• Light/Dark

[ArsTechnica] Some US states are now trying to ban lab-grown meat

Teh_Lurv

Teh_Lurv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,390
ArsTechnica is reporting that Republicans in several states with heavy ranching or meat-packing industries are in the process of passing legislation that would outlaw the production and sale of lab-grown meat. Among the reasons cited are unspecified "health concerns" of the meat, the potential impact on local established industries, ...and because one of the proponents is Bill Gates.

Months in jail and thousands of dollars in fines and legal fees—those are the consequences Alabamians and Arizonans could soon face for selling cell-cultured meat products that could cut into the profits of ranchers, farmers, and meatpackers in each state.

State legislators from Florida to Arizona are seeking to ban meat grown from animal cells in labs, citing a "war on our ranching" and a need to protect the agriculture industry from efforts to reduce the consumption of animal protein, thereby reducing the high volume of climate-warming methane emissions the sector emits.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Just last summer, federal agencies gave their first-ever approvals to two companies making cell-cultivated poultry products, which are appearing on restaurant menus. The meat substitutes have garnered the support of some significant investors, including billionaire Bill Gates, who has been the subject of attacks from supporters of some of the state legislation proposed.

"Let me start off by explaining why I drafted this bill," said Rep. David Marshall, an Arizona Republican who proposed legislation to ban cell-cultured meat from being sold or produced in the state, during a hearing on the bill. "It's because of organizations like the FDA and the World Economic Forum, also Bill Gates and others, who have openly declared war on our ranching."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The proposed legislation in Alabama could have a large impact on NASA, which is currently researching meat-alternatives for astronauts in that state.

Crawford said that legislators had heard from NASA, which expressed concern about the bill's impact on programs to develop alternative proteins for astronauts. An amendment to the bill will address that problem, Crawford said, allowing an exemption for research purposes.
...
Even with the proposed amendment to allow research, Kolbeck said the ban could still have serious implications for NASA.

"The problem with cutting out only an exemption for research is that NASA is not going to be in the business of making food products," Kolbeck said. "We need American companies to make these kinds of products to feed our astronauts, and this industry will die if states like Alabama make it illegal and a criminal misdemeanor for companies like mine to sell our products."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

arstechnica.com

Some states are now trying to ban lab-grown meat

Spurious “war on ranching” cited as reason for legislation.
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com

Serve my lab-grown steak well done ERA if old.
 
Pirateluigi

Pirateluigi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,437
Maybe they need to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and find a new industry. Get their resume in hand, walk right into the CEOs office and don't take no for an answer.
 
Dogo Mojo

Dogo Mojo

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,305
Every single fucking thing is "a War" to republicans. It has to be exhausting to be so eternally terrified of everything.
 
DarthMasta

DarthMasta

Member
Feb 17, 2018
5,058
You guys are aware that's always how things go, right? If your money is built on butchering animals and you have influence, what do you think is going to happen?

If this will ever work, it will come from places that aren't tied to the existing meat business.
 
napkins

napkins

Member
Nov 18, 2017
2,100
i wonder how many of them think things like impossible and beyond are actually lab grown meat. my mom is deep into right wing bullshit, and she honestly thought beyond burgers were lab grown
 
Lump

Lump

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,282
The first company to get tasty lab grown meat going in massive quantities is going to generate so much goddamn money (let's be real, it'll probably be Amazon)
 
Hrodulf

Hrodulf

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,556
This was always going to happen, I'm just surprised they needed any motivation from the traditional meat industries. Conservatives have always been obnoxiously vocal in their opposition to any changes we might make in the way we raise, produce, and consume meat.
 
Beren

Beren

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,787
Once the costs of lab-grown become noticeably cheaper and it's widely available, that tune will change fast.

If they actually give a damn about the ranchers, they should be talking about investing money to transition them into an adjacent industry, such as lab-grown meat, for instance.
 
fragamemnon

fragamemnon

Member
Nov 30, 2017
7,306
This is just special interest influence at work. Ranchers and meatpackers are an extremely powerful special interest bloc in some states and at the federal level through a block of rural representatives, this is the special interest group flexing its muscle. They bully the Interior/Bureau of Land Management ALL the time so their cows can rip up government land for cheap.

I think the article/post here is a bit off because there appears to be much more action to label the products as not "meat" than there is outright banning of it.

Beren said:
If they actually give a damn about the ranchers, they should be talking about investing money to transition them into an adjacent industry, such as lab-grown meat, for instance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is like the 'learn to code' meme , completely different industries and skillsets. I'm all for not subsidizing ranchers and their behavior, but the answer here feels like they need to just tax ranchers and meat-packers for the emissions on the cattle per head. Want less taxes? Ranch cows that have higher yield per head.
 
smurfx

smurfx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,085
as long as a huge state like california doesn't ban it then it doesn't matter what they do. if anything it might incentivize some states to try and get a monopoly on lab grown meat and dominate the industry if it takes off.
 
Beren

Beren

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,787
fragamemnon said:
This is just special interest influence at work. Ranchers and meatpackers are an extremely powerful special interest bloc in some states and at the federal level through a block of rural representatives, this is the special interest group flexing its muscle. They bully the Interior/Bureau of Land Management ALL the time so their cows can rip up government land for cheap.

I think the article/post here is a bit off because there appears to be much more action to label the products as not "meat" than there is outright banning of it.



This is like the 'learn to code' meme , completely different industries and skillsets. I'm all for not subsidizing ranchers and their behavior, but the answer here feels like they need to just tax ranchers and meat-packers for the emissions on the cattle per head. Want less taxes? Ranch cows that have higher yield per head.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My ignorance of the field might make the actual suggestion unsuitable, but I think the spirit is valid. If the industry is on the downturn (and we want it to be, for a lot of reasons), we should invest in helping them make the transition. It's not "learn to code," it's "we're going to pay your way through school and help guide you in this new career of coding." The government takes on the burden and is an active participant.
 
astroturfing

astroturfing

Member
Nov 1, 2017
6,989
Suomi Finland
how did i guess with absolute certainty it would be the Republicans..?' i've never even been near America lol.

ohhhhh yeah it's because they are pathetically predictable reactionary anti-progress right-wing lunatics.
 
disparate

disparate

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,580
fragamemnon said:
This is just special interest influence at work. Ranchers and meatpackers are an extremely powerful special interest bloc in some states and at the federal level through a block of rural representatives, this is the special interest group flexing its muscle. They bully the Interior/Bureau of Land Management ALL the time so their cows can rip up government land for cheap.

I think the article/post here is a bit off because there appears to be much more action to label the products as not "meat" than there is outright banning of it.



This is like the 'learn to code' meme , completely different industries and skillsets. I'm all for not subsidizing ranchers and their behavior, but the answer here feels like they need to just tax ranchers and meat-packers for the emissions on the cattle per head. Want less taxes? Ranch cows that have higher yield per head.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Farmers in general are one of the shittiest special interest groups in the world, they threw a royal fit in the EU because of environmental regulations not letting them dump chemicals in water and carbon into the air as freely.
 
fragamemnon

fragamemnon

Member
Nov 30, 2017
7,306
Beren said:
My ignorance of the field might make the actual suggestion unsuitable, but I think the spirit is valid. If the industry is on the downturn (and we want it to be, for a lot of reasons), we should invest in helping them make the transition. It's not "learn to code," it's "we're going to pay your way through school and help guide you in this new career of coding." The government takes on the burden and is an active participant.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't think your intent, or the intent of the original commuter on this is made in bad faith by any means.

I lived through deindustrialization; this is the exact same argument and proposed solution. We'll be feeling the effects of that policy for many years to come-not just politically through right--populism engulfing one of our political parties, but also the real cost to human flourishing through wide-scale hollowing out of communities, dehumanization, unchecked mental illness and substance abuse, etc.

Even the mass disappointment of college graduates and the student loan debt crisis track back to the measured indifference in how government treated deindustrialization policy.

I just really wary when this high-minded approach shows up in conversation given the very recent history of such approaches.

edit: I don't even know that it's right to say that the meatpacking/ranching industry needs to downturn. It needs to get cleaner (and respect biodiversity more) but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing if we have less economic output from the industries as long as they start actually paying out for their negative externalities.
 
Beren

Beren

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,787
fragamemnon said:
I don't think your intent, or the intent of the original commuter on this is made in bad faith by any means.

I lived through deindustrialization; this is the exact same argument and proposed solution. We'll be feeling the effects of that policy for many years to come-not just politically through right--populism engulfing one of our political parties, but also the real cost to human flourishing through wide-scale hollowing out of communities, dehumanization, unchecked mental illness and substance abuse, etc.

Even the mass disappointment of college graduates and the student loan debt crisis track back to the measured indifference in how government treated deindustrialization policy.

I just really wary when this high-minded approach shows up in conversation given the very recent history of such approaches.

edit: I don't even know that it's right to say that the meatpacking/ranching industry needs to downturn. It needs to get cleaner (and respect biodiversity more) but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing if we have less economic output from the industries as long as they start actually paying out for their negative externalities.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I completely agree that we've bungled it in the past. I think it's still the right solution - we just have to actually do it WELL. I think it's the neutered half-measures that happen that lead to the bad results you bring up. If we put the time, money, and effort into it, we'd get the results we wanted that would help people. But that's what a lot of government's issues are: money and effort.

If there is going to be a shift in an industry that shrinks it, I don't know what else to suggest. Trying to pretend it isn't happening or fighting it hasn't worked in the past, either.
 
Coyote Starrk

Coyote Starrk

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
57,711
Beren said:
Once the costs of lab-grown become noticeably cheaper and it's widely available, that tune will change fast.

If they actually give a damn about the ranchers, they should be talking about investing money to transition them into an adjacent industry, such as lab-grown meat, for instance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah that's not happening. Even if lab grown meat becomes the norm I bet we will see taxes and regulations levied against it in many states in order to make it less competitive against traditional forms of meat long before we ever see anything about transitioning classic farms into other industries.


The average ranch owner is not going to be interested in switching over to lab grown meat. Especially family owned enterprises that have been around for generations.
 
Aaronrules380

Aaronrules380

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
23,064
This is such a clear hit job from current industries afraid of competition. Health concerns is laughable, given it's still fucking meat, and if anything will be healthier due to the lack of the huge amount of antibiotics and chemicals pumped into animals in the current meat industry by comparison
 
disparate

disparate

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,580
SteveMeister said:
I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm asking whether you think it's a reasonable expectation that an industry employing half a million people in the US would bother trying to protect their jobs when threatened.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean inasmuch as an oil industry will attempt to "defend" themselves from carbon regulations
 
Laephis

Laephis

Member
Jun 25, 2021
3,481
SteveMeister said:
I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm asking whether you think it's a reasonable expectation that an industry employing half a million people in the US would bother trying to protect their jobs when threatened.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
When those same people vote for a political party that claims to love the "free market", then their actions are in fact not reasonable. They can live and die by the economic system they worship.
 
Pirateluigi

Pirateluigi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,437
SteveMeister said:
I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm asking whether you think it's a reasonable expectation that an industry employing half a million people in the US would bother trying to protect their jobs when threatened.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Then they need to figure out how to compete or move on.

I've worked for industries that no longer exist. It's hard but it's also the way progress goes.

Ideally we have UBI to help people through these transitions but the same people that run these industries are the people that will never let UBI happen.
 

Dis

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,191
SteveMeister said:
I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm asking whether you think it's a reasonable expectation that an industry employing half a million people in the US would bother trying to protect their jobs when threatened.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think it's not reasonable for an industry to fight tooth and nail to stop a better alternative to a planet destroying industry from getting a foot in the door any chance they can get yes. Does it suck they'll have to find other jobs? Absolutely, do I think that should mean I have to find it reasonable to accept continued planet wide devastation in the name of those jobs? Fuck no

Should I find the fight to keep that dogshit system the USA calls healthcare which has caused deaths and debt on millions of Americans reasonable simply because those jobs at awful companies who profit off it may not exist if a better alternative was in place too?
 
Last edited:
Temp_User

Temp_User

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,988
Unfortunately, there is dumb historical precedent for this type of protectionism and in an election year politicians will bite on anything that will throw money their way.

When margarine was invented in 1870, Wisconsin's legislators did not take kindly to the new butter substitute, and neither did the strong dairy lobby. To protect rural dairy farms, they passed an 1895 bill banning the sale of margarine dyed yellow to look like butter. Because margarine was less expensive than butter, lawmakers hoped this would keep the dairy industry from collapsing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Broward

Broward

Member
Oct 26, 2017
59
There is an effort underway in Florida as well, just awaiting Gov DeSantis' signature at this point. Here is an article from last week about it.

www.firstcoastnews.com

'We want to protect Floridians': Lawmakers pass bill banning sale, manufacturing of cultivated meat

The Florida Legislature passed a bill on Wednesday that would make selling or manufacturing cultivated meat a misdemeanor.
www.firstcoastnews.com www.firstcoastnews.com

"Florida could become one of the first states to ban the sale of cultivated meat. Lawmakers in both the House of Representatives and Senate passed a wide-ranging agriculture bill this week that includes a ban on selling or manufacturing cultivated lab-grown meat; It is now awaiting Gov. Ron DeSantis' signature."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.