Meat without animals

Image source: Popular Mechanics

Discussing the difference between free-range and factory farmed chicken in this previous post, prompted me to consider several philosophical questions. As discussed in this excerpt from Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser, the chicken McNugget is produced from a breed of chicken known as the "Mr McDonald". The breed has been engineered to have unusually large breasts. They are slaughtered in approximately 45 days while a normal chicken would mature in 3-5 months. Urban myths have circulated on the net of chickens engineered to be without feathers, beaks or feet. These stories have been proven false as science has apparently not reached this stage of 'advancement'. But lets consider if this kind of drastic genetic engineering were in fact possible. Leaving aside the true feasibility of this supposition, what if chickens or pigs or cows could be engineered without the sentient part of their brains or without brains at all. Would they still be 'animals'? If an 'animal' was without awareness and could not experience pain or even self-induced controlled movement, could it still be considered cruel to confine it to a restrictive pen. Furthermore, could it still be considered unethical to kill and eat this 'animal' any more than doing the same to a head of lettuce? Let's also imagine that this method could produce healthy, disease free 'meat'. Perhaps the fruitarians of this world could persist with a viable ethical argument against eating this product, but it would seem to resolve the meat is murder argument of most vegetarians.

This discussion may seem far fetched, but advancements in the field of bioengineering have already successfully produced edible engineered 'meat' in the laboratory. Here is a description of this product known as 'in vitro' meat or 'cultured' meat, from the non-profit "advanced meat substitutes" organization, New Harvest:

Cultured meat is meat produced in vitro, in a cell culture, rather than from an animal. The production of cultured meat begins by taking a number of cells from a farm animal and proliferating them in a nutrient-rich medium. Cells are capable of multiplying so many times in culture that, in theory, a single cell could be used to produce enough meat to feed the global population for a year. After the cells are multiplied, they are attached to a sponge-like "scaffold" and soaked with nutrients. They may also be mechanically stretched to increase their size and protein content. The resulting cells can then be harvested, seasoned, cooked, and consumed as a boneless, processed meat, such as sausage, hamburger, or chicken nuggets.

Appetizing, isn't it? Related to this product, advancements have been made in the field of human organ production. Human bladders have successful been grown in a laboratory environment and transplanted into patients. An article from Popular Mechanics describes how this is done:

Doctors led by Retik, chief of urology at the Children's Hospital in Boston, took bladder biopsies from patients. The urothelial cells of the inner layer were separated from cells of the outer layer of muscle, and cultured. Then, researchers plaited the cells onto a spongelike biodegradable scaffold, made of a synthetic polymer and collagen, in the shape of a bladder. After a seven-week incubation period, surgeons grafted the new bladder/scaffold segments onto the patients' damaged bladders. All seven patients improved — and are continuing to thrive.

So clearly, if it were desired, the mutant chickens described earlier could be produced using the same method. But considering the popularity of processed meats, this step would appear unnecessary. The thought of lab produced meat may not be appetizing, but compared to the questionable practices used by the meat industry, including the cruel treatment of animals, and the use of antibiotics, growth hormone, nitrates and ammonia, the lab produced meat begins to sound more and more tasty. Furthermore, engineered meat can be designed specifically for human health, animal fats could be replaced by healthy omega 3 fats. Considering the likelihood of reduced agricultural production in the future, and a related global food shortage, engineered meat would seem to be a viable method of feeding humans in the future.

Meat and Memory: An Introduction

Here's a fun question. What's the best piece of meat you've ever eaten in your life?

As one gets older, the ranking of one's life experiences into bests and worsts becomes more and more ridiculous. Older memories fade and evolve in their retelling. We reach a point where we're not sure how much of a memory survives from the actual experience and how much is a product of the recalling and retelling. While we imagine we can mentally thrust ourselves back through time to a specific moment, what we actually see in our mind's eye is the latest in an endless series of copies of copies that may have little resemblance to the original.

Nevertheless, slotting our memories into categories of goods and bads and bests and worsts is part of the human condition. The sum of these simplistically categorized memories forms the basis for our decision making process. Like all animals, we need to make thousands of rapid-fire decisions every day. When we see another person, we almost instantly categorize them into one of our facile folders of likes and dislikes. This is our subconscious protecting us from potential danger--our mechanism for surviving in the fight-or-flight reality of life. The same is true of food. We need some sort of instant visual or olfactory indication as to whether the food we put in our mouths will give us life or cause illness or death. Therefore, when presented with a dish, our subconscious performs a rapid search of our memories and brings up a verdict of good or bad. Ambiguities do not indicate a clear course of action so our memories avoid them. To rank our experiences into bests and worsts is slightly different but no less simplistic. It allows our egos to set broader goals and gives us the means to set long-term plans to achieve them.

But I digress...

To return to the meat question, I'll have to narrow it down to several finalists:

• A butterflied barbecued chicken breast
  
• A broiled ribeye steak with salt and pepper
• A pan seared foie gras with peaches
• A plate of yellow-fin tuna sashimi
• An order of tuna tataki
  
• A deer loin roasted in red wine and rosemary
  

 Each of these meat experiences, at the very least, deserves an article of its own. At the most, they could be expanded to a series of autobiographical novels. For to truly delve into the joy of food, one must delve into the joy of life. Food is not eaten in a vacuum, it is inextricably linked to our experiences. Our memories of food have less to do with the actual dish that was in front of us, than with the specific time and place in which it was consumed. Conversely, a particular dish may subconsciously lead us to recall a time or feeling in our deeper past.

Thus, in this upcoming series on Meat and Memory I will explore the strange, dark corners of my history and psyche. Like an archeologist, I will dust off the hidden layers of my mind, and piece together the ruins into some semblance of understanding. Will this lead to revelation? Maybe. But as in all things, the journey is more important than the destination.

(Image: Autumn Cannibalism by Salvador Dali, 1937)