this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
733 points (98.4% liked)
Futurology
2529 readers
116 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I culture cells for a living. Not that these are the only ways, but the most common and effective ways to grow cells in the lab is to add either FBS (fetal bovine serum) or BSA (bovine serum albumin) to the culture media. Currently we don't mass produce BSA in an animal free manner and FBS is by nature an animal product. Granted, that the products of one animal may in fact allow manufacturers produce more than enough 'animal-free meat' to overcome this but I haven't seen any numbers. I'm interested in hearing more about these techniques going forward and in determining if animal-free products can really be produced animal free.
That's what they say.
Where did you read this? Could you link a source please?
https://meatable.com/faq/
Bottom of the page
A man of culture I see
Relatable.
What if it requires 1/1000th the number of animals … but each one suffers a hundred times more?
Would it be worth it?
How do you quantify suffering?
If you don’t have a way of quantifying suffering, perhaps all utilitarian calculus is bunk?
Unfortunately, I don't really understand your response.
You talked about one hundred times the suffering. What does that mean? To me, the way animals are held in mass production is completely unethical and there is no way to make it worse... So how do you make the animals suffer even more?
stem cells can suffer? this isn't cloning an animal, it's cloning certain tissues.
Hence the word “if” here. A hypothetical scenario.
From a utilitarian perspective, you're still reducing overall suffering by an order of magnitude, so your scenario is still a greater good.
This assumes a linear value function of course
Sorry, this is all my addled GenX brain could think of when I read that.
https://youtu.be/GIuZSaqse-A
😁