Lab Meat: Can in vitro meat save the animals? With Nicholas Genovese, David Pearce, and Jordi Casamitjana
(23 min) Play or download (13 MB MP3) (other formats) (via iTunes)
Lab Meat
A future with cheap lab meat could be drastically different – for humans and animals. How would it work? And is the development of this technology good for animals?
Ian talks to Nicholas Genovese, a PETA-funded scientist working on the stem cells that could make up what he calls cultured meat. I ask two vegans, transhuman philosopher David Pearce and activist Jordi Casamitjana, why they are for or against in vitro meat; and I reveal the results of my survey. Will vegans and meat eaters ever be able to get beyond the “ick” factor of cultured meat?
Nicholas Genovese, cultured meat scientist
Dr. Nicholas Genovese joined us from the University of Missouri.
You can find out more about Dr Genovese’s work on cultured meat in his interview at the Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies. Michell Sherrow of Peta has blogged about their sponsorhip of Dr Genovese’s work on lab meat.
David Pearce, transhuman philosopher
David Pearce co-founded Humanity+ and has collected his interesting writings on transhumanism and the abolition of all suffering on his site The Hedonistic Imperative.
Two blog posts that were very critical of in vitro meat, one by Jeff Perz [Facebook] and the other by “The Rational Vegan”, inspired my questions for David.
Listener Jeff Zick, who submitted a provocative question about the ethics of growing in vitro meat from human cells, requested the full uncut interview with David Pearce, so there it is.
Jordi Casamitjana, animal activist
Jordi Casamitjana is a zoologist, ethologist and consultant at Animal Protection Consultancy.
He had a central role in the abolition of bullfighting in Catalonia, Spain. Here is a video of him addressing the Catalonian Parliament [in Catalan]. He also wrote an Op Ed for CNN he wrote about his success with the campaign.
Related Links
More on Lab Meat
Ian mentioned Peta’s in vitro meat contest.
Why Cultured Meat, a site that makes an animal protection case for lab meat, posted a response to Jeff Perz’s critique.
New Harvest is another organisation advancing meat substitutes.
We got most of the information about the development of in vitro meat from this review paper:
- I. Datar, M. Betti (2010). Review: Possibilities for an in vitro meat production system. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 11, 13–22
How Disgust Sensitivity relates to Meat Consumption
Disgust seems to be one of the major themes in reactions against in vitro meat and is one of my primary research interests. I spoke a little in the episode about disgust sensitivity, vegetarianism and attitudes towards meat. Here are the references:
- Fessler, D. M. T., Arguello AP, Mekdara JM, & Macias R. (2003). Disgust sensitivity and meat consumption: a test of an emotivist account of moral vegetarianism. Appetite, 41(1), 31–41.
- Fessler, D. M. T., & Navarrete, C. D. (2003). Meat Is Good to Taboo: Dietary Proscriptions as a Product of the Interaction of Psychological Mechanisms and Social Processes. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 3(1), 1–40. doi:10.1163/156853703321598563
- Rozin, P., Markwith, M., & Stoess, C. (1997). Moralization and becoming a vegetarian: The transformation of preferences into values and the recruitment of disgust. Psychological Science, 8(2), 67.
Thanks
Our thanks to all of you who filled in our survey – the results of which I’ll post soon; our interviewees Nicholas Genovese, David Pearce, and first ever studio guest Jordi Casamitjana; to Digital media artist Robb Masters who wrote our theme …
… and VegFestUK, for nominating us for their media award. Please vote for us!
9 responses to “Lab Meat: Can in vitro meat save the animals? With Nicholas Genovese, David Pearce, and Jordi Casamitjana”
Trackbacks / Pingbacks
- - August 5, 2013
- - August 11, 2013
- - August 17, 2013
- - April 29, 2014
A note on why this show has a content warning, and one – about animal experiments – that you won’t find in the DVD store.
Much of the research into lab meat uses animal experiments. Some groups, eg IVU-Sci, have objections to even citing animal experiments, so I added a content advisory as a courtesy to them.
All sorts of interventions in human and nonhuman animals alike can be performed without killing, hurting or harming a sentient being in any way. Yes, there are important issues of consent here
(cf. http://www.amazon.com/The-Immortal-Life-Henrietta-Lacks/dp/1400052173 )
But if cells from a biopsy performed for a legitimate medial purpose, i.e. to help a human or nonhuman patient, are later used to save the lives of millions, I think one’s moral scruples can start to become a bit theological. Real life is messy.
Would you eat in-vitro human meat? Would you eat in-vitro pig meat?
I believe that if my answer to this question is different if replacing the word “human” by “pig” then it is a speciste approach.
I think its great that vegans don’t want to eat this! They are already doing the best they can for the world. It’s about converting the meat eaters.
No matter how you slice it (pun intended) “lab meat” harms sentient beings. Whether we’re talking about the individual animals used to procure tissue from, or the fact that the very idea of trying to produce meat in any fashion is abhorrently speciesist and anthropocentric. Non-human animals are sentient beings who value their lives and deserve, as do human animals, to thrive and flourish free from exploitation and oppression. “Lab meat” is another example of trying to sell us with the oxymoron of humane exploitation.