Islamic scholars consulted by a leading producer of cultivated meat say that the newfangled protein — which is grown from animal cells and doesn’t require animals to be slaughtered — can be halal, or permissible under Muslim law.

And the Jewish Orthodox Union this month certified a strain of lab-grown chicken as kosher for the first time, “marking a significant step forward for the food technology’s acceptance under Jewish dietary law,” as the Times of Israel put it.

  • Lmaydev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    It always amazes me people think this being that created the universe cares what meat they eat.

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      A lot of food handling instructions in religion are rudimentary sanitation practices. For example, food must be consumed same day, not left out. Don’t eat raw shellfish. Don’t drink blood. Wash your hands.

      • Capt. Wolf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        49
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Pretty much all religious texts at their core are “how to not die,” “how to make more of you,” and “how not to be an asshole,” with an overarching guilt system to enforce it.

        Everything else is either people misconstruing things because they can’t make sense of their own existence, either through mental illness, misguidedness, or plain old ignorance.

        • XIN@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d never thought of religion as a form of Darwinism before.

          • Spzi@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is is, in many interesting ways. In the sense of Dawkins (“the selfish gene”), who coined the term ‘meme’, religions are complex memes. Ideas which need hosts to survive and spread. This puts evolutionary pressure on these ideas to become good at convincing brains that:

            “This idea is worth listening to. This idea is worth remembering. This idea is worth spreading.”

            Naturally, religions became good at these things or went extinct. In many cases, their evolution converged to extremes. A powerful god is obviously beaten by the all-powerful God. A stronger incentive than living a decent life on Earth is obviously receiving eternal bliss in heaven.

            Religions take great efforts to emphasize they are very important - sorry: the most important - ideas. And some which emphasize how important it is to spread them happened to spread, driving others extinct in the process.

            To this day, religions evolve in the attempt to adapt to their changing environment of culture, politics and technology, lest they go extinct. New denominations form and rise in the process.

            I agree to @capt_wolf@lemmy.world’s observation. Does the frequent inclusion of these very existential ideas (“how to not die”) hint at how early in the human evolution religions started playing a role? If so, if religions helped early humans survive, that would make being susceptible to religious ideas an evolutionary advantage for early humans. So maybe there was a synergy between genetic evolution and memetic evolution. And maybe that’s also why conspiracy theories are such a pest, piggybacking on the same mechanics.

            • XIN@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I absolutely love your brain. What are you up to for the next 20-30 years?

              • Spzi@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Heh, thanks! I plan to eat loads of delicious food, and get laid at least twice. Maybe I’ll die. Also many other goals, projects and ideas.

                Why did you ask? The question was oddly specific. What are your plans?

                • XIN@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m on the lookout for a long-term, platonic adjacent relationship with a contemplative person!

    • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The reason these practices are in place are historical

      Think about a time before modern sanitation. You eat THIS meat, you fucking die. So obviously God doesn’t want us to eat it because otherwise he wouldn’t have made it a dirty, deadly meat. Even today, these meats kill people occasionally.

      I’m an atheist, but I think it’s still worthwhile to understand the perspectives.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        People didn’t have modern sanitation elsewhere as well. That’s not the reason, the reason is that these religions were followed by people who lived “like pigs”. And since the pigs live like their owners, they were dirty and nasty as well. This religious ban is a mirror of people who followed these religions.

    • kae@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you read through the stories that define them, it makes a lot more sense. Blood and sacrifice are intertwined with life and righteousness. God is holy and set apart, and can’t be in the presence of less – so their lives and habits are built around remaining in relationship to their God.

      So the careful handling of death, food, and blood makes perfect sense from that worldview, whether you personally agree with it or not.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And isn’t it funny how the gods are always concerned with the same things their worshippers are? It would be odd to care deeply about regulating the sexual and dietary habits of the ants in our backyards. If god(s) were real I’d expect their interests to be wild and beyond our understanding, and not about what hats humans can wear and what meat is acceptable.

      • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The in-lore explanation is that we are created by the god(s) in their own image. Much like if you made a toy to play with other toys, you’d probably make something humanoid, or at least anthropomorphic.

        Unless you want to talk about Lovecraftian horror gods, but in that lore, humans weren’t created by the gods (as far as I know).

        • DarkGamer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Created in their image perhaps, but generally not in their own capability, understanding, and therefore one would assume, interests. Gods are like us because we imagine them like us, because humans draw from what we know and what we are concerned with when we imagine and dream and hallucinate. Religious writers cannot accurately fathom the interests of those with superhuman knowledge and capability, and so the gods typically want what the people who claim to speak for them also want, and offer solutions to whatever the worshippers are concerned with. Lovecraft was brilliant for acknowledging this limitation in his own way, he was known for not describing the horror because it is far too horrible and beyond our comprehension.

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, but when communicating to these minions, it makes sense to translate your intentions into what they can relate to.

        If I want a way to control my ants so that they stay away from some places but go to others, I might teach them to avoid soap and seek sugar.

        They might not understand what my bed is because it’s too big and alien for them, but if I put some soap around it, they will avoid going there. They might not understand what I mean by “go to my neighbor’s garden”, but they will be able to follow a trail of sugar to that place.

        So especially if the interests of the gods are wild and beyond our understanding, I’d expect them to give us some relatable proxies instead.

    • Uranium3006@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      organized religion is and always has been about using laws to control people and take their money through brainwashing backed with death threats where and whenever they can get away with it

    • Floey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Arguably. I think a lot of lab meat currently uses massive amounts of FBS instead of alternatives. Though I guess many vegetarians don’t have a problem with renet.

        • agoseris@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some of the cows slaughtered for meat are pregnant. Fetal bovine serum comes from the blood extracted from these cow fetuses.

          Since it is used to produce lab grown meat, it is not vegetarian

          • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pretty sure it’d still be vegetarian, just not Vegan then right? At least how I generally have heard it defined, vegetarians are OK with eating food made from animal byproducts (though it’s preferable to avoid) and only vegans refuse to consume anything with any animal byproducts

            • Spzi@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              For some vegetarians, it makes a difference wether an animal had to die in the process. It’s one thing to continously harvest milk or eggs from an animal which otherwise lives on happily. It’s another thing to eat something which could only be obtained by slaughtering an animal.

              In the same sense, many hard cheeses like Parmesan or Gran Padano aren’t vegetarian either, because they use rennet.

              • stopthatgirl7@kbin.socialOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Isn’t the vast majority of cheese now made with bacterial rennet instead of calf rennet? I remember reading that something like 95% of cheese now was made with that instead.

                • Spzi@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Would be nice to know, I’d like to read a source. On wiki, I got the impression the driving incentive is not to kill less calfs, but to produce more rennet, to ultimately produce more cheese. The German wiki quotes “Nur ca. 35 % der weltweiten Käseproduktion können mit Naturlab produziert werden.”, roughly “Only about 35% of worldwide cheese production can be produced with rennet from animals”. Technically still a vast majority.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There isn’t really a central authority for deciding if it’s vegetarian or not though.

      Technically is not an animal product so I guess it is vegetarian but also at the same time it’s still meat so it isn’t.

      I guess it depends on what your objection to meat is. If your objection is based on animal cruelty then I guess it’s probably vegetarian but if your objection is based on dietary restrictions (religious or otherwise) then obviously it’s not.

      • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hello, it is I the pope of vegetables. On behalf of the interests of all plants I do ordain this diet

      • vlad@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think vegans are completely against any meat because they think it’s unhealthy, and vegetarians think it’s immoral.

        I just think it’s tasty.

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Vegans have more to do with morals than vegetarians. Vegans may refrain from using animal based products like leather, which can be completely unrelated to health. A vegetarian diet is just that, a diet without meat. Can be for health or moral reasons, unspecified.

          Many things are tasty, many of which don’t have the detrimental implications of animal products, especially meat.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Vegans are the ones that think it’s immoral. It’s like the joke goes, how can you tell if someone is vegan, because they will tell you.

          Vegetarian is just a dietary preference.

    • VonCesaw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ethically it’s dubiously vegetarian, culinarily it’s meat. Mostly depends on how they harvested the cells tbh.

  • TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m glad to see lab-grown meat clear another hurdle. The better and more common this technology is, the closer we’ll be to finally getting rid of the meat industry and factory farming.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is a bit weird to think though that the eradication of factory farming is going to lead to a decrease in global cow populations. So based on raw numbers alone this is actually a bad thing for the species.

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We should at least factor in how natural or pleasant their existence is. Or else a maliciously engineerd creature which spreads like crazy but is genetically bound to suffer immensely all their life is somehow preferrable over a local population of happy birds.

        The species we use to harvest their products and body parts are often unable to survive naturally, some suffering from accumulated genetic defects, like being unable to support their artificially increased body weight.

        If we don’t need to reserve pastures for human-cows, there might be a chance for natural species to grow their numbers again.

        • salton@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          From the outside it seems to fit well with religious laws that intend to reduce the suffering of the animal being slaughtered. If there is no animal that needs to suffer at all in the slaughter it seems like a win if it can be understood but the believers.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I always think that lab grown meat is a weird idea why don’t they just do something interesting why don’t they do lab grown velociraptor. I want to eat a velociraptor please.

    Or better yet go through the fossil record and find the tastiest animal, and then grow that.

  • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    There was once a thought experiment about whether a hypothetical potato containing a pig gene (to make it tastily fatty) would be halal and/or kosher. IIRC, because of the different philosophical bases of the two taboos, it would have been one but not the other, though I can’t remember which.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    So many rules and hurdles to overcome just to stubbornly avoid eating plant-based foods.

    • nyoooom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be fair, plant based food can be good, but it’s a different food, not an alternative. I’ve tried a few and none of them got close to tasting of feeling like meat.

      If we can manage to produce lab grown meat at a large industrial scale, it could solve the animal suffering, pollution and water consumption problems caused by current production

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also to be fair, it only tastes “different” when you know it’s different. I remember seeing a blind taste test with a panel of trained chefs and none could tell they were eating plant-based meat.

        Of course, meat doesn’t taste like meat once you’ve seasoned it, salted it, put sauce and other condiments on it, and otherwise made it taste anything like meat. LOL

        So, we can eliminate a great amount of the “it’s not the same” factor simply by not marketing plant-based food as “gross” and “different”. Let the taste, texture, versatility, and cost speak for itself.

        Second, yes, on an industrial scale lab grown meat is better than factory farms. They likely come with the same detriments to human health as real meat, but that aside, I think lab grown meat would make a fantastic alternative to farmed meat used in pet food.

        On the climate front, lab grown meat might not be better than beef. It would honestly be a shame if the world all went to lab grown meat, only to find out decades later that it caused more harm than good.

        But, in the meantime, we have plants :)

        • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with almost everything you’ve said, but God I wish there was a way vegans could come across as anything other than preachy and annoying.

          • kaj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s tough changing minds in general, especially when the topic entails labeling your past and likely present self a serial animal abuser. Something most vegans went through already and had to overcome.

          • Spzi@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you agree with almost everything, would it be worthwhile to find a wording which preserves the good content while ditching the bad form?

            I also wonder how much of the annoying part is the speaker, and how much of it is the reluctance of listeners to question themselves.

  • danielfgom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    These “experts” are crazy. How can it be kosher when it’s not a naturally occurring meat?

    This would be what the Bible calls an abomination. I’m not touching that stuff, it’s gross!

  • BakedGoods@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Any meat can be halal and kosher as long as the person eating believes it is. The difference between halal meat and non-halal meat is nothing. It’s all in the deranged persons mind.