In Vitro Meat: A Revolution or Abomination?
@littlemissmistress (187)
United States
March 22, 2007 5:27pm CST
“In fifty years hence, we will escape the absurdity of growing a whole chicken in order to eat the breast or wing by growing these parts separately under a suitable medium.”- Winston Churchill, 1932.
In 1932, what Churchill had said was considered science fiction, but little did he know that seventy-four years later these developments would actually begin, resulting in a substance called “in-vitro” or cultured meat. Today, scientists are further developing this concept as a meat alternative, but would*you* eat it?
Basically, a cell is taken from a cow, chicken, tiger, eagle, whatever, and is cloned, stretched on a scaffold, and soaked in nutrients. Then it is cooked and eaten a boneless meat.
I, personally, would have no problem eating it. I'm not a vegetarian, but in this process, no animals are harmed. It also takes up less space and produces less waste.
So what do*you* think?
2 responses
@Fargale (760)
• Brazil
23 Mar 07
I'd LOVE to see that in the stores as soon as possible! Especially since what I really appreciate are meats without bones, visible fat, and all that messiness usually found in our naturally grown meat. I can see absolutely no downside to this area of research. It'll please meat-eaters and vegans alike. =D
@willfe (149)
• United States
23 Mar 07
Sign me up -- there are ultimately fewer steps involved in producing this meat, which translates directly to fewer chances for humans to screw it up (on purpose or by accident). It'll end up being cheaper, and much safer, and given enough time they'll work out how to "grow" each kind of cut we're used to munching on so there won't be a bit of difference (in taste, texture, color, or cooking methods) between the "real cow meat" and the cultured stuff.



