If it's not slaughtering animals then its not meat.

Its like suddenly some one comes and calls some thing meat n then we order 2 of those.

Vegetarian is a reasonable alternate if we don't want to slaughter meat. Meat like tasting vegetarian alternate is also reasonable. But lab grown meat is the most unnatural thing. How does eating a thing which is 99% unnatural constitute as eating food. Its just eating a thing.

There is a crowd which wants to avoid as much artificial things in food and eat natural food and there is a crowd which wants to eat 100% artificial thing like lab grown meat.

I wonder which crowd will win in the end.

Have you seen farm raised chickens and cows?

I would argue that there is nothing natural about that either. The modern farm animal wouldn't survive in the wild. They are bred to grow at insane rates, are fed hormones, and get too heavy to be mobile. Not to mention, what impact this has on the nutritional content and chemical content of our meats, and what impact they are having on us.

If you are concerned about eating naturally, I think you should start allocating time in your day to hunting for wild food. Nothing about the human diet is "natural" anymore.

Poorly growing cattle is a real problem, The more people stop purchasing such products and move towards responsibly sourced and grown chicken or other animals that provide meat this problem can be solved. But why not work towards such a right solution and look for shortcut and artificial solutions like lab grown meat.

How can a lab grown meat and a animal that naturally grow be one and the same?

Arthanari, I've noticed you're pushing this idea of artificial ingredients being added to the meat.

Genuine question, are you talking about certain lab grown meat products vs others? Look at this excerpt from a wired article [1]: At Finless Foods, they take a bit of fish meat and filter it for a particular kind of cell, not so much stem cells but stem-like cells, what they’re calling progenitor cells. “We're looking for cells that have the ability to differentiate into different lineages,” says Selden. “So we're looking for cells that are stem enough.”

The idea is to trick these cells into thinking they’re still in their owner. So by feeding them nutrients like salts and sugars, Finless can get the cells to turn into muscles or fat or connective tissue. Think of it like sourdough yeast: Once you’ve got a starter strain, you can keep making a distinctive bread. “Once each of these companies has a cell line going,” says Selden, “they never have to go back to the initial animal.”

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/lab-grown-meat/

>> Cultured meat production requires a preservative, such as sodium benzoate, to protect the growing meat from yeast and fungus. Collagen powder, xanthan gum, mannitol and cochineal could be used in different ways during the process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultured_meat

This is what wikipedia says.

They are all bad for health and simply used to extend the life time of a product beyond its natural lifetime so that the seller does not loose the money and with no other healthy intent.

https://www.glutenfreeschool.com/2014/06/10/what-is-xanthan-...

15 grams or not. Why eat it when there can be better choices.

The whole process is artificial.

But with that rationale, so is our current factory farming process.

Animals don't naturally graze, they are fed all the food they need. They don't naturally die. They are killed. They aren't naturally conceived, they are inseminated.

Where does the "natural" absolutism end?

So instead of working on improving this process we are totally jumping ship to a artificial process? So basically we have given up on such a simple task of raising good cattle which our ancestors have been doing for centuries because some scientists found some cool trick to multiply cells in the lab and are looking for ways to push their cool inventions on the masses to feel good and important?

What exactly are you referring to with "99% unnatural"? My understanding of lab grown meat is that it is intended (ideally) to be equivalent to meat that you would obtain through traditional means so the difference is in the production method, not the product.

It is artificial because it's made by humans. If it gives the same product with a significantly reduced negative impact on the environment then I'm all for it (although I would agree that people should actually try and eat less meat too). What's your objection to the process being artificial?

I don't know what you mean by "not slaughtered, not meat". Can you please elaborate?

What is meat? Can you please elaborate?

Not before you answer the question without asking one.

Agreed. I’d prefer it if it otherwise the same (taste/nutrients).

So basically you would prefer to eat any artificial thing which matches the taste and nutrient or a natural food?

Hardly anything natural about the animals (or even fruits and vegetables) we eat. They’ve all been specially and quite artificially bred for our consumption.

I recently heard a comment on a non-topical podcast along the lines that "everything is GMO". Your favorite herloom tomatoes at the farmer's market, the corn, the lettuce, your dog, the beef, your cat, yourself. GMO is "evolution, faster" or at least customised in a lab. If one thinks I should have a fundamental problem with this view, I'd like to hear why.