Posted on 05/21/2015 9:16:27 AM PDT by PROCON
Meat — despite popular movements to decrease the amount humans consume — is still a central part of diets around the world. People who live in industrial countries (like the United States) eat roughly 210 pounds of it each year.
And consumption in the developing world, where people eat closer to 66 pounds each year, is climbing fast. Growth is such that by 2030 the average human is expected to consume just under 100 pounds per year, 10 percent more than today.
Our collective affinity for meat likely began out of circumstance — humans that lived inland from the coast had little choice but to hunt in order to live — and has persisted for evolutionary reasons. Meat carries nutrients like zinc and protein, promotes growth, and provides energy. It also doesn't hurt that the price of meat has fallen dramatically.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
The only difference between living "inland from the coast" in this regard is that one area has seafood and the other doesn't. And fish are meat. I think the real reason would be more that meat has lots of protein, protein creates muscle and muscle makes one stronger. In a dog eat dog world where survival depended strength the meat eaters would prevail. Other than beans, there isn't much, if any, protein in most veggies.
Huh?
It will look like beef(cow) after products.
Nah, these guys figured it out (flavor is irrelevant)...
Dozer: It’s a single-celled protein combined with synthetic aminos, vitamins, and minerals. Everything the body needs.
PRIMUS!!!
A few might try it because of the benefits (a very few)
More will try it out of curiosity.
Most people will only try it when it is much cheaper than the real thing and people I trust tell me it taste good and won’t make me sick (Me).
Personally I don’t see any economic or environmental advantage to cultured meat.
Next on their list..
Lutefisk
Never knew that meat is a source of Vitamin B-12. Must research this further.
Are veggietarians B-12 deficient?
Once they can grow meat feasibly in the lab, they could grow any kind of meat, even human meat. Which we could eat without the usual taboos of cannibalism really applying, since that meat never really “belonged” to a human.
So, would you try it?
“The only difference between living “inland from the coast” in this regard is that one area has seafood and the other doesn’t.”
If they are talking historically, then it makes sense. Until relatively recent times, agriculture was not very viable unless you were in an rich delta or flood plain, which tend to be found near the coasts. You could grow stuff in other areas if there was enough rainfall, but without knowledge of fertilizer, crop rotation, etc, that would only last a few years before the soil wouldn’t cooperate any more.
There will come a timewhen you will be reasonably sure of the meat you are eating only if you live on the farm that grows the cattle if live meat is permitted anymore. Cheap fake meat is all the excuse the Republicans and Democrats need to implement the green goal of eliminating the raising of animals for food. the greenies are offended by all that bovine farting and need to accomodate the Moslem pork sensibilities at the same time.
Well, there are plenty of inland river deltas and plains and agriculture is just as predominant inland as on the coast. We've had knowledge of fertilizer and crop rotation since the Old Testament. How recent the Old Testament times are in the scheme of events we are talking about here is, I guess, a matter of debate.
Heck no, we freedom loving Americans are almost at the point of revolt over the inane and unconstitutional tyranny the nut-case libs and their dear leader are trying to impose on us.
There is a lot of land that’s just unsuitable for growing crops.Most of that ground is excellent for grazing cattle.
“Well, there are plenty of inland river deltas and plains and agriculture is just as predominant inland as on the coast.”
Inland flood plains are usually narrower, and don’t offer as much land area for farming, which is why all the major ancient civilizations that developed agriculture were centered around deltas and flood plains near coasts (India, China, Mesopotamia, Egypt).
“We’ve had knowledge of fertilizer and crop rotation since the Old Testament.”
Rudimentary knowledge perhaps, but not the kind of knowledge we have today. Just throwing manure on stuff is not enough to compensate for depletion of a specific mineral, unless the manure happens to be rich in that mineral. Changing crops by season was done, yes, but it was done because different crops grew better in different seasons, not because we had systematic knowledge of which crops depleted which minerals, and how to counteract that by using crop rotation.
Not even curious to find out if it really “tastes like chicken”? :)
Exactly MrD has done that for years.
I really don’t get the mindset that says laboratory-grown meat saves animal lives—when it seems to deprive animals of an opportunity to live (in the great circle of life).
You first, I'll stand by with some antidote :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.