamental tenets necessary to actually measure its very existence.


Do they feel emotional distress and physical pain? Yes.

So you claim, but you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever of the former and nobody denies the latter.


This asks the question 'what is play' is it actually leisure (i mean for us as humans too) or is it more than that. I think the answer is that it is more than that. But it is enjoyment. Do a google search for fuck's sake.

I'll take that as capitulation on the point that you have no evidence.


Simply false.

Aside from meat, and supplements, key nutrients and vitamins, vitamin B12 in particular, can be difficult to acquire. Why you try to deny this is beyond me. B12 can be acquired from yeast products like marmite, but that stuff tastes disgusting.


No I failed high school biology and a lot of other classes but anyways we are capable of digesting meat but we do not need it and are intelligent enough to understand the suffering of other creatures enslaved into an industry that is unnecessary.

We don't biologically need meat, we don't need animal industry. Your entire argument falls on us 'needing animal products' and this is false.

Actually we do need meat biologically for a balanced diet, the only reason people can now have a vegan diet is that, both scientifically and technologically, we now, in very recent years relatively speaking, we can artificially fortify products to makeup for the deficiencies in your otherwise biologically bunk lifestyle choice. But this returns us to the question of precisely why the rest of us should give up what comes to us naturally as a basic biological imperative. This again returns us to the question of whether animals should be viewed in human terms, which is essentially your argument -as demonstrated by your application of terms like 'murder' and 'slavery' in terms of animals.


So am I unevolved for not liking the taste of meat?

No, and I never suggested any such thing. However, you are ill-advised to manufacture such a transparent straw man.


but we are intelligent enough to live heathily without animal products and lying about it just makes you look silly

I never suggested that we couldn't. My point is that we shouldn't have to. We are, by our very nature, omnivores. That we now have the technology and scientific knowledge to allow privileged western societies to escape that reality is not an argument that we should. And appeals to thus far unproven claims of 'emotional distress' is not a valid argument. I've highlighted a few potential reasons why it might be, in the long term, advisable to become less meat dependent - but they are based on material concerns - not your wishy washy animal-rights appeals to emotion. But that is because I'm a socialist and humanist, not an idealist. Don't get me wrong, I think that a lot of the ways that humans treat animals is a cruel disgrace, but your first world centrism and holier-than-thou pretentions don't cut the mustard - or, rather, the vegan butter.


this is completely false

Amazingly enough, not all nutrients grow on trees.


I don't drink soy milk or eat quorn.

Then you must lead an even more boring existence than I had imagined. But in any case, without supplements, and without fortified products, such as the ones described above, it is difficult to acquire key nutrients. To go back to vitamin B12, which is particularly important for pregnant women and infants, because the vitamin is an essential ingredient in developing a healthy nerve system, without these products, supplements (which comprises a vast portion of the worlds population as it stands) or meat humanity runs the risk of damaging its children health.

From the horses mouth (yeah, I'm that funny):

http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/b12.php

Incidentally, I chuckled at your furious backpeddling away from your laughable claim that humans are naturally herbivores.


Tell me, what is my agenda.

You want to push your ascientific lifestyle choice, based on a half-assed grasp of human physiology onto the rest of us based on your subjective perspective on morality - and employ an equally half-assed grasp of animal physiology to lend scientific credence to those moral choices.

Your 'points' are, of course, not a legitimate argument when actual material, provable, arguments exist to suggest that humanity should begin a gradual process of reducing meat consumption. And that is the issue I have with you, not the over-riding point about reducing meat consumption, but your moral objections which do not float.


it must be painful at first to come to understand that a academic failure like myself can slice through your 'evidence as you understand it' like a hot katana through a warm tub of Earth Balance vegan butter

You have your head so far lodged up your behind it is truly extraordinary. You haven't 'sliced' through any argument raised by any contributor to this thread. All you have done is spray unsourced platitudes as a substitute for either evidence or purpose. This has nothing to do with academic credentials, instead the fundamental process involved in the construction of an argument.


why not to end the pain of other animals?

An interesting question, but a more important one is why should I, or anybody else, place the livelihood of a farmyard animal above a human being?


missed opportunity for a good steak joke here which would have been more worthwhile than what you actually posted

It looks like you're trying to be funny and cutting - but have failed. Why don't you leave the jokes to those people with wit and, in the meantime, run along and provide all that evidence you have thus far failed to deliver?

[Doflamingo]

So wait... McDonalds isn't totally synthetic? I don't believe you

[Quail]

Many animal products are supplemented too (in fact the animals that people eat are often given food supplements - if the animals themselves had nutritional deficiencies they wouldn't provide a good source of those nutrients), and many people who eat animal products have nutritional deficiencies. I don't really buy into the idea of a vegan diet being the most "natural" - but there are definitely health benefits to reducing the consumption of animal products, and personally I feel great on a vegan diet (although it is also possible to be vegan and just eat junk). That said, it is possible to live perfectly healthily on a vegan diet, even for athletes, pregnant women, young children, etc., so it seems to me that as a species we've got to the point where it is completely unnecessary to keep livestock (in the west, at least). Meat and other animal products are really just eaten for pleasure, even though they cause great suffering to the animals that people use to produce them. I don't think that a few moments of someone's pleasure is worth the suffering these products cause.

As for the question of actual suffering, you concede that animals feel pain. However they also show more complex signs of distress. For example, when the calves of dairy cows are taken away, they mourn their loss. When dogs have been abused they are often suspicious of people who look like their abusive owner. I read an article a while back about chickens showing evidence of empathy. It's convenient to brush these aside as mere products of evolution, but I think the reality is that animals are more intelligent and have a greater capacity to feel than people give them credit for. Which I suppose makes sense, because acknowledging their intelligence and capacity for emotion might make that burger leave a bad taste in your mouth.