Test-Tube Meat
“Schmeat” or “in vitro meat” is the culinary product of stem
cells harvested from a cow’s shoulder and nurtured in a laboratory into strips
of muscle. Heavily supported and funded by People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals (PETA), “schmeat” made its debut earlier this month in London where a 5-ounce
patty was served that took two years to produce. Its release was highly
anticipated among animal rights activists.
There is a vision that this technology could develop become commonplace
in society. We could potentially be able to grow our own meat at home.
Proponents argue that “schmeat” is better for the environment, more ethical
than conventional meat, and no animals have to die to produce it. They also
claim it will help reduce greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming,
and “schmeat” is healthier than conventional meat because scientists can
control the quality (no fat, no cholesterol, etc). Opponents argue the meat is
tasteless and has the consistency of a scallop and draw attention to the
potential economic impacts of introducing this to our world economy. What are
your thoughts?
1. Do you think that “schmeat” is just another science
fiction experiment or do you think its production could help feed the world and
reduce some food-industry practices promoting climate change?
2. If scientists are successful in their production of
“schmeat,” how do you think the public will respond when it begins to replace
conventional meat products?
3. What about the economic effects of “schmeat”? If it turns
out to be the best option for us environmentally and ethically, what about all
of the slaughter houses that will be put out of business, leaving hundreds of
thousands of people unemployed?
I am glad you posted this article. I was amazed when I read it the first time.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading the following please consider the following assumptions:
Schmeat is a perfect substitute for meat
People are rational consumers
The income and substitution effect are true
I think that this product has the same good intentions as the green revolution did. Theoretically distribution of this product on a large enough economy of scale would create a substitution effect in the market (ceteris paribus) and thus lead to a decrease in the price of real meat. This would mean that meat would be readily available to more people and decrease the amount of people who would otherwise go hungry. Or there would be no change.
The reaction of the public would be positive because of the income effect that the substitution effect would cause. A further reduction of cost of food would allow consumption of other goods, making the theoretical consumer happier. There could also just be no change.
The aggregate, net economic effect should be positive in the long run. So while slaughter houses and farms would shut down, in their place mass producers of schmeat, artisan schmeat users, schmeat distribution chains, and schmeat R&D should theoretically fill the economic gap. In fact, due to the income effect, the economy should expand because of schmeat. But there could also be no effect.
Economics are such a joke, but this was a great blog post.
I think in theory the idea of "schmeat" is a good idea and I partially agree with the viewpoint of the article in that the effects on the environment aren't as harsh. Also maybe a good option for vegetarians whose only obligation is killing animals. It also could be a viable option for helping the issue of hunger if this can become a cheap and easy way to 'make' meat. Although at this point it seems that taking two years to grow one hamburger really won't do much good. I think the most major issue for this meat product is public reaction. It seems like something that could be extremely controversial and could be taken in a negative light. Although I believe this might be a good idea, I myself don't know if I would eat grown meat and I think many people would share my same feelings. Economically, I think it would have the same effects as any technological advance in that eventually it might replace conventional meat farms, just as CD's replaced cassette tapes and DVD players replaced VCR's. I think that is a natural part of research and development, and like I stated previously, I don't think everyone would buy into the idea.
ReplyDelete