• @Whelks_chance
    link
    English
    155 months ago

    I like this idea. Animals care far less about the texture of meat, which I think is one of the most common complaints about meat substitute food eaten by humans.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      75 months ago

      The flip side to this, is that the vast majority of meat in pet foods is effectively waste from human-grade meats, for the same reason. That means the price point for competition in pet foods is significantly lower.

      It also means that there won’t be as direct of an impact on livestock numbers should pet food be sourced via synthetic meats, as it just means the byproducts which would enter the food chain for dogs instead become waste products with a cost of disposal.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        They’re only introducing it to pets because it requires very few approvals compared to human consumption. Once it’s worked for a few years (assuming) and their production systems have ramped up, seeking human approval will be much easier.

        Pet food is a stepping stone.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 months ago

        If this cheaper that offcuts humans won’t eat, that is extremely promising.

        This should be way better for the environment, way cheaper and free a lot of land.

        So wasteful to grow a whole animal for few cuts of it’s muscle.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    55 months ago

    This could be one of the game changing moments in human history. Could be so good for society and the planet as a she.

    The world population is unsustainable as is, this is a major step to making it more sustainable. But it will probably just mean we double the population again and this just slows the disaster down.