Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PETA Offers X-Prize for Artificial Meat

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the surprisingly-practical dept.

Biotech 1130

Bored MPA writes "The Times reports that PETA is to announce plans on Monday for a $1 million prize to the "first person to come up with a method to produce commercially viable quantities of in vitro meat at competitive prices by 2012." PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk addressed the controversial decision by saying, "We don't mind taking uncomfortable positions if it means that fewer animals suffer." An unexpected and pragmatic move from an organization that has a strong base of support from pro-organic vegans." The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmm... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141282)

I think I've got a winning idea, thanks to this film [amazon.com] . Hopefully those PETA folks won't ask too many questions. Then things might get... unpleasant.

Isnt fake meat called... (5, Funny)

Mazrim_Ta (129987) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141286)

Tofu? I'll take my prize in small bills please.

A good brand (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141378)

Is called Quorn [yahoo.com] . It's made from mushrooms!

Re:A good brand (1)

vidarh (309115) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141830)

If you think Quorn tastes like meat you have mostly tasted meat that have a distinct similarity to carboard. Quorn is far better than Tofu or other soy based products to me, but it's only hard to distinguish from meat if the meat is bad quality and poorly prepared and the Quorn is seasoned excessively with fat and/or spices.

Re:Isnt fake meat called... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141404)

I know you're trying to be funny here, but in vitro != fake. it just means that it is produced in a lab, in a vat. no live animals are needed. of course, some people might feel uncomfortable eating meat that's never been "alive", but apart from the peta pet peeve of animal suffering, it might be a solution to this whole cows-farting-methane-thereby-causing-global-warming-thing. plus, you could engineer the meat to be as tasty as you want, like those kobe cows...hmm....

Re:Isnt fake meat called... (0, Flamebait)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141680)

I thought it was called SPAM

I'm an animal lover. And the better they taste the more I love 'em! Yum!

-mcgrew

PS: I saw "The Queers" live in Cincinnatti a couple years ago with hmy daughter Patty, got a Queers t-shirrt there. My favorite Queers song is Stupid Fucking Vegans [inmusicwetrust.com] . Fuck PETA and the horse they rode in on. Then eat the damned horse!

PETA? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141296)

They can go to hell for all I care about them. Bunch of stinking terrorists.

Re:PETA? (4, Funny)

bluelip (123578) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141450)

PETA loves meat. You do know it stands for People Eating Tasty Animals, right? :)

Interesting... (1)

TofuMatt (1105351) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141306)

Crazy. We were talking about PETA and their craziness today. This seems way more reasonable.

I'm a vegan, but it's just a health thing... I still cook steaks for others. ^_^

Re:Interesting... (4, Funny)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141472)

My experience leads me to believe that you are unusual among vegans, or even among people who are fashionably vegetarian for some short period of time.

For many of your dietary bretheren giving up the opportunity to sit in coffee shop wearing pantaloons and blurt out pseudo facts about how meat eaters are killing themselves and the planet and all the animals would be too much to bear. I think they would continue to oppose in vitro meat just to preserve that pastime.

Re:Interesting... (1)

Lobster Quadrille (965591) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141674)

I was vegetarian/borderline-vegan for a few years, also for health reasons. My experience says that there are a lot more people who do it for the same reasons.

Now I do eat meat, but I'm also getting fat.

Re:Interesting... (2, Insightful)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141790)

What's so Odd about it? I don't eat red meat sans maybe Ostrich every blue moon. My diet is very Fish, Grain, and Veggie based and THAT gets me strange looks.
Even so, people feel the need to be apologetic when they order a stake if we go to dinner. My response is: "It's your body. Put into it what you what. Follow my example if you want, or don't. It's not MY place to force you to eat healthy"
If you try to force someone to see the world your way that will only get them to look away from it.

I'm ashamed that health and eco conscious people where more forceful in their views in the past making it harder for the people of today to be taken seriously.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141834)

I also sometimes eat vegan for health reasons and don't have a problem with animal meat.

Lowered my cholesterol from 300 to 140.

I guess I shouldn't consider myself a vegan though because every 3 months or so I do eat some animals products. Pure vegan is not sustainable diet over the long term. There are certain nutritional requirements that you can only get from animals products. I'm not big on the fake stuff either. I get all my vitamins and minerals naturally from the food I eat.

There is no way in hell I would eat this cloned meat. Thinking we know how these organic systems work is what lead to Mad Cow and such. Prions and who knows what else.

Re:Interesting... (2, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141742)

Agreed with the sibling post. I've known vegetarians who were vegetarians for health reasons, but never vegans who were vegan for health reasons...Lot of the vegans I know won't eat anything that was remotely an animal byproduct, to the point of only eating certain M&M's because one of the dyes isn't completely animal-free.

Most people just don't rank their health that highly. I am glad to see PETA finally doing something productive however...If your real goal is to prevent animal suffering, then this is actually a good method.

Re:Interesting... (2, Funny)

easyTree (1042254) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141914)

...to the point of only eating certain M&M's because one of the dyes isn't completely animal-free

bah! that's borderline enjoying-your-food (not that i'm saying m&m`s are food). everyone knows that the 'safe' m&m`s touch the 'unsafe' ones in the packet so any '_real_' vegan will avoid m&m`s altogether.
--
warning: post may contain failed attempt at humor.

Cloning Tissue or Whole Animal? (3, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141316)

The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?
Are they cloning the sample or the animal? If it's just a sample piece of tissue, I would imagine most would be fine with it. If they are cloning the entire animal, it's still a physically separate organism with a central nervous system that is attached to a cerebrum. It's still feeling pain so I would think all Vegans would be opposed to it.

Re:Cloning Tissue or Whole Animal? (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141462)

When they say "VAT" that means it is only a sample of the animal, in a giant tub (vat means a tub/barrell). It has no brain, legs, arms, etc. It is more like a cross between an animal and bacteria than a real animal.

Re:Cloning Tissue or Whole Animal? (1)

ta bu shi da yu (687699) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141612)

Yeah? And what happens when they start cloning meat... HUMAN meat? Will you eat it then?

Re:Cloning Tissue or Whole Animal? (3, Funny)

gunnk (463227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141752)

Hmmm... I could clone my own tissue for sale and put up a giant sign that reads "Eat Me".

Might be worth it.

Re:Cloning Tissue or Whole Animal? (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141842)

Cloned meat is all about tissue...The root of the economic justification is that all the other crap that gets built to make the animal is wasted anyway, so why not just make a huge tank of filet mignon? (Using beef as an example, because bigger animals are less efficient to grow)

Sadly, right now, probably the best they can do is clone hamburger, which means that if they do make it marketable, it'll drive the cost of all other cuts of beef through the roof.

What about human? (1)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141318)

Why oppress animals to take DNA samples, why not just clone human flesh [courageunfettered.com] ?

Re:What about human? (2, Funny)

giafly (926567) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141470)

Why oppress animals to take DNA samples, why not just clone human flesh [courageunfettered.com]?
Why clone human flesh, why not just eat dead people? You know they'd eat you if they could [urbandictionary.com] .

Re:What about human? (4, Informative)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141876)

There are actually some really good medical reasons for not being a cannibal...Basically you're probably not going to catch anything from the cow, because it's a cow, but a human? Make sure yours is extra well-done.

vegans... pff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141330)

nope, vegans wouldnt even eat a cloned cell, as it is a living part of an animal

i always wondered though, why they think that plants dont mind getting eaten - its a sort of rassistic behaviour

Re:vegans... pff (1)

JudgeSlash (823985) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141874)

nope, vegans wouldnt even eat a cloned cell, as it is a living part of an animal

So a vegan wouldn't sacrifice one last animal so that the rest of the population could live until eaten by a predator?

Who will think of the apex predators?

hmm (5, Funny)

strack (1051390) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141332)

I like PETA, but I couldn't eat a whole one.

Re:hmm (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141410)

Fuck PETA - I've got a rather small one-eyed tube steak they can munch on.

Re:hmm (4, Funny)

Zappa (26961) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141664)

PETA ?
Is this an acronym for "People Eating Tasty Animals" ?

Re:hmm (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141748)

like PETA, but I couldn't eat a whole one.

Unhealthy, not much protein or iron. You're better off with veal.

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the animal from the Restaraunt at teh End of the Universe yet.

Vegans != Hive mind. (5, Interesting)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141340)

The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?


Just like people who comment on slashdot, vegans have a wider variety of opinions & reasons to arrive at their dietary choice. Trying to ask them collectively what they think about something like this is useless.

It would be like asking the slashdot crowd "would you buy Microsoft products if they open sourced them"

For those who prefer car analogies, it would be like asking

For those who prefer car analogies (5, Funny)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141384)

There is never any point finishing a car analogy on slashdot....

Re:Vegans != Hive mind. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141460)

Vegans that eat meat are not vegans at all.
a slashdot analogy would be a open Source "hacker" designing microsoft windows.

I suggest (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141356)

I suggest we just eat vegetarians. That should solve the problem.

If it was commercially viable (1)

osullish (586626) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141362)

Then McDonalds, KFC etc. would have it perfected already!!

Kinda sorta the point! (2, Insightful)

clonan (64380) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141516)

If it were viable right NOW there would be no need for the X-prize.

This sort of contest provide direction and potentially takes some of the sting out of development.

The hope is that by 2012 a process will become available that McDonald's, KFC and the others can perfect.

It should be very exciting!

Silly. (5, Funny)

jpellino (202698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141368)

If they're vegans for more than one narrow reason (which they seem to be) this will not make them happy.

I can't recall the comedian, but someone once noted "Why do vegetarians need to make their food (tofu pups, veggieburgers) look like meat they simply wont eat? You don't see monks keeping blow-up dolls just hanging around."

Re:Silly. (1)

SlashTon (871960) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141726)

I can't recall the comedian, but someone once noted "Why do vegetarians need to make their food (tofu pups, veggieburgers) look like meat they simply wont eat?
A bit of a silly question, isn't it? (But I suppose that's why he's a comedian...). Why would the (implied) main reason be a need on the side of vegetarians to pretend they are eating meat? When you think about it, why does so much meat need to be shaped like small discs? Or be stuffed into a sausage? I think that it is mainly a convenient way to 'package' it... Its not as easy to fry, grill, barbecue or whatever a small heap of 'meat bits' than it is something in hamburger form. It is also quite a bit easier to make it uniform (portions that are exactly the same size and shape, so convienient for fast food places). And just like all meat isn't consumed in burger/sausage/whatever shape, all vegetarian foods aren't 'shaped' like meat products either.

While... (5, Insightful)

Icarus1919 (802533) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141380)

While I applaud the intent here, I gotta say that if people have a problem with genetically modified vegetables, then meat grown in a laboratory will DEFINITELY not appeal to them. This would be a classic case of a concept that people will find instinctively suspicious and disgusting.

Re:While... (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141530)

Not all people ahve problems with gene modified plants. Not even all liberals. Despite the conservative desire to classify everyone that does not follow their ridiculous ideas as radical fools, there are quite a few people out there that are pretty liberal but not lunatics. I myself enjoy steak very much, but if given the choice between a real animal steak and a vat grown one, would choose a vat grown. I eat gene modified plants all the time. I don't see the difference between 'natural Corn' (that the american indians bread up from things the size of a kid's pinkie to things the size of an adult's forearm.) and gene modified plants.

Re:While... (1)

Icarus1919 (802533) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141826)

I never said all people. However, polls show that genetically modified foods are, to a substantial portion of the population, unappetizing (and considered dangerous by a smaller, but still substantial, portion. but that's another story).

Re:While... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141878)

Despite the conservative desire to classify everyone that does not follow their ridiculous ideas as radical fools, there are quite a few people out there that are pretty liberal but not lunatics.
Swap "liberal" and "conservative" and the above is no less true.

Re:While... (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141610)

You say that now, wait until lab grown meat is 1/5th the price of factory farm grown and tastes 3 times as good.

Wait until the outbreaks of disease in livestock that happens every year starts being reported instead of suppressed because there's actually an alternative.

Bill? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141700)

This would be a classic case of a concept that people will find instinctively suspicious and disgusting.


You mean... Bill Gates is involved?

Re:While... (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141816)

THEY don't want to eat it, they want ME to eat it. Guess what? They're wasting their time.

Re:While... (1)

Pigeon451 (958201) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141894)

Most issues with GM veggies is the method they're grown and the IP surrounding them, and the negative environmental impact. Most people don't even know they're using GM products actually.

I fail to see the issue with artificially grown meat. Test tube babies were controversial at first. How about artificial implants (heart valves, hips, etc)? Hey, even synthetic oil is better than the real stuff!

Eat the PETA members (4, Insightful)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141390)

Maybe it's just me, but I think that movements such as PETA are a sign of deep issues within our society. We have people who are so completely satiated and content with their lives, that they are willing to spend vast amounts of their time, effort, and money, in order to achieve something so truly inane.

We have hunger, diseases, war... and all these people want to do is to get everybody to stop eating animals. Considering that it was likely the consumption of large amounts of animal protein that allowed humanity to evolve rather rapidly in the last stage of our evolution, I find PETA's goals rather ironic.

Re:Eat the PETA members (3, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141522)

I think it's highly ironic that certain supporters of PETA, quick to condemn the taking of innocent animal life, get riled up when they see people seeking to outlaw abortion. There's this weird paradox in the animal rights movement, especially in the work of Peter Singer, that animal life is elevated to sacredness but certain human lives are lowered to complete expendability.

PETA isn't against taking animal life (5, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141804)

That's a commonly held misconception. They're in favor of ethical treatment of animals, which for them precludes farming. PETA actually offers free euthanasia for sick animals for people that can't afford to have it done by vets.

As for abortion, it's highly ironic that many of those who get riled up by killing of a pre-human lump of cells are just fine with their government getting into a non-defensive war and driving up food prices around the world through it's subsidy of corn based ethanol. There's this weird paradox in the pro-life movement that unborn life is elevated to sacredness but actual humans living on earth already who have memories and consciousness can be chucked aside without protest.

Re:Eat the PETA members (1)

JCY2K (852841) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141526)

There are numerous organizations aimed at ending the problems which you mentioned or to lessen their horrible impact however the ethical position that all beings capable of experiencing pain ought not to willfully be made to suffer is coherent and valid. Further, no matter the past evolutionary impact of meat in the protohuman diet it is now unnecessary. As for hunger, it takes 16 pounds of grain to produce 1 pound of edible animal protein so who is trying to do/doing more to end hunger, you or them?

Re:Eat the PETA members (0, Troll)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141626)

no matter the past evolutionary impact of meat in the protohuman diet it is now unnecessary

Please provide credible academic citations for this assertion. It is incorrect.

Re:Eat the PETA members (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141908)

Please provide credible academic citations for this assertion. It is incorrect.
Please provide credible academic citations for this assertion. It might be incorrect.

Re:Eat the PETA members (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141778)

The price system of a free market capitalism, which will eventually drive the price of meat up as the demand for food increases ?

Re:Eat the PETA members (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141794)

Honestly I find people like you to be no better than PETA.

Famine, Disease, War are all SOLUTIONS, not problems. They are God's (or nature's if you are an athiest) tough love cure for overpopulation. Any biologist will tell you that each and every one of them occures in some animals besides humans when they outgrow their current habitat.

Famine - not enough food for the amount of people you have. Disease - anyone doctor will tell you that higher population = more disease. You reduce population size and disease rates drop like a tech stock in early 2008. War, well, it solves one and only one problem - overpopulation.

But even if you can't see the logic in that, think about what real vat food production would mean. The ability to grow meet in a vat would allow for the following:

Growing it in an antiseptic area, free of things like say Mad Cow Disease

Quicker grow rate, for the cost of less feed, (Don't have to help the animal grow bones, tendons, brains, etc.) allowing us to make more meat, cheaper, feeding more people, reducing hunger.

Re:Eat the PETA members (1, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141822)

We have hunger, diseases, war... and all these people want to do is to get everybody to stop eating animals. Considering that it was likely the consumption of large amounts of animal protein that allowed humanity to evolve rather rapidly in the last stage of our evolution, I find PETA's goals rather ironic.

First of all I believe one of PETA's tenets is the actually very convincing belief that by stopping people from eating meat you'll solve a lot of world hunger problems. Secondly I'm not sure about your consumption of large amount of animal protein thesis; do you have a citation?

Thirdly, I don't think it's fair to say that just because more important problems exist PETA shouldn't work on what they consider a problem. I mean, hunger, diseases and war are infinitely more important issues than open source, but there are plenty of people and organizations who focus on open source, and I don't think most people would find that this is somehow the wrong thing to do.

Re:Eat the PETA members (1)

c (8461) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141840)

> We have hunger, diseases, war... and all these people want to do is to get everybody to stop eating animals.

Feed any hungry lately? Cure any diseases today? How about stopping that war? Any of that stuff working for you?

I don't necessarily agree with PETA (goals or methods, take your pick), but as causes go it's one of the less futile ones. It fits into the "think globally, act locally" model in that just about any individual can practice what they preach and collectively see progress over time. If you measure improvements in animal welfare over any stretch of time, there's clearly been improvements.

In the big picture, it's certainly a better use of someones time and energy than getting excited about whether the $team_of_millionaires are going to beat the pants off the $other_team_of_millionaires in $team_sport.

c.

Re:Eat the PETA members (1)

Lobster Quadrille (965591) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141858)

I've watched all their propaganda films, and it's worth noting that the strongest points they make have nothing to do with not eating animals and everything to do with treating them ethically.

The organization is terribly run and certainly gets sidetracked a lot, but keep in mind that their name is 'People for the ethical treatment' of Animals', not 'People trying to prevent other people from eating animals.'

Answer to your question (2, Insightful)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141392)

It depends on why they're vegan. If it is to stop animal cruelty, then vat-o-meat should be fine. If it for health reasons, then vat-o-meat will have just as much fat and cholesterol as the real stuff.

Re:Answer to your question (2, Informative)

Vellmont (569020) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141710)


If it for health reasons

Health reasons? There's plenty of meat that's quite healthy for you. Most fish is low in saturated fat and cholesterol. Chicken is pretty OK. Buffalo tastes very similar to beef, but has lower saturated fat. Vegans are vegans for political reasons. These are people that don't eat gummi bears because it contains ground up bones, and don't wear anything that has leather in it. I've heard of extreme wack-jobs that won't eat honey because we've enslaved the bees. It ain't just about food.

Re:Answer to your question (5, Interesting)

R2.0 (532027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141846)

"vat-o-meat will have just as much fat and cholesterol as the real stuff."

Actually, probably not. As I understand it, all the techniques of "culturing" cells are directed toward making all the cells the same - if there are different types of cells in the culture, it is considered a failure. So "cultured meat" would be ALL muscle cells, with no fat cells or connective tissue. Which, while pleasing the health conscious, would be a culinary disaster - picture the toughest, driest steak on the planet.

One solution would be to culture genetically engineered fat cells with little bad cholesterol, and then grind it in with the cultured meat. So the choices would be hamburgers and sausages that probably taste worse than tofu, or real "once had hooves" meat.

I'm thinking that prize will remain unclaimed for a long time.

Re:Answer to your question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141904)

It depends on why they're vegan. If it is to stop animal cruelty, then vat-o-meat should be fine. If it for health reasons, then vat-o-meat will have just as much fat and cholesterol as the real stuff.
You could never be more wrong, a vegan by definition is someone who not only does not eat meat, but does not consume anything produced or is a by product of an animal, i.e., milk, eggs - so that would include cloned portions of an animal.

I really support this. (2, Interesting)

kinabrew (1053930) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141406)

I was a vegetarian for nine years, and only started eating meat again last year, for health reasons(only chicken, since I hate the taste of all other meat)

If meat can be grown that doesn't have a central nervous system and so can't feel pain, I would feel much better about eating what little meat I do eat.

Soylent (1)

H3lm3t (209860) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141408)

Remember everyone, Tuesday is Soylent Green day!

Re:Soylent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141588)

I hear they are remaking the film with Charlton Heston in it :)

Sick (-1, Troll)

SuperByelich (1046482) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141422)

This is just sick. I'd much rather eat a Bambi, and i'm sorry this won't stop people from wanting real food. Atleast not until we get Nazi Socialistic law put on us that forces us to.

Re:Sick (1)

Lobster Quadrille (965591) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141902)

What if you can't tell the difference, and the meat is cheaper to make, with a smaller ecological footprint? What about when all the fast food joints start using it?

Vat-meat is certainly more appealing to me than the ingredients in a McDonald's chicken nugget.

Careful with those cost specifications... (2, Insightful)

Baldrson (78598) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141432)

While it is laudable that more companies are sponsoring prize competitions, greater care must be taken when specifying things like "cost" or, as in the case of the Progressive Automotive X-Prize [progressiv...xprize.org] being "production capable", etc. That's why in my specification of the O-Prize [geocities.com] , which substitutes vegan omega-3 oils for fish oils, I avoided specifying those things. Rather, I just guaranteed a monthly market of a certain dollar amount, with sales going to the lowest bidder:

Introduction

The O-Prize is designed to realize the great potential of oil from algae [unh.edu] with the lowest risk over the shortest time.

The potential of algae oil is to, in stages:

1) Enhance neurological development via nutritional supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids and,
2) Provide an abundant renewable source of green or environmentally friendly fuel oil.

A fixed dollar amount is withdrawn from the prize fund each month to purchase algae oil from the lowest price source(s) certified for the target market. That quantity of algae oil is then resold to the target market and the funds are added to the prize fund. When the lowest price certified sources can compete with the target market, that stage of the O-Prize has finished.

The O-Prize is designed to let algae cultivation techniques mature in two stages, building both technology and popular support for both environmentally friendly and humanitarian purposes.

Probably not ... (4, Insightful)

YeeHaW_Jelte (451855) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141482)

"The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?"

They're not very rational. They'll probably demand you release the sample from its captivity.

All kidding aside, I'm a veggie myself and have a hard time being sympathetic to the vegan cause -- it's just so unrealistic.

Free farm animals will only result in the demise of the particular species ... ever seen a farm pig or a farm cow in the wild?

Current biological thinking is that domesticated animals were drawn into human habitat because their own habitat was taken over by more fit animals. Humans simply domesticated these animals, but otherwise they wouldn't have stood a chance in the wild. Following this reasoning, releasing farm animals would just condemn them to starvation, a horrible death.

Don't get me wrong, I'm strongly opposed to using farm animals as an industrial product, as this is what is common in bioindustry at the moment, but we're in symbiosis with these species ... freeing them is not the answer. Treating them well and with respect is.

Re:Probably not ... (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141750)

"They're not very rational. They'll probably demand you release the sample from its captivity."

They have the teeth and digestive systems of omnivores, yet object to one of the results of millions of years of evolution, that we eat meat.

Answer to question (1)

angryfirelord (1082111) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141510)

The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?
As someone who's sister is vegan, the answer to that is no, plan and simple. When one is a vegan, they refuse to eat any animal products at all, which ranges from meat, to milk, and to the gelatin that's in chewing gum. Personally, I think the cloning a good idea provided there are no heath issues, but I don't think it'll satisfy the vegans.

Re:Answer to question (1)

onemorehour (162028) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141872)

Just because your sister might not want to eat cloned meat doesn't mean that she'll think that cloning meat is equivalent to raising and killing animals.

How about you go ask her and let her respond?

Torchwood did it (and did it, and did it..) (4, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141538)

If scientists are swiping there ideas from Torchwood episodes [wikipedia.org] nowadays, they'd better be prepared to start shagging each other and coming back from the dead on a regular basis as well.

Re:Torchwood did it (and did it, and did it..) (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141614)

If scientists are swiping there ideas
Ugh, my first there/their typo in years and years. Happy Monday morning, brain. Have some coffee.

At last PETA and I agree on something (4, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141542)

But, Ms. Newkirk said, the decision to sponsor a prize caused "a near civil war in our office," since so many PETA members are repulsed by the thought of eating animal tissue, even if no animals are killed.
I think you mean "holy war".

Other than that, yeah, good show.. I'm a big fan of growing food in vats instead of animals on grain and parts of other animals.

For a start, it makes real permanent space stations all that more feasible.

PETA-style vegans happy? As if. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141566)

PETA-style vegans will NEVER be happy. It is their raison d'etre to be in a constant state of discontent, grousing at humanity for every little slight against the animal kingdom. For mostly spiritual reasons I don't eat animals, but I do eat dairy and eggs, and boy does it really cheese them off (npi). For the real PETA-style nut cases, it's all or nothing, with-us-or-against-us. Commercially viable fake meat? Mmm, OK, if it feeds people and replaces meat, sounds great... but yah, veganazis will never be happy.

Anencephalopathy (1)

HetMes (1074585) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141572)

Just grow fields of brainless animals that are kept alive and fed artificially. And don't get all ethical on me.

Uncomfortable (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141582)

Would PETA find this [goatse.cz] to be an acceptable uncomfortable position?

growth medium for cell culture (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141590)

The funny part about this is that apparently they don't know how cell culture is usually made. For animal cells it very often involves the use of purified serums. Guess how many liters you'll need to make a steak?

PETA could already sell "artificial" meat... (1)

Liancourt Rocks (867396) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141596)

Don't forget that PETA already kills animals [petakillsanimals.com] for fun and profit. Why not go one further and sell their meat too?

Why eat meat? (1, Insightful)

PIPBoy3000 (619296) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141636)

Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. [michaelpollan.com]

That seems to be the optimal human diet, summed up nicely in seven words. That's the main reason I'm a vegetarian. As I went through my biology coursework in college, I realized that eating red meat wasn't great for me. From there, I eventually cut out other meat. Now as I look around my cubicle farm of IT staff, I'm one of the few thin and fit people around.

The other reason not to eat so much meat is economic and environmental. It's inefficient. When you convert sunlight to meat, it has to go through a plant phase, and you end up having to cultivate a lot of grain to make a little meat. It's simple physics, and difficult to argue against (the best I've heard is that you can graze animals on land not useful for much else).

Vat grown meat might help with the latter issue, but probably won't help much with the first one. Eating lots of meat likely isn't the most healthy option for humans. It's not inherently bad, but causes health issues in the quantities Americans seem to eat it.

Eat me! (1)

imasu (1008081) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141644)

The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?

Oh hells yeah! Take a sample from my arm! Oh the endless potential!

"Would you like to eat me? Your friend ate me last night!"

"So. That sausage. You like it? Want some more? I've got some RIGHT HERE."

They WRITE THEMSELVES.

Oblig. Neuromancer Quote (2, Interesting)

lobiusmoop (305328) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141646)

Molly and Armitage ate in silence, while Case sawed shakily
at his steak, reducing it to uneaten bite-sized fragments, which
he pushed around in the rich sauce, finally abandoning the
whole thing.
          "Jesus," Molly said, her own plate empty, "gimme that.
You know what this costs?" She took his plate. 'They gotta
raise a whole animal for years and then they kill it. This isn't
vat stuff." She forked a mouthful up and chewed.

Arthur C. Clarke had it right (1)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141648)

In 1964 Playboy published his short story "The Food of the Gods" he explores a very intersting line of thought or reasoning with artificially created meats.

Wait a minute, (0, Troll)

PalmKiller (174161) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141672)

Oh yea, and they need to make sure they got money set aside to pay for animal contraceptives, spade or neutering before they get us all on spamalicious meals. Once we stop eating them the animal population will rise, and thus conditions for the animals will worsen, food will become scarce, disease will become rampant. If they don't work that out first, we will have to start killing them just to thin out their population, and that will be oh so much better for them.

doesn't seem right (1)

pawsart (1060776) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141676)

is it just me, or does this seem to go against everything PETA is supposed to stand for? i'm a vegan, and i think that this is highly questionable stuff

What a bunch of idiots! (1)

InDi0 (691823) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141692)

Yeah its OK to over consume, as long as we don't kill those squishy squishy pigs.

There is no food shortage in the world. The 1st world is throwing away food by the kilo-ton while the 3rd world is starving to death. We are consuming much more than we need, simply to fuel an economy of greed.

And the vegans think its ok to keep doing that if we don't directly kill animals. Never mind that overconsumption causes the destruction of every natural resource on the planet, including animal life.

If we can continue feeding our fat bellies without the killing, everything will be OK.

All hail the Profit God. Amen

Discovery won't like this (1)

jtseng (4054) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141730)

What will Mike Rowe do on Dirty Jobs if someone figures this out???

VERY EASY: 1 stone can be used to kill 2 birds... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141732)

... here is how:

1) Kidnap PETA person
2) Grind up PETA person
3) Sell to other PETA people as non-animal meat substitute
4) PROFIT
5) Repeat step 1 until PETA_people_left=0

If anyone wishes to assist in the above plan I'd suggest we start with Ingrid Newkirk !

Wonder if this will cut down on energy use as well (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141740)

the amount of energy(and CO2 and CH4 emissions) it takes to get a burger to your plate is astounding. Cows are very inefficient if you consider the energy put into them compared to the amount of energy that can be derived from eating them. Not to mention you have to truck the feed to them and then you have to truck the meat to where it is consumed, very few cows in the city. All this adds up to a lot of fuel and a lot of emissions, not to mention the cows themselves often emit methane which is considered to be worse per unit volume then CO2. If they could raise the meat in vitro, maybe the process could be much more efficient and thus emit much less CO2 gasses.

For anyone interested in the subject, the University of Chicago [uchicago.edu] did a pretty good writeup. Seems chicken is probably the best meat for the environment.

does tthat include more attractive veggie dishes? (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141766)

When I first began a vegetarian several decades ago, I started using those substitute products made out of soybean and tofu, but they were unsatisfactory. I prefer Asian-style dishes that dont tried to imitate meat, but are tastey in their own right.

Eat me (1)

wild_quinine (998562) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141770)

The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that?
Hell, you can take a sample from ME if it will feed the whole world.

Wouldn't be Kosher, plus other problems... (1)

katz (36161) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141776)

So I see a lot of folks here are wondering if cell could be sampled from living animals--that way, there's no murder, no death. Maybe people could probably feel comfortable with that. However, under Kashrut laws, meat that from a living animal is not kosher.*

Some other folks ask about cloning human meat; that wouldn't be kosher, either, simply because human flesh does not lie in that specific, defined list of Kosher animal species as defined by Jewish law.

No one seems to be addressing the fact that cells will probably still be sampled over and over again. While less animals suffer with cloning meat, slaughtering for the sake of 'cloned meat' sources would probably continue.

- Roey

------------
* It wouldnt'be like rennet since cloned meat is by definition the re-growth of the actual muscle tissue of the sampled host animal.

Flesh for Fantasy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23141786)

I've been thinking about this for some time now. And while it would be feasible to grow muscle tissue I doubt it would be possible to get the flavor right. The flesh would need to be grown on living bone and 'fed' something similar to what the donor animal eats in order to pick up the subtle flavors that make meat so tasty.

A real question (2, Insightful)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141796)

Back in January, Hallmark Meat Packing got caught slaughtering sick animals, resulting in the largest meat recall in US history. Some of the animals slaughtered couldn't stand on their own feet.

What will we test to determine "fit to consume" when meat is grown in a vat?

Just think of the possibilities! (1)

Low5 (173930) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141806)

Who says we have to eat lamb or beef or pork if it's grown in a vat? We could finally ethically try Long Pig!

Oh the marketing possibilities of celebrity meat products...

Vegan choices vs. non-vegan choices (1)

Kohath (38547) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141808)

will the vegans be ok with that?
Why should anyone care? Who cares whether the vegans approve or disapprove? Do vegans care whether I approve of their lifestyle? Should they?

Vegans are free to eat as they wish. The rest of us don't have to bow to their choices. We don't have to consider their choices at all.

Being a Vegetarian.... (1)

ZipprHead (106133) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141810)

Being a vegetarian and not bothered by people who want to consume meat I find this whole concept absolutely disgusting. If you want to eat flesh grown in a vat, more power to you. But I have to ask, would that actually be any healthier then the hormone and antibiotic infested meats most people already consume?

I much better policy would be well cared for, grass fed, organically bread animals. Healthier for you, healthier for the earth and a much happier animal.

Peta people are wack

yes (4, Insightful)

onemorehour (162028) | more than 6 years ago | (#23141838)

As a vegan, I can at least speak for myself: the answer is definitely "yes."

Veganism is neither irrational nor difficult to understand; if you're making an animal suffer unnecessarily, vegans are against it. It's amazing to me how such a simple position seems to confuse people.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?