Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Lab-grown Burgers 'Will Be on the Menu by 2020'

  1. #11
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    The Horned God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 30th, 2017 @ 08:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Irish
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Posts
    2,248
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SpearBrave View Post
    That is select areas of the country. here in the Midwest there is depopulation going on in many rural areas. This is a whole other case as to why this is happening, but it is cultural.
    Doesn't make much difference. The U.S as a whole is losing arable land to urbanization, and it is the best land that is being lost first. It's the same in every country with a growing population. When people first settled in cities they settled in the places with the best agricultural land. Those areas were often the river valley's. As the cities have expanded the urban sprawl has consumed much of those precious river valley lands. There is no easy way around that. More people + less arable land = increased food prices.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpearBrave View Post
    I don't need any study to show you how much prime land is being unused. Just rent a car in mid America drive backroads for several days and take a look for yourself. Trust me if you look and can size up the amount of acres in a field you can add up enough unused farm land to equal the size of a small European country.
    Is this the land on which farmers are being paid not to produce crops? If so then as I say it is like that for a reason. But land left untended and ungrazed will return to scrub after a few years so it can't be totally untended surely?


    I can just point you to my brothers produce operation. 20 acres 6 of which are in use. Two full time employees Two seasonal employees. His business has been literally growing for the last seven years. He is not growing grain, but labor intensive veggies.
    Ok, good for him. Most land is not suitable for growing such crops though. Only arable land is, that is land capable of being plowed and that is only maybe 20% of all land. So this wouldn't be an option for everyone.


    It causes over population, why should we even care if there is famine in Africa, maybe they should practice better population control and quit breeding beyond the carrying capacity of their lands.
    The U.S can probably ignore Africa for the time being, it is a long way away after-all. But the reason Europe cares is that we have found that it is next to impossible to stop problems in Africa spilling over into our countries. A famine or a war in Africa could easily lead to a mass exodus of people towards Europe. It would be better an far less expensive for us if that didn't happen.



    The problem with your thoughts here are on how we base things. I am almost 50 years old and I don't remember a mass crop failure in my life. Even during bad years, there was still no total mass crop failure.
    It doesn't require a total crop failure to put a farmer or a lot of farmers out of business. On the contrary, the more usual danger is a larger than average worldwide wheat harvest depressing the market price of grain and thereby putting U.S producers under pressure.

    If a farmer has invested too much money raising a crop and then has to sell his crop at a loss because he can't compete with cheap grain from a bumper harvest in Asia which is causing an over-supply, then he can be in trouble.

    Subsidising farmers not to produce grain in certain years ensures that the price remains high enough that all the farmers stay in business. That might seem anti-competitive or like the "socialism" that Americans seem to so dread, but it isn't. Keeping farmers in business (though not necessarily producing every year) ensures that the food supply is secure because farmers aren't going out of business and production can be ramped up if need be.


    This the one or two row crop ( grain ) mentality. This is the biggest problem to modern agriculture. We have to stop thinking in terms of grain. With grain you need bigger equipment to farm bigger land. That bigger equipment means bigger debt. So, As I stated above who is behind this big farm mentality, the banks are. They own the land via loans and they own the equipment via loans, so they own the what is called the farm industry standard.
    Grain is the only food crop along with rice that can feed 7 billion people. No other crops can do it. That is one reason it is supported. If the U.S stopped producing grain there would be a global famine on a biblical scale. The knock on effect of raised food prices would likely mean that worlds poorest 100 million people would probably starve to death.

    Ever wonder why Amish farms are 100 acres or less? Yet, the Amish seem to always have surplus money to buy more land for the many children they have. So, I guess small scale farming is just a losing cause for them?
    The Amish maintain damned-able low overheads. It's not for the faint of heart to say the least.. . Not many Americans want to live like the Amish. But it's comforting to know that if the world economy does crash completely you can always go back to living like its 1800.

    Not everybody in the world needs to be a super tech geek or sheep living in the industrial zone. In fact from a preservationist point of view we need to turn away from these things. Let the muds have the cities and let them kill each other and starve.
    The starvation scenario with cities abandoned etc is an unlikely one imo.


    No, I really mean actual good land being unused.
    Are you sure you're sure? In Ireland if a farmer has land that's zoned as agricultural and doesn't use it for a few years, a government body known as the "land commission" confiscates it off him and either auctions it off or gives it to a neighboring farmer for next to nothing. I'd be surprised if something similar wasn't done in the U.S.


    I grow enough food to feed a family of five to six in my "kitchen garden". The size of my is 30' x 60', I rotate my plants and use early, middle and late plantings. I preserve what I need for the winter plus extra and I give the rest away to people I like. I spend about 20 to 30 minutes a day in my garden, plus a Saturday here and there preserving food. I would not call that a huge time drain. I still have plenty of time to read, debate with people here, go hunting, fishing and walking plus work a full time job. One thing I don't do is farcebook or twitter or watch TV. Hell, I don't even own a TV and most likely never will again.
    Good for you, I mean that sincerely. You seem to have gotten growing you own food down to a fine art. However that 20 minutes per a day thst you say you spend belies that years of practice it would have taken you to reach the level of proficiency you are currently at. I would argue that most people have neither the time, the opportunity nor the energy or inclination to pursue and develop kitchen gardening as a hobby much less a lifestyle.

    Perhaps people should grow their own food more, they might get closer to nature and closer to who they really are.
    Perhaps they should, and perhaps they would gain from it, but its just not likely to ever happen.

    This whole lab grown meat thing is about profit and nothing more. It is just another farce of the modern world that we can do without.
    I still say it remains to be seen. It will probably be popular with some people who want to eat meat but don't like the idea of killing an animal to get it. I think they are entitled to have that option if they want it and as long as the usual conditions are met.
    Close observation may result in feelings of horror, wonder and awe at world you find yourself inhabiting.

  2. #12
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    52
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,507
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,605
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,239
    Thanked in
    567 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Horned God View Post
    Doesn't make much difference. The U.S as a whole is losing arable land to urbanization, and it is the best land that is being lost first. It's the same in every country with a growing population. When people first settled in cities they settled in the places with the best agricultural land. Those areas were often the river valley's. As the cities have expanded the urban sprawl has consumed much of those precious river valley lands. There is no easy way around that. More people + less arable land = increased food prices.
    We are not losing land at that rate in the grain belt in America. Most Midwest cities are not growing. Right now urban growth is due to immigration. Stop immigration and you will stop a lot of this growth.

    Is this the land on which farmers are being paid not to produce crops? If so then as I say it is like that for a reason. But land left untended and ungrazed will return to scrub after a few years so it can't be totally untended surely?
    Yes this includes lands where farmers are paid not to grow. The whole idea that we even do this is absurd. If you really understood big farming you would never agree with it.

    Ok, good for him. Most land is not suitable for growing such crops though. Only arable land is, that is land capable of being plowed and that is only maybe 20% of all land. So this wouldn't be an option for everyone.
    If land can grow grain, it can crow other crops. So most of the land we are talking about here can be used to grow other crops besides grains and it certainly can be used for pasture/hay production if you cannot till it.

    Small farms work, if managed properly. The idea of big farming is the idea of big equipment which cost big money which requires big loans, which require big government bailouts, which requires higher taxes. The only real profit is being made is by the banks that loan the money.

    The U.S can probably ignore Africa for the time being, it is a long way away after-all. But the reason Europe cares is that we have found that it is next to impossible to stop problems in Africa spilling over into our countries. A famine or a war in Africa could easily lead to a mass exodus of people towards Europe. It would be better an far less expensive for us if that didn't happen.
    Most of our so "surplus" grain is going to third world countries. This allows them to breed more people, which in turn are ending up in Europe.

    It doesn't require a total crop failure to put a farmer or a lot of farmers out of business. On the contrary, the more usual danger is a larger than average worldwide wheat harvest depressing the market price of grain and thereby putting U.S producers under pressure.

    If a farmer has invested too much money raising a crop and then has to sell his crop at a loss because he can't compete with cheap grain from a bumper harvest in Asia which is causing an over-supply, then he can be in trouble.

    Subsidising farmers not to produce grain in certain years ensures that the price remains high enough that all the farmers stay in business. That might seem anti-competitive or like the "socialism" that Americans seem to so dread, but it isn't. Keeping farmers in business (though not necessarily producing every year) ensures that the food supply is secure because farmers aren't going out of business and production can be ramped up if need be.
    It is socialism at its worse, socialism is a proven failure. It is also usury to the people paying taxes and national debt not to mention the farmers.

    Besides all that we can produce just as much grain and meat with smaller farms using smaller equipment with less cost overall. This also avoids less flows and ebbs in the market overall. As one area may not have a good year the other area may have a bumper year, it all balances out in the end.

    I don't know about your beliefs in personal freedom, but I would rather have it than be subject to any form of control by the US government or even worse the US banking system. If you control the food you control the people.

    Grain is the only food crop along with rice that can feed 7 billion people. No other crops can do it. That is one reason it is supported. If the U.S stopped producing grain there would be a global famine on a biblical scale. The knock on effect of raised food prices would likely mean that worlds poorest 100 million people would probably starve to death.
    I never said quit growing grain, we just need to quit growing so much of it.

    What should it matter if the poorest 100 million people starve? Is that not nature? I don't buy into the whole "we are world" line of thinking. I do like the idea of taking care of our own first.

    The Amish maintain damned-able low overheads. It's not for the faint of heart to say the least.. . Not many Americans want to live like the Amish. But it's comforting to know that if the world economy does crash completely you can always go back to living like its 1800.
    You don't have to live like the Amish to practice the economics of diversified small farming.

    smaller tractors and equipment = less money spent= less land needed to keep a farm profitable.

    The starvation scenario with cities abandoned etc is an unlikely one imo.
    It is not unlikely in a global crisis, our people need to stay away from centralization as much as possible.


    Are you sure you're sure? In Ireland if a farmer has land that's zoned as agricultural and doesn't use it for a few years, a government body known as the "land commission" confiscates it off him and either auctions it off or gives it to a neighboring farmer for next to nothing. I'd be surprised if something similar wasn't done in the U.S.
    No, in the US private property laws are respected. Yes, we have zoning for tax and industrial, residential purposes, but seizing private property is a big no no in America.

    Good for you, I mean that sincerely. You seem to have gotten growing you own food down to a fine art. However that 20 minutes per a day thst you say you spend belies that years of practice it would have taken you to reach the level of proficiency you are currently at. I would argue that most people have neither the time, the opportunity nor the energy or inclination to pursue and develop kitchen gardening as a hobby much less a lifestyle.
    Growing things is not hard, nor does it take a degree in horticulture. People do it around here all the time. Most people that live around here grow and preserve at least part of their own food. Maybe these are the things we need to get back to, instead of worrying about some of the other trash that comes with urban living.
    Perhaps they should, and perhaps they would gain from it, but its just not likely to ever happen.
    It is happening, I have seen the homestead movement grow in just the last six years. No, people are not going full tilt, but they are producing more and more of their own foods and learning the old methods of home food preservation. It is a very good thing to see this.

    I still say it remains to be seen. It will probably be popular with some people who want to eat meat but don't like the idea of killing an animal to get it. I think they are entitled to have that option if they want it and as long as the usual conditions are met.
    I really don't have any feelings for people don't like the idea of killing animals for meat. I do know that lab grown meat is unnatural and that is enough to not like it.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Neophyte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 06:21 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Subrace
    Nordic + some Atlantid
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Posts
    1,932
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    48
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    36
    Thanked in
    26 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SpearBrave View Post
    If land can grow grain, it can crow other crops. So most of the land we are talking about here can be used to grow other crops besides grains and it certainly can be used for pasture/hay production if you cannot till it.
    How is the American climate? In how large parts of the US can you keep cattle outside all year long?

  4. #14
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    52
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,507
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,605
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,239
    Thanked in
    567 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    How is the American climate? In how large parts of the US can you keep cattle outside all year long?
    The US is very large, however in most of the lower 48 states cattle can be kept year round depending on the breed and winter cover.

    Most cattle breeds that are common in the US come from various Northern European stock. With the Scottish breeds being the most popular as the parent stock. These cattle do well as long as they can get out of the wind and have plenty of hay to feed on during the winter. When I say out of the wind, that does not really require a barn, just a small valley or dip in the land.

    As you go further South the herds tend to be more of the French and Spanish types as parent stock. Florida is a prime example of large cattle raising using parent stock that originated in warmer climates.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  5. #15
    Spirit of the Reich "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Ahnenerbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Volksdeutscher
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Y-DNA
    I-M170
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    Gau Westmark
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Gemini
    Family
    Polyamory
    Occupation
    Herbalist
    Politics
    Ecological Geniocracy
    Religion
    Vedic
    Posts
    1,220
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    25
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    198
    Thanked in
    105 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Reginleif View Post
    As an assumed carnivore, I'm curious as how it would impact the current system of the meat market.

    Scientists set up company to make stem cell meat an affordable reality Lab-grown burger from bovine stem cells could be on sale within 5 years. In 2013, the team cooked and ate a burger that cost £215,000 to produce The 142g 'cultured beef' patty, developed at Maastricht University, was lightly fried in a butter and oil and took three months to grow.

    They are taking the wrong approach in looking for meat substitutes. In any living cell, there is information contained (that's why the meat and milk of stressed-out and vaccinated cows is so toxic for us). I can't even imagine what kind of epigenetic information would be contained in cells that are forced to replicate just to artificially "create meat"!

    A quick guess is that those lab-meat cells are going to transmit cancerous instructions to your body's cells. Or auto-immune diseases. It's the same problem as with GMOs but worse...! The consequences could be incredibly destructive. Maybe this kind of stupidities is what will solve the overpopulation problem (the smart ones are switching their diet full-on towards organic, while the masses just accept to eat anything as long as it is "cheap").

    Already when we eat animal meat, there is a kind of information (or frequency) transmitted to us, depending on the species of animal that we are eating. For example, the cow is bioenergetically connected to the Divine Mother of the Universe (the Mother Goddess). That's why eating bovine flesh is considered impure in the ancient Vedic tradition (and also in the myths about the Primordial Cow Audhumla in Aryo-Germanic spirituality), because it severs the divine connection adn keeps us away from spiritual realization.

    The meat of the pig has also be found by meditators to considerably harm their meditation and prayer practice. That's why it became forbidden among some ancient religious cults, then among Jews and finally among the Moslems (who don't meditate and don't understand the reason of that taboo but nonetheless became fanatic about it).


    On the other hand, food researchers are now finally coming up with truly viable plant-based alternatives to animal meat - like, how come we can send spaceships to Mars, but we still need an animal to chew, digest and transform plants into meat...? And then kill those animals like primitives, sacrificing billions of lives every year, creating massive suffering just to satisfy some "food craving"...


    When I opened the package, the patties looked exactly like raw beef — except they're made mainly from pea protein, yeast extract, and coconut oil. They contain beet juice, which gives them a reddish color. According to the nutrition label on the back, the Beyond Burger has significantly more protein, sodium, calories, and fat compared to a normal burger.

    Unlike most veggie burgers I've tried, the Beyond Burger sizzled like meat. It didn't smell like beef however — more like a vegetable I couldn't immediately identify. Peas perhaps?

    About three minutes later, I flipped the patty over, and it was slightly browned. After waiting about three more minutes, the burger was done. It generated a lot of juice on the spatula, although it didn't look exactly like normal beef blood.

    After I added lettuce, tomato, and ketchup, I took a bite. In a blind taste test, it definitely wouldn't fool me as beef, but its texture was shockingly close — and it was even pink in the middle. To make it taste more like a normal burger, next time I would use steak seasoning.

    It's not the first plant-based burger from the seven-year-old startup, but it's the first from Beyond Meat that's not sold in the frozen food aisle. And unlike other veggie burgers by popular brands such as Amy's and Morningstar, the Beyond Burger sits next to real refrigerated beef at the Colorado Whole Foods. Beyond Meat plans to distribute it to more stores later this year.

    Beyond Meat aims to shake up the $48 trillion global meat industry by creating palatable alternatives. For that reason, it's garnered much hype from vegetarians, meat-eaters, and a long list of investors, including Twitter co-founder Biz Stone, the Humane Society, and Bill Gates.

    Another similar startup, called Impossible Foods, will soon launch a plant-based "cheeseburger," which has already raised a VC backing to the tune of $108 million. It has also received rave reviews, including one from world-renowned chef and Momofuku founder David Chang.

    Although Americans are among the highest per capita eaters of meat in the world, a growing number of people are slowly cutting down.

    Both Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat are riding that trend, but unlike many other vegetarian brands, the two startups are targeting carnivores.
    Source: TechInsider


    Patrick Brown and his research team at Northern California-based Impossible Foods. Impossible Foods has developed a burger that it says is less resource-intensive, healthier and will eventually be cheaper to produce than red meat.

    Brown's team analyzes meat at a molecular level to determine what makes a burger taste, smell and cook the way it does. He wants his burgers to be squishy while raw, then firm up and brown on the grill. He believes everything from an animal's fat tissue to muscle cells can be replicated using plant compounds. Before starting the company, Brown had a hunch that a certain ingredient made meat taste different than other foods. "I had a very strong suspicion early on that heme would be the magic ingredient for flavor," said Brown.

    Although the costs are not yet competitive and the flavor is a work in progress, Impossible Foods expects to have its meat going head-to-head with ground beef next year. “Livestock is an outdated technology,” says Patrick Brown.

    Heme is an iron-containing molecule in blood that carries oxygen. It's heme that makes your blood red and makes meat look pink and taste slightly metallic. It's highly concentrated in red meat, but it can also be found in plants. And that was the trick to giving Brown's meat-free burgers that blood-pink look when raw and meaty taste once cooked. Brown could have extracted heme from legumes like soybeans, which contain leghemoglobin in nodules on their roots. Except, that would have been expensive and time consuming, and unearthing the plants would release carbon into the atmosphere.

    So, he decided to use yeast instead. By taking the soybean gene that encodes the heme protein and transferring it to yeast, the company has been able to produce vast quantities of the bloodlike compound. Each vat of frothy red liquid in the lab holds enough heme to make about 20,000 quarter-pound Impossible Burgers. "We have to be able to produce this on a gigantic scale," says Brown.

    "Ultimately, we want it to be practical to produce enough of our product to match what's currently consumed in the U.S. or the world. Well, that's a lot of heme," he says.

    Because Impossible Foods isn't targeting vegetarians; it wants to woo carnivores. Brown thinks meat lovers would opt for veggie patties more often if they had an option that really replicated the burger-eating experience. So he's trying to pin down what accounts for the mouthfeel of beef.

    To replicate fat, researchers mix flecks of coconut oil into ground "plant meat" made from textured wheat protein and potato protein. The potato protein provides a firm exterior when the meat is seared. And the coconut oil stays solid until it hits the frying pan, where it begins to melt, just like beef fat. The burger has more protein, less fat and fewer calories than a patty that's 80 percent lean meat and 20 percent fat. And because it's plant-based, this "meat" has no cholesterol.

    The taste is unreal. When I tried a mini burger slathered in vegan mayo, mashed avocado, caramelized onions and Dijon prepared by San Francisco chef Traci Des Jardin at the company's headquarters in Redwood City, I was floored. The flavor was slightly less potent than meat, but if I didn't already know this burger was made from plants, I wouldn't have guessed it. The texture as I chewed was just like ground beef.

    The aroma of Impossible's sizzling patty is also unmistakably meatlike. As it wafted through the office, the photographer I'd brought along for this story (a self-described cheeseburger enthusiast) cooed, "the smell!"

    Brown's team engineered that smell. First, the researchers put cooked meat in a gas chromatography mass spectrometry machine, which separates thousands of compounds. Then, they sniffed the meat via a tube, so they could identify the specific individual components of that meat scent.Brown says the researchers encountered smells like butter, maple syrup, a diaper pail, smoke, grass — even a raspberry bug. That last one was from a researcher who grew up on a raspberry farm in Vermont.

    "The smell of meat is the simultaneous exposure to these hundreds of different smells, and the smell of meat happens up here," Brown says as he points to his head.

    Impossible's plant burger is still more expensive to produce than beef patties. But Brown says the goal is to increase production so the "meat" becomes less expensive than ground chuck.
    Source: GrubStreet

  6. #16
    Uniter
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Thulean Imperial Inquisitor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Icelandic
    Ancestry
    Iceland
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Iceland Iceland
    State
    Reykjavik Reykjavik
    Location
    Ísland
    Gender
    Family
    Thule
    Occupation
    Merit
    Politics
    Science
    Religion
    Unity
    Posts
    429
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    I´m mostly vegetarian (& vegan). But I did have beef burgers yesterday. I sporadically eat meat.

    I welcome this. I can handle the epigenetic stress.

    (My body tells me.)
    "I have reached these lands but newly
    From an ultimate dim Thule
    From a wild weird clime, that lieth, sublime,
    Out of SPACE — out of TIME
    ."
    Edgar Allan Poe


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, February 20th, 2012, 08:50 PM
  2. Halal Meat Now On School Menu!
    By SaxonPagan in forum England
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Thursday, March 11th, 2010, 07:50 AM
  3. Burgers, boeren en soldaten
    By Frans_Jozef in forum Netherlands & Flanders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 12th, 2007, 10:08 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •