Poll of the Day > Would you eat a meat-based plant substitute?

(+) Yeah! (+)

There's a chance, albeit a stretch, that gen-ed synthetic meat might become cheaper than plants, as such you could have simulated beans made out of meat+gelatin+tallow
---

Eat? Potentially. Make a significant part of my diet? Probably not, given that omitting actual plants loses a whole lot of nutrients that meat-based substitutes aren't likely to be able to replace.
---

No more than just enough to satisfy my curiosity.

The real thing is great as-is.
---

I'm still waiting on Arby's to start letting me buy marrots, along with whatever other megetables they come up with.

There's a chance, albeit a stretch, that gen-ed synthetic meat might become cheaper than plants

No there isnt

---

Red_Frog posted...

I'm still waiting on Arby's to start letting me buy marrots, along with whatever other megetables they come up with.

This is what I thought of when a I saw this topic.
---

I'd try it out of curiosity, but it doesn't seem practical.

Lokarin posted...

There's a chance, albeit a stretch, that gen-ed synthetic meat might become cheaper than plants,

As genetic manipulation improves, I suspect it'd more be a matter of lab-raised flesh being indistinguishable from either plant or animal given the structural makeup and its artificial origins. That said, if synth-meat became cheaper than plants, we'd see synth-plants which would be cheaper than synth-meat.
---

even if you streamline the culturing process to grow meat in the lab far more efficiently than it is now, meat is inherently more energy dense so it requires more water and resources

theres practically no chance of it becoming cheaper than plants

---

Wheres the Fuck yes, bud. option?

---

I honestly look forward to the future where we all eat chemically-flavored protein slurry and do away with food entirely.

What I really want is the 1950s sci-fi future where we all eat food pills that contain 100% of necessary nutrients, but that doesn't seem scientifically feasible based on what we know today.

I'd also be all-up for appetite suppressants and all vital nutrients being drip-fed into a body via IV, but it seems like it would be awkward and annoying to have to drag the bag around everywhere you go.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'd also be all-up for appetite suppressants and all vital nutrients being drip-fed into a body via IV, but it seems like it would be awkward and annoying to have to drag the bag around everywhere you go.

I thought about doing this the world went completely vegan for some absurd reason... Until then, I like food, so...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Until then, I like food, so...

I don't. I mostly just eat to get rid of hunger and to avoid dying, not because I actually enjoy the act of eating all that much.

If I could magically give up eating tomorrow and never have to eat again for hunger/survival purposes, I'd happily give up the flavors I like in exchange for the convenience of not having to buy/prepare food (and saving the time/money spent on it). I don't really enjoy the act of eating itself, or the experience of flavor, other than as something I NEED to do to not die. Most of my meals usually involve just shoveling food in like coal into a furnace to keep the body going, then getting back to whatever it was I was doing in the first place. Or straight up multitasking while eating.

(Eating-as-social-experience is also an understandable plus, but you can have social interaction without eating, so it's not as if it's a necessity.)

I'd also give up sleep if I could theoretically have normal functioning energy levels and sanity without it. I don't really enjoy sleeping as much as I just hate what happens to me when I don't.

We actually had a topic about this here not that long ago. A lot of people voiced opinions on whether or not eating and sleeping were positives in and of themselves or just inconveniences we need to put up with as the inefficient meat-sacks we are.
---

Without things like eating/hunger and sleep, Im not sure if Id still feel human

especially sleep. That break or restart between days seems like a big part of sustaining our consciousness. Existing in just one long endless day for years and years until you die sounds horrifying

---

Mead posted...

Without things like eating/hunger and sleep, Im not sure if Id still feel human

Maybe that's a plus.

I usually shit on Shadow for being a fan of transhumanism, but honestly, if I had the option to download my brain into an android body that felt mostly the same but was immune to disease, aches and pains, and which didn't need to eat or sleep, I'd probably leapt at it in a heartbeat. Or conversely, just plunk me in a pod and download my brain directly into the Matrix (though preferably one that isn't as shitty as the one in the movie).

The real question is, in a scenario like that, where we'd presumably be much more logical creatures (ie, a lot of emotional and irrationality is tied to biochemistry, which would either be strictly controlled or eliminated in that sort of scenario), would we still be "us"? Is a human without anger, fear, or panicked adrenaline rushes still human?

And even if it really isn't, would that be a bad thing? We've done a pretty shitty job of BEING human for a few thousand years now - maybe we'd be better off with a bit less humanity.

Of course, the problem there is that then we also have to ask whether things like joy, love, mercy, or simple contentment are also tied to that biochemistry, and whether we'd have to lose them as well. At which point, the cost might wind up being far worse than the benefits (though some might disagree).



Mead posted...

especially sleep. That break or restart between days seems like a big part of sustaining our consciousness. Existing in just one long endless day for years and years until you die sounds horrifying.

We mostly only tend to think that way because we literally can't imagine a scenario where an alternative exists. We've actually managed to stave off psychosis due to sleep deprivation via certain narcolepsy drugs in experimental tests, but we've never really had anyone live long-term to see how well they adjust. Certainly none of us have ever experienced it for ourselves.

My suspicion is that the main drawback would be that our sense of time would wind up disrupted a bit because we'd lose one of the anchors we use to judge by... but it's also entirely possible that we'd find other ways to adjust. Maybe just more deliberate scheduling and time-management would offset most of the issues.

Without the fatigue effect where we notice our ability to concentrate and focus fading, we might never feel the need for long-term downtime. And even if it turns out we need SOME downtime for some technical reason, it might be possible for us to effectively "power down" for a half hour or so a day rather than needing the full 8-hours of sleep.

All of this is theoretical anyway, because it's not like we'll likely ever be able to overcome the biological issues involved, before we even have to start considering the psychological ones.
---

I mean, I guess if that works for you. I personally like the taste of most foods. And wouldnt give it up if I didnt have to. And like Mead, I dont think Id feel human. And I wouldnt want to be android. Sometimes it sounds ok, but eh... Without sleep, I feel people would end up working more. And longer hours. Sometimes days, if we really didnt need to sleep...
---

trying to make veggies taste like meat means making the veggies taste better

and so this would be the exact opposite. deliberately making food taste worse. ill pass.
---