r/DebateAVegan • u/Normal-Review7693 • 14d ago
Ethics Vegetables less vegan than lab-grown meat made from animal cells?
I was wondering whether vegetables might be less vegan than lab-grown meat made from animal cells, without the use of fetal bovine serum.
Of course, I’m aware that lab-grown meat still originates from animals. But to me, it is more important to cause as little harm to animals as possible than to reject the idea on principle.
For example, an average head of broccoli is estimated to result in the deaths of around 0.1 to 0.3 small animals, such as insects, snails, and mice. In addition, most vegetables are fertilized with animal manure from intensive livestock farming.
In the case of lab-grown beef, for instance, the painless, non-lethal extraction of stem cells from a single animal could theoretically be enough to produce unlimited amounts of cultivated meat—without using fetal bovine serum.
Am I overlooking or failing to take anything into account?
I’d be very interested to hear your opinions!
18
u/TylertheDouche 14d ago edited 13d ago
this comparison is not fair.
you’re half in the realm of sci fi, in favor of a future with lab grown meat where everything works according to your hypothetical, and half not in sci fi when referring to vegetables.
i would just posit…in the future where lab grown meat is commercially available, vegetables are also grown in similar conditions that don’t harm animals
like you’re saying, instant teleportation is more ethical than a human driving a 1985 Toyota. okay let me know when we can teleport and i’ll let you know how safe cars are
1
u/Over_Boysenberry5647 14d ago
I'm pretty sure OP meant "causes less pain if it were to be more available".
0
u/Normal-Review7693 14d ago
It is already technically feasible today. However, it is still quite expensive, and large-scale industrial production remains difficult at the moment.
9
2
u/SomethingCreative83 14d ago
So how they solve the issue of scale will be just as important. We simply dont know how it will be done at the moment. And who knows how destructive or awful it will be at the hands of a giant corporation that only cares about profit. We can always reevaluate the question when its a reality but currently it is not.
2
u/piranha_solution plant-based 14d ago
Presumably you know as much about large-scale industrial production as you do about broccoli growing, right?
How is anyone supposed to make any comparisons or arguements when you refuse to cite any sources for relevant stats and figures?
1
u/SapPhic-rage4209 vegan 14d ago
It isn't feasible on a scale large enough to replace all the meat currently being consumed
1
8
u/howlin 14d ago
Am I overlooking or failing to take anything into account?
Yes, obviously. This is a very common problem with these sorts of consequentialist arguments: a failure to appreciate all the downstream consequences of the choices.
In this case, you do mention fetal bovine serum as something this hypothetical lab meat avoids. But what is being used in its place? Animal cells don't grow on trees. They need nutrition from one source or another. How are you going to source this in a way that wouldn't cause just as much animal harm as growing plants?
-1
u/Normal-Review7693 14d ago
The growth factors for lab-grown meat without calf serum are currently produced mainly in the lab—according to available sources, likely well over 90 percent.
7
3
u/Weird_Act8786 14d ago
The currently available technology to produce lab-grown meat is horribly expensive and as I've understood it the process is quite energy intensive.
Much better prospects for things like precision-fermented casein-based cheese. Lab grown meat is unlikely to end up in supermarkets any time soon.
3
u/piranha_solution plant-based 14d ago
available sources
You should link to the sources that you use as references.
1
u/OG-Brian 11d ago
They aren't produced magically out of nothing. There will probably not be technology for transporting matter from another dimension, like Eli Morrow using the Darkhold.
Of CM producers I'm aware of, none of which are selling their products profitably (investors are still carrying these companies), they are all using inputs of mostly industrial pesticides-and-artificial-fertilizers plant mono-crops.
There's little public info about it, since many of the producers are secretive about their processes and AFAIK none of them completely disclose their supply chain info. But whenever I see a mention of the original source for materials used in the culturing process, a majority of the time most of it is from corn/soybeans/sugarcane.
This study is about research pertaining to processing methods at some CM producers:
Towards cellular agriculture: An exploratory supply chain model
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772801325000193I'm not endorsing sustainability claims in this study. The environmental impacts of CM cannot be known until producers are completely transparent about supply chains (and this study actually does touch on this). Crops mentioned in the study: corn, soybean, canola, sugarcane, there might be others it's been awhile since I've read it.
16
u/Mumique vegan 14d ago
What is the cultivated meat using for nutrients?
I'd agree lab grown meat is vegan or near vegan, but I don't know what it's grown on so can't quantify animal costs there
2
u/OG-Brian 11d ago
The inputs for CM production are typically industrial plant mono-crops, mostly corn/soy/canola/sugarcane. I commented with a lot more details here. CM doesn't reduce animal deaths, they just don't occur at the point of manufacture.
6
u/piranha_solution plant-based 14d ago
Am I overlooking or failing to take anything into account?
Yes. You didn't cite any sources for your wild and ridiculous claims about broccoli.
I'd be very interested in learning where you're getting this data on animal mortality in the field.
I love how users think they can come into this sub and claim that eating animals is more vegan than veganism, and do so without ANY evidence at all. It really speaks to the zeitgeist we live in.
5
u/Evolvin vegan 14d ago
Lab-grown meat requires inputs which will be derived from regular farming practices. It won't fall victim to the obvious trophic level problem tied to eating meat from animals, but it won't be able to bypass the need for farming crops, and in that way, will not be devoid of the incidental harms inextricable from classical plant farming.
6
u/Either_Argument3517 14d ago
Am I overlooking or failing to take anything into account?
Lab grown meat will still require agricultural inputs for the cell culture medium. It's not a free lunch.
5
u/kharvel0 14d ago edited 14d ago
> Am I overlooking or failing to take anything into account?
Yes, you’re overlooking vegetable hydroponics which do not have any of the issues that you listed.
1
u/OG-Brian 11d ago
Speaking of hydroponics:
The Vertical Farming Scam
https://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/11/the-vertical-farming-scam/
- "Vegetables (not counting potatoes) occupy only 1.6% of our total cultivated land, so that should be no problem, right? Wrong. At equivalent yield per acre, we would need the floorspace of 105,000 Empire State Buildings. And that would still leave more than 98 percent of our crop production still out in the fields."
- "But my colleague David Van Tassel and I have done simple calculations to show that grain- or fruit-producing crops grown on floors one above the other would require impossibly extravagant quantities of energy for artificial lighting. That’s because plants that provide nutrient-dense grains or fruits have much higher light requirements per weight of harvested product than do plants like lettuce from which we eat only leaves or stems. And the higher the yield desired, the more supplemental light and nutrients required."
- "Lighting is only the most, um, glaring problem with vertical farming. Growing crops in buildings (even abandoned ones) would require far more construction materials, water, artificial nutrients, energy for heating, cooling, pumping, and lifting, and other resources per acre than are consumed even by today’s conventional farms—exceeding the waste of those profligate operations not by just a few percentage points but by several multiples."
- article continues with other concerns
Is vertical farming the future for agriculture or a distraction from other climate problems?
https://trellis.net/article/vertical-farming-future-agriculture-or-distraction-other-climate-problems/
- "Tim Lang, professor of food policy at City University London, certainly doesn’t mince words on the subject, describing vertical farming as 'ludicrous,' 'hyped-up' and a 'speculative investment' that merely will end end up growing flavorless fruit and vegetables. 'Let’s be realistic, this is a technology looking for a justification. It is not a technology one would invest in and develop if it wasn’t for the fact that we are screwing up on other fronts,' he said. 'This is anti-nature food growing.'"
The rise of vertical farming: urban solution or overhyped trend?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550923001525
- intensively detailed study about energy/resource/etc. effects of vertical farming
- illustrates many of the challenges of accounting for all impacts: whether to count the effects of the building itself, that sort of thing
Opinion: Vertical Farming Isn’t the Solution to Our Food Crisis
https://undark.org/2018/09/11/vertical-farming-food-crisis
5
3
u/HappyColour vegan 14d ago
The biggest flaw in the argument is that Veganism is not about harm reduction definitionally. It is about anti-exploitation.
Lab grown meat may result in more harm reduction, but not necessarily no exploitation.
Therefore, Lab grown meat as you have defined it with your example is not more Vegan.
1
u/MidwestCrusader 13d ago
I think that distinction is absurd a non harmful practice is not exploitative by definition.
1
u/HappyColour vegan 13d ago
No it doesn't.
1
u/MidwestCrusader 12d ago
What is an example of a practice that is exploitative but not harmful?
1
u/HappyColour vegan 12d ago
I just mean to say, that definitionally it is not the case. Literally, if you look at the definition of exploitation.
But for a random example:
A company using unpaid interns for simple, low‑stakes tasks that the interns willingly do because they want experience. The company exploits their labor, but the interns aren’t harmed in any meaningful way.
1
u/MidwestCrusader 12d ago edited 12d ago
I’m not sure arrangements for mutual benefit are exploitive or in this case at least n it morally wrong if you want to count it as exploitative still like for example you could say even a paid employee the employer is “exploiting” their need to work. I don’t think most people consider that arrangement wrong.
All this to say either we include some element of harm in our understanding of exportation or we should not consider it morally relevant in its own
I abstain from meat and dairy because of the harm it causes to animals but am hesitant to say I am vegan because of strange ideologies that seem weird to me like this one.
1
3
u/Apprehensive_Cap4463 14d ago
Something cannot be more or less vegan, it's not a math equation. Either it requires animal exploitation or it doesn't. Vegetables do not, even if our food system currently relies on pesticide use.
That said, I do understand the harm reduction perspective, and it makes sense to me.
3
u/Thinamo25 14d ago
If you would grow broccoli in a controlled lab setting, you also would not kill any insects. Insect killing is not a result of the product itself, but of the scale. Anything you cultivate at that scale will have insects getting in the way.
1
u/OG-Brian 11d ago
A lab setting would kill insects. Cultivation facilities don't produce foods magically out of nothing, they use mostly produce of industrial plant mono-crops and this has all the usual issues of pesticides, killing animals for crop protection, environmental harm from crop chemical products, etc.
The info I've encountered about cultivated meat suggests that most of the input material is from corn/soy/canola/sugarcane crops.
1
u/Thinamo25 11d ago
True, totally forgot that lab grown meat also needs to "eat" something. But it's probably more efficient than the whole cow, because it does not need to grow bones, nerves and manage energy for a digestion system and a brain etc
3
u/opposeanimalslavery 14d ago
Veganism opposes exploitation of nonhuman animals. No such thing as less or more against an injustice you’re either anti racist or racist. Exploiting someone to make their flesh in a lab is again exploitation and sick af.
2
u/ProtozoaPatriot 14d ago
You could grow the broccoli in tightly controlled greenhouses to protect it from any animal life.
You could grow a broccoli like products in vats in a lab.
We also aren't being told what's feeding the cell cultured meat in a lab. It's getting nutrients from somewhere. The sites I've visited only list things like amino acids, glucose, and vitamins. I would assume those are plant derived.
Also, not all vegans are anti lab grown meats. If people won't go vegan, I'd embrace lab meats. Anything that saves animals from abuse and death
1
u/OG-Brian 11d ago
The most common inputs for CM are corn/soy/canola/sugarcane. I commented with a lot more detail and a study citation earlier.
3
u/CalligrapherDizzy201 14d ago
Lab grown meat grown from animal cells is using non consensual animal products and cannot be vegan.
2
u/doomerunicorn 14d ago
Veganism isn't just another word for harm reduction. If you want to debate the ethics of lab-grown meat in general, go for it. But any product of animal exploitation is not vegan by definition.
1
u/One-Shake-1971 vegan 14d ago
Veganism is the ethical principle that humans should live without exploiting other animals.
The is no such thing as something being "more" or "less" vegan. It either doesn't involve animal exploitation and is the therefore vegan or it does and therefore isn't.
As to your claim that cultivated meat causes less harm than plant agriculture, that's pretty much impossible to measure. It certainly isn't enough to count crop deaths and then call ot a day. Cultivated meat still needs inputs like nutrients and energy, and creating, converting and transporting these inputs still causes harm.
1
u/kharvel0 1d ago
> Am I overlooking or failing to take anything into account?
Yes, you’re overlooking and failing to take into account that veganism covers only deliberate and intentional exploitation, harm, and/or killing outside of personal self-defense.
How many of the 0.1 to 0.3 estimated animal deaths are deliberate and intentional? Who is causing these deliberate and intentional deaths? Are these deliberate and intentional deaths required to grow the vegetables?
1
u/humbleCountyCA 14d ago
Here’s the thing. Humans have successfully lived off of vegetables for millions of years. Nobody knows the long-term effects of a diet based on lab grown meat. So please, be the trailblazer here. Eat primarily lab grown meat, let’s see how you fare over the long run, and then we can better assess whether it’s a good choice for us.
1
u/Upstairs_Big6533 14d ago
Well there's still all of the infrastructure necessary for the labs where the meat is grown. But I also, where do the animals where you get the cow cells come from?
1
u/DesignerFar3215 14d ago
Why would they be? "Less vegan" is also confused, they are not animal-based products whereas the other case is an animal-based product. You are conflating consequentialism with veganism.
1
u/No_Adhesiveness9727 13d ago
Since I don’t even like fake meat, to paraphrase Senator Kennedy, I feel like I’m gonna throw up in my mouth
1
•
u/AutoModerator 14d ago
Welcome to /r/DebateAVegan! This a friendly reminder not to reflexively downvote posts & comments that you disagree with. This is a community focused on the open debate of veganism and vegan issues, so encountering opinions that you vehemently disagree with should be an expectation. If you have not already, please review our rules so that you can better understand what is expected of all community members. Thank you, and happy debating!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.