Yes but regarding food the opposite could also happen. Lab grown meet, better alternatives from plants (e.g. https://simulate.com/) are coming and could lower the price drastically. Also improving plant seeds can make them more resistant to heat/water scarcity

We should eat what requires the fewest resources (water, land), and is completely nutritious for all stages of life: plants, and plants only.

It’s mind boggling how tight the Venn diagram is between People Who Are Fearful of Climate Crisis and People Who Refuse to Stop Eating Animals.

This is true in a lot of places and I agree meat consumption should go down but this is not true everywhere. Animals can convert calories we cannot eat to calories we can eat.

Take dry grasslands for example where you could either herd goats and sheep on what nature provides or grow crops which uses a lot more water and fertilizer than the environment there produces.

This supplies a vast, vast minority of the calories in developed countries. CAFOs, or factory farms, tend to supply animal products to developed countries, and those animals aren’t being sustained on the grasslands. So your point doesn’t really justify the ubiquity of animal consumption.

The GP's point applies even more to factory farms than grazing animals because animal feed can be transported across the globe. It's the agricultural version of specialization.

The vast majority of feed used in factory farms is inedible to humans. The primary ingredient is often the waste product from bioethanol production and distillation [1]. The edible varieties of corn, barley, oats, and alfalfa used in feed aren't that popular with people [2], are mostly produced on land that would otherwise be unproductive, and are mostly used for newborns or in the final stage before slaughter to make the meat fattier and more palatable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distillers_grains

[2] For example, even though barley is a core ingredient to much of the alcohol industry, animal feed still accounts for two thirds of barley consumption. Most of the rest of the barley ends up in animal feed in the form of distillers grains.

When you consider arability constraints and nutritional efficiency, meat is more efficient and less destructive than plants in many cases. Soy production, for example, sufficient to meet global demand requires destroying the Amazon; meat production is much less destructive to land, taking place either on non-arable scrubland or via consuming human-inedible surplus feedstock. (Or on land already depleted by plant farming, like in the Amazon.)

And then in the end you're left with foods with inferior nutrition. I'm not going to stop eating the foods I've evolved to eat (ruminants especially) until I can safely do so without becoming malnourished, weak, and unhealthy. Right now, this is not technologically possible.

The majority of that soy you’re worried about is grown to feed the animals…

You’re citing things which are actually making the case for eating only plants stronger, while thinking that you’re doing the opposite. It’s wild.

This isn’t even addressing the part of your argument where you fallaciously appeal to nature by saying you’re going to do what you evolved to do. What we evolved to do is irrelevant; what we have the ability to do is all that matters.

> without becoming malnourished, weak, and unhealthy. Right now, this is not technologically possible.

Millions of people “survive” on a vegan diet and have for decades. They’re doing just fine and aren’t “malnourished, weak, and unhealthy”

What do you think about food replacements like US Soylent or EU JimmyJoy?

It looks to me like a big deal, but I don’t see much enthusiasm from other people and these products have been around for a while.

We don't know enough about human biology to make a healthy food replacement in a factory. We do know enough about human biology to know that we currently can't.

Everyone who eats these "food replacements" long enough and frequently enough looks weak and sickly; it's not a coincidence.

I personally did not look at them but also think it is a minority that will switch: first the price and I second I am not sure if labgrown is that appealing to most people.

Agriculture revolution doesn’t only mean labgrown stuff. Crop rotations, resistant plants, derisking a good harvest etcetc. And the approaches are endless: Predictions, tools, robots, satellite imagery etcetc.

It would seem that animals evolved to eat plants and other animals are probably not going to switch to dead packaged food from a singular company en-masse. There are also cultural factors. Meals are one of the few social excuses for hanging out and wasting work time together.

Exactly. Being from a place where food is important: they are already starting to go back to the country side. Your regular accountant / dev / office employee is proud to grown eggs, potatoes, tomatoes, milk for fun.

Some culture care way more about food than the US can imagine.

Agree with the cultural value of dinners. I do that too, just eating the dead packaged food 2 out of 3 meals. I don’t need to go grocery shopping every day, don’t need to count nutrients and so on.

I love the concept and really tried to get on the JimmyJoy train. However it causes severe nausea for me. I don't have any known allergies or intolerances and no other food ever has caused similar issues. So, I think they have some ways to go.

Just test these for a week or two. I found the taste and texture intolerable after two days

Been on it since 2018. Also watching my health closely with tons of lab tests. I’ve never been in a better shape. I’m 29.

As for the taste - not sure about Soylent, but JimmyJoy is very tasty.

Really? I tried JimmyJoy and had to throw it all in the trash after the first three. I found it absolutely horrible.

I would love a pill that would give me all the amino acids I need; but I couldn't swallow this.

They are continuously improving the taste, particularly after 2020

I think it's a matter of experimentation. I've been having Aussielent (Australian version of Soylent) for about 5 years for breakfast and still really enjoy it. I use the vanilla flavour, make it with hot water, and put a squirt of honey in it - it's like liquid porridge.

You are right on point. Water as well as food of course. Growing our own food, collecting rainwater and choosing a healthier lifestyle is what we can do for ourselves.

rainwater is dirty, even in unpolluted areas https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.2c02765

What's the revolution or solution?

I did a couple of years in agtech and must say I was impressed on the readiness of technology (adoption was a different story). So to me think of crop planning, soil health monitoring, genetically modified crops for specific regions/dryer climates as well as logistics (even water logistics) is something I see getting more important. The revolution we say in two ways: A) customers can track strawberry production from the planting date all the way to the store(check some youtube from china). So your journey and interest in the food will not only start at the stoee but much earlier evtl also creating direction connections and contracts with farms - also resulting in willingness to pay more. B) I can imagine food prices to explode - I mean who can prevent it from happening? If borders close and climate is not your friend anymore: Vertical farms, GMO crops and robotics will become a reality - because the pressure to innovate/ change will be there.

Thats just my assumption after working in agtech for 2 years and living through pandemic and some political instability suddenly impacting critical supply while having a mature technology just needing to be adopted in a underserved area…