Meat for the squeamish

[EdEarl]

Only €250,000 ($338,000) per 140g patty.

 

The lab-generated “schmeat” is derived from animal cells, so it is actually meat, not a meat substitute.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2013/06/06/technology-schmeat-in-vitro-meat-burger.html

[Phi for All]

I really hope the name "schmeat" doesn't stick. I think that would stop many people who might otherwise think this is a pretty fantastic idea. The prefix just makes it sound bad, schlock means low quality, shyster means disreputable, sham, shitty, it's not a prefix you want ahead of your meat.

 

I think it's a great idea. I want to know how to grow my own. Others can make beer and wine, I want a home meat growers vat.

 

This can be grown just the way you want it to be, and nobody from PETA will be frowning at you through the window while you eat it. There will be those who claim it isn't as good as meat off the hoof, and that's fine, they can worry about whether their burger was humanely slaughtered as they listen to their vinyl records and drive their muscle cars.

[MonDie]

A lot of vegetarians think meat itself is gross, and the way it's grown might not change that. It's still animal flesh.

[Phi for All]

A lot of vegetarians think meat itself is gross, and the way it's grown might not change that. It's still animal flesh.

 

I doubt this is aimed at those vegetarians. There are plenty of vegetarians who's objections to meat are the sustainability issues and the slaughterhouse process. They'd love a steak if the fear, pain and other moral issues are removed. It's hard to see lab generated meat as something that needs us to act as its voice.

 

It's tasty protein, with the potential to be whatever we want it to be. Another step towards being able to feed ourselves and operate offplanet, or in places on Earth that are inhospitable to livestock and farming.

[Moontanman]

I really hope the name "schmeat" doesn't stick. I think that would stop many people who might otherwise think this is a pretty fantastic idea. The prefix just makes it sound bad, schlock means low quality, shyster means disreputable, sham, shitty, it's not a prefix you want ahead of your meat.

 

I think it's a great idea. I want to know how to grow my own. Others can make beer and wine, I want a home meat growers vat.

 

This can be grown just the way you want it to be, and nobody from PETA will be frowning at you through the window while you eat it. There will be those who claim it isn't as good as meat off the hoof, and that's fine, they can worry about whether their burger was humanely slaughtered as they listen to their vinyl records and drive their muscle cars.

 

 

Hey! I resemble that remark...

 

I have often thought about the potential of genetically modified organisms to produce meat, can you imagine a banana like fruit that produces a shrimp tail instead of a banana? Or a chunk of crab meat or maybe beef but it will be a long time until we grow chicken breasts on plants i think, this is good start though...

[Phi for All]

Hey! I resemble that remark...

 

Well, I'd need to taste it first, before making any kind of judgement, but I remember back when CDs first came out to replace vinyl and tape for recording. I was blown away by the high quality sound, and I couldn't understand why there were those who thought vinyl was better. The argument always seemed to me like an Appeal to Tradition fallacy. No one could make me understand why hearing all the reality on vinyl was preferable to the clarity on compact disc.

 

This lab grown meat only needs to be as good as regular meat in order to be immensely better. I do think about humane treatment of livestock and also accept the consequences of being an omnivore, and I would welcome an alternative that made economical sense (whoops, not quite yet) and removed the ethical objections.

 

Since I think taste is probably a factor that's somewhat controllable in a lab situation, I'll bet the tough part is texture. A good piece of beef has to feel right as you chew. It can't be stringy or too chewy, although not enough chew makes it seem processed.

 

There could be a lot of factors involved that make a piece of meat off the hoof better than lab grown meat. It could be that the act of walking that meat around for a few years on a live animal before it's eaten makes all the difference. But I think they'll be able to tailor this lab grown meat and improve on the original. Muscle cars may have been cool and fast, but they broke down a lot and didn't have as many cool features as modern cars. Lab grown meat, engineered just the way you want it, could solve a lot of problems.

[EdEarl]

 

There could be a lot of factors involved that make a piece of meat off the hoof better than lab grown meat. It could be that the act of walking that meat around for a few years on a live animal before it's eaten makes all the difference. But I think they'll be able to tailor this lab grown meat and improve on the original. Muscle cars may have been cool and fast, but they broke down a lot and didn't have as many cool features as modern cars. Lab grown meat, engineered just the way you want it, could solve a lot of problems.

Cattle walking around makes their meat tough, but if that's what you want, I'm sure labs can attach electrodes to it as it grows in vats, shock it periodically, and make it tough for you.

[Moontanman]

Well, I'd need to taste it first, before making any kind of judgement, but I remember back when CDs first came out to replace vinyl and tape for recording. I was blown away by the high quality sound, and I couldn't understand why there were those who thought vinyl was better. The argument always seemed to me like an Appeal to Tradition fallacy. No one could make me understand why hearing all the reality on vinyl was preferable to the clarity on compact disc.

So I guess you prefer an electronic book to a nice leather bound book you can hold, smell and put on a shelf in your library to be experienced over and over?

 

This lab grown meat only needs to be as good as regular meat in order to be immensely better. I do think about humane treatment of livestock and also accept the consequences of being an omnivore, and I would welcome an alternative that made economical sense (whoops, not quite yet) and removed the ethical objections.

 

Since I think taste is probably a factor that's somewhat controllable in a lab situation, I'll bet the tough part is texture. A good piece of beef has to feel right as you chew. It can't be stringy or too chewy, although not enough chew makes it seem processed.

I have to admit to being a bit of a savage when it comes to meat but if it tasted good and had a decent texture and nutrition I could change my mind.

 

There could be a lot of factors involved that make a piece of meat off the hoof better than lab grown meat. It could be that the act of walking that meat around for a few years on a live animal before it's eaten makes all the difference. But I think they'll be able to tailor this lab grown meat and improve on the original. Muscle cars may have been cool and fast, but they broke down a lot and didn't have as many cool features as modern cars. Lab grown meat, engineered just the way you want it, could solve a lot of problems.

Muscle cars... nope, modern cars just don't compare with the gut feeling of a muscle car, kinda like flying in a WW2 corsair or a learjet, one is for comfort the other is for the raw feeling of power, the vibration, the feeling of power than shakes your whole body. My uncles built muscle cars when i was young, nothing like the raw power, the noise of the mechanical parts of the engine, hearing the explosions of the pistons, the raw power of raising the front wheels in the air... apples and oranges i think...

[Phi for All]

So I guess you prefer an electronic book to a nice leather bound book you can hold, smell and put on a shelf in your library to be experienced over and over?

 

It depends where I am. I like my regular books at home, but you can't beat an e-book for traveling. And for me, the story is why I read a fiction book or watch a movie. Once I get into a story, holding anything is a distraction, much less smelling something that's not part of the story. For me, reading isn't about the media, it's about what the author wanted me to know.

 

I get the leather-bound book appeal, and I enjoy it a lot, but it's not the most important part to me. It's not the best part of the experience, and in some instances it can be detrimental. One of my favorite things to do is find a warm rock next to a rushing river and sit down to read for an hour or two. Not a good place for either an e-book or a leather-bound. I don't feel comfortable, can't get into the story if I'm worried an expensive book will get wet. So in that instance, a paperback is my preference.

 

I have to admit to being a bit of a savage when it comes to meat but if it tasted good and had a decent texture and nutrition I could change my mind.

 

Yeah, I can imagine a whole lot of ways a lab-grown piece of meat might be pretty gross. But the fact that they can do it at all means they can do it better if they keep trying. I want to grow my own strip steaks that grill to perfection and taste like filet mignon, but I suppose in the beginning we'll have to settle for something more basic. Maybe lab-grown brisket with a good dry rub, slow-cooked for half a day and falling off the... ooops, no bones!

 

Muscle cars... nope, modern cars just don't compare with the gut feeling of a muscle car, kinda like flying in a WW2 corsair or a learjet, one is for comfort the other is for the raw feeling of power, the vibration, the feeling of power than shakes your whole body. My uncles built muscle cars when i was young, nothing like the raw power, the noise of the mechanical parts of the engine, hearing the explosions of the pistons, the raw power of raising the front wheels in the air... apples and oranges i think...

 

Again, I get the appeal. As a hobby, I understand the attraction. As a practical, working solution to my transportation needs, I can't afford all the down time in the shop. Even when those cars were fairly new, they spent a lot more time at the mechanic's than modern cars do. I will gladly trade the power and the body-shaking for reliability and efficiency. I have other ways to get my "gut feelings" on.

 

And I think, if lab-grown meat gathers a market, there will be people who will remember "real" meat with nostalgia, forgetting all those times you got a bad cut with too much gristle. Depending on how lab-grown meat tastes, I might be one of them, but I hold high hopes that this will mean better protein sources for millions, better treatment of animals and livestock, and some overdue respect for us omnivores.

[Moontanman]

It depends where I am. I like my regular books at home, but you can't beat an e-book for traveling. And for me, the story is why I read a fiction book or watch a movie. Once I get into a story, holding anything is a distraction, much less smelling something that's not part of the story. For me, reading isn't about the media, it's about what the author wanted me to know.

 

I get the leather-bound book appeal, and I enjoy it a lot, but it's not the most important part to me. It's not the best part of the experience, and in some instances it can be detrimental. One of my favorite things to do is find a warm rock next to a rushing river and sit down to read for an hour or two. Not a good place for either an e-book or a leather-bound. I don't feel comfortable, can't get into the story if I'm worried an expensive book will get wet. So in that instance, a paperback is my preference.

I do have several vinyl half speed master discs, they were an attempt to expand the dynamic range of vinyl just before CDs began to be made. The sound is great but you have to have a cartridge and turntable capable of reproducing the sound before they became significant improvement (I do) but they still degrade over time just like any other vinyl album. But I still like the sound of my vinyl, I have several hundred of them, the ritual of cleaning the album each time it's played, the familiarity of the effort involved... I don't know hard to explain but i have just as many CDs as well (and laser discs and a laser disc player which to some extent can be the best of both worlds)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I can imagine a whole lot of ways a lab-grown piece of meat might be pretty gross. But the fact that they can do it at all means they can do it better if they keep trying. I want to grow my own strip steaks that grill to perfection and taste like filet mignon, but I suppose in the beginning we'll have to settle for something more basic. Maybe lab-grown brisket with a good dry rub, slow-cooked for half a day and falling off the... ooops, no bones!

 

 

 

 

The more I think of it the better it sounds but I still hope for the plant that has meat as fruit, lol

 

 

 

Again, I get the appeal. As a hobby, I understand the attraction. As a practical, working solution to my transportation needs, I can't afford all the down time in the shop. Even when those cars were fairly new, they spent a lot more time at the mechanic's than modern cars do. I will gladly trade the power and the body-shaking for reliability and efficiency. I have other ways to get my "gut feelings" on.

 

 

Of course muscle cars were terrible for transportation but for profiling...

 

 

 

 

 

And I think, if lab-grown meat gathers a market, there will be people who will remember "real" meat with nostalgia, forgetting all those times you got a bad cut with too much gristle. Depending on how lab-grown meat tastes, I might be one of them, but I hold high hopes that this will mean better protein sources for millions, better treatment of animals and livestock, and some overdue respect for us omnivores.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think there is a happy medium in this, you don't want the meat to be too perfect, it should have some fat, gristle, and maybe some of the membranes real meat has....

Edited July 3, 2013 by Moontanman

[Royston]

I really hope the name "schmeat" doesn't stick. I think that would stop many people who might otherwise think this is a pretty fantastic idea.

 

It is slightly off putting. It's impossible to use a name that distinguishes it from regular meat, without reminding the consumer that it's produced differently. But Schmeat is a bad choice. Maybe something like 'morally modified meat' or Mmmeat.

[Phi for All]

Maybe something like 'morally modified meat' or Mmmeat.

FTW.

 

The ad copy practically writes itself. I'm thinking we have Tony the Tiger renounce cereal and start being the spokestiger for Mmmeat!

[Moontanman]

Gives mystery meat a whole new meaning...

[MonDie]

It's a shame that the organic movement will inevitably oppose Mmmeat.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Mondays Assignment: Die

[Phi for All]

It's a shame that the organic movement will inevitably oppose Mmmeat.

 

Not unless it's a meat vs vegetable sort of clash. AFAIK, the proteins they use to grow Mmmeat are completely organic, unless I missed something. And once they have the original cells to work with, they can grow more from previously grown cells. Talk about your sustainability.

 

I can easily see brew pubs adding to their menu by including some vats for designer Mmmeats. It may be a while, but with tissue engineering growing new organs for medicine, lab grown Mmmeat will probably not have such a steep learning curve.

[arc]

The history for lab created foods go back a long way. Fresh squeezed vs tang, Cheddar vs Cheez whiz, whipped cream vs cool whip.

 

Using schmeat in hot dogs would probably be a lateral move in texture and taste.

 

Then there is; My baloney has a first name it's S-C-H-M. . . . . .

[EdEarl]

It may lead to small scale ranching. Just bag the grass clippings and store them in the garage. Toss some of the grass clippings into the mmmeat vat and harvest a bit of beef every day.

[imatfaal]

And I presume that we could chose the animal we were growing in our vat - I love beef in every form; but I get told not to eat it too much due to the various fats in it. Other meats have broadly similar tastes and have the advantage of being healthier; but suffer from being very hard to get hold of and thus very expensive. Bison/Buffalo for grilling, Ostrich for burgers, Horse (good stuff not old nags) for casseroles etc - all great substitutes and possibly better than beef, just too expensive at the moment.

 

And i love Ed's idea of emptying the grass cuttings into a vat and harvesting a little meat every day or so - not sure how the energy balance would work on that one

[EdEarl]

 

And i love Ed's idea of emptying the grass cuttings into a vat and harvesting a little meat every day or so - not sure how the energy balance would work on that one

I'd be a lousy rancher. I become attached to all the animals I keep, even if they live in a tank.

[Phi for All]

I'd be a lousy rancher. I become attached to all the animals I keep, even if they live in a tank.

 

When it comes time to carve a piece off of Tubby, I'm just going to pretend he's getting sheared or something. He'll forgive me because that's the way I raised him.

[john5746]

And I presume that we could chose the animal we were growing in our vat - I love beef in every form; but I get told not to eat it too much due to the various fats in it. Other meats have broadly similar tastes and have the advantage of being healthier; but suffer from being very hard to get hold of and thus very expensive. Bison/Buffalo for grilling, Ostrich for burgers, Horse (good stuff not old nags) for casseroles etc - all great substitutes and possibly better than beef, just too expensive at the moment.

Not to mention some Salmon or Marlin without mercury or pesticides.

 

Hmm. How about eating ourselves? MyMeat yuck.

[Royston]

Hmm. How about eating ourselves? MyMeat yuck.

 

If the technology became commercially available, I think it would be inevitable somebody would attempt a McMe burger. There's also the possibility of cultivating the cells of endangered species, e.g Snow Leopard sausages, rasher of Rhino, and so on. Needless to say, anything with flesh would be game (no pun intended).

[CharonY]

I would imagine that different (mammalian) cell types will most likely taste very similar (if much at all). Much of the taste is the way the tissue is grown, which again is the result of how the animal lived (including what it is being fed).

 

 

Chances are that those protein products will heavily rely on processing to get any sort of taste into it.

[EdEarl]

It's been test tasted.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23576143

[Phi for All]

It's been test tasted.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23576143

 

Shoot that writer, he didn't give me what I really wanted.

 

I understand the consistency is pretty good, a lack of marbling that may actually be good for us, and it needs seasoning like any other burger (honestly, I couldn't believe the "I miss the salt and pepper" critic; you can always add those, you know, or cook with them next time). I wanted to know what it tasted like, and all we got was, "there is quite some intense taste" and "what was consistently different was flavour". Intense?! Intense good, intense beef, intense bad, intense what? And if it's taste is intense, is that what's making it "consistently different"? I'm at a loss to understand what is meant when one says a single burger's flavor was "consistently different". "Consistently different" from bite to bite, "consistently different" from a regular hamburger patty, what is "consistently different"?

 

It makes me think there is something around which these guys are skating.