We had a lively (and funny) debate at work a couple weeks ago. Essentially, it was about how technology constantly stays ahead of morality and legality. I grew up in the era that if I own something I have physical possession of that something. The younger generation that I work with have no issues with owning virtual objects (mp3 files) that stores in a 'cloud' that they can access anywhere.
Q: Would you eat lab grown beef ? A: Bottom line is of course you would. All the objections about safety are really irrelevant. If the lab grown beef is proven safe, and they will be, there really is no credible objections about eating it. It may not taste the same as normally raised beef, but nothing that a good dose of steak sauce and/or spices cannot compensate.
Q: Would you eat lab grown human flesh ?
Before anyone answer, keep in mind that there are no laws against cannibalism -- directly. There are laws about murder and desecration of a human corpse. But no laws that explicitly say: 'Eating human flesh is illegal.' Or similar wording.
Another thing to mind is that we have already grown human flesh, or specifically noses and ears to help disfigured people.
It is no stretch of the imagination or technical hardship to lab grown a chunk of human flesh like from the arm or leg. This is not something abstract like 'going back in time and kill your grandfather' paradox. Lab grown human flesh is already happening. Instead of murder or desecration of a human body, science have given us a third way to have access to human flesh without actually harming anyone.
Laws are not transnational. We may believe some ideals, such as the freedom of speech, to be 'universal', but the application and enforcement of them are locally defined and always contained by political borders.
What if some countries have laws against eating human flesh regardless of methods of access, but some countries do not ? Are we going to see 'cannibal tourism', overt or covert ?
What if in the future, there is a kitchen appliance that, if fed nutrients, can grow your own flesh ? You can buy the nutrients package at the local supermarket. Before you leave for work, give the appliance a piece of your DNA, and have a chunk of your own flesh by the day's end. Of course, a couple of engineers thought that scenario up, and it is not as fantastic as it may initially seems.
As distasteful as the idea may sound, we 'civilized' people already made allowances for when cannibalism became necessary, as Neil Hanson (above) clearly showed. If there is a personal distaste for the idea of consuming human flesh, how powerful is that belief and where did it came from ? If that distaste is based upon the moral revulsion of murder and human corpse desecration, then science have effectively removed that foundation.
Why grow human flesh in a lab? Grow your own. Why not just say we can eat children up to the age of one or two. I mean, they really aren't people at that age. SMH
Why grow human flesh in a lab? Grow your own. Why not just say we can eat children up to the age of one or two. I mean, they really aren't people at that age. SMH
Time and cost would be the biggest factors. Growing a child is expensive and vastly inefficient. Growing in a lab environment cuts out the need for a host to carry the living tissue till it can be extracted, you could also potentially just grow what is needed, like muscle tissue, without undesirable bits like bones. In addition you could cut down the years needed for it to grow, allowing for more efficient harvesting cycles.
Also presently it is not legal to kill a child, so by growing parts you effectively are working around those laws.
I'm betting the problem is that to understand the sarcasm, you also have to have an understanding of the subject matter that is the object of the sarcasm. I'm willing to bet that it all went way over Spiderman's head. Never had a chance. My post was less veiled, and called it by name. Not having and understanding of what just happened, he simply goes into rabid attack dog mode, with no clue what he is barking at. Kind of funny in itself. Maybe this will help...
Humans are like pork. Differences in sinew & fat content with loadbearing, like other earthly critters.
While I have a strong cultural aversion to cannibalism, vat grown is not the same, although there are still some moral issues, but perhaps not what you'd think.
I guess as more artificial foods are introduced, vat grown meat will be considered morally superior. Beef or chicken, I would bet, will be the first commercial products, for mass consumption. Duplicating actual steaks of muscle texture will initially be high cost products. That will actually speed it's acceptance in mass market.
The moral issue for vat grown naked ape meat is copyright. What if some people are delicious? How much is your personal taste worth? Do you own your DNA?
We struggle with this issue today, and it's just going to go on being a problem.
Posted on Wednesday, February 18, 2015 - 07:04 pm:
"good enough for Dingos, good enough for you"
There's a very good reason we have a cannibalism taboo. It's practical, you don't want to be killed and eaten. By making eating human flesh taboo, you hopefully reduce the number of murders. The other problem is prions, diseases you get from cannibalism. Kuru, for example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_%28disease%29
Vat grown protein should not have such problems....... I notice that the majority of mass food poisoning cases is from pre-prepared organic salad. There's a reason I don't do "organic".