Would You Eat The "Meat"?

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to eat a piece of meat that was grown, SANS THE ANIMAL? Recent discoveries by some of today’s most cutting edge scientists have granted this far-fetched idea some form of reality. Dutch businessman, Willem van Eelen, first initiated the idea while spending time in a Japanese prison camp during the 1950s. Since then scientists have been working hard to generate meat products in alternative ways. One party in particular that has led the way in this field are the Universities of Eindhoven, Utrecht and Amsterdam in the Netherlands who have been “working to cultivate muscles out of the stem cells of a pig.” (Heselmans).
The initial process of growing meat can be simply described as placing cells on a petri-dish where they would then grow into who tissues. Seems easy. The hard part is being able to grow muscle on a large scale, one that might actually satisfy someone’s hunger. In order to do so researchers need to use thin sheets of membranes that would be combined with a correct combination of muscle and fat cells in order to create an appealing texture and taste. Another factor that would need to be assessed is that, “like any muscle, during this process the muscles cells would have to be ‘exercised’ so that they would grow and stretch and not turn mushy.” (Pilkington). So I guess it’s not so easy after all!


If This Doesn't Work Try The Link Provided Below. My Apologies.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/video/3302/q05-220.html

This isn’t the first time an idea of cultivating meat without livestock has been discussed. In 1932 Winston Churchill predicted in an essay that, “Fifty years hence we shall escape the absurdity of growing a whole chicken in order to eat the breast or wing by growing these parts separately under a suitable medium.” Churchill’s optimistic attitude seems to have been correct!

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2009-11/dutch-scientists-grow-first-vitro-pork

There are many different sides and feelings to this phenomenon. Some positive aspects that could arise from this is that there could be eliminating contamination problems in some meats, “avoiding animal suffering by reducing the farming and killing of livestock,” and “dramatically cutting down on food-borne ailments such as mad cow disease and salmonella or germs such as swine flu, by monitoring the growth of meat in labs.” Also, livestock is responsible for taking up 70% of all agricultural land, in the event that labs become more prominent that land could be put to other used. (Choi). Another positive aspect of growing meat that I find the most promising is the idea that it could aid in eliminating world hunger!
On the other hand many ethical and moral dilemmas are being faced as this field of study. One of the main concerns I have with practice is that many jobs could be lost as a result of eliminating the need to farm animals. Other jobs that would be affected by this would include those involved in the trucking and transportation industry that consistently rely on the fact that meat needs to be transported! But I guess this study could be the way of the future, and if done correctly the pros may very well outweigh the cons!

So the question is would you eat the “meat”?







Sources
Adams, Paul. "Dutch Scientists Grow First Pork Meat In Lab". Popular Science . 12.8.09 .

Choi , Charles Q. . "Mad Science? Growing Meat Without Animals ". Live Science . 12.8.09 .

Heselmans, Marianne . "Cultivated Meat ". New Harvest. 12.8.09 .

Pilkington, Nicky . "Where's The Beef". FoodEditorials.com. 12.8.09 .

Ternes, Ellen . "Paper Says Edible Meat Can be Grown in a Lab on Industrial Scale". University Of Maryland. 12.8.09 .

N/A, "Meat Farms- The 50 Best Inventions of 2009". Time Magazine . 12.8.09 .

Darwin Revelation: Human Intelligence

With time, humans have been able to better adapt to their surrounding environment and in turn have gained a greater understand of what they are capable of each and everyday. Our ability to understand our place in nature has allowed us to develop and evolve in a stable environment where we have flourished as a species and have grown exponentially. The way our existence has unfolded is astounding. The simple to intricate progress we have made since man was created (or in this case, has evolved into) can been seen everywhere we look in modern society, while keeping in mind our history and our lack of technology in the past. This simple observation is enough to see that we as humans have evolved greatly, not so much from a physical standpoint, but rather a mental and intellectual progression.
The many readings regarding Darwin and his theories from class initiated this revelation and have become the backing for it as well. One reading in particular really stood out to me and was something I could easily relate to. Unlike many of the readings we were assigned in class, this was one I could depict more in depth because of the time in which I am living. A look at modern society is enough to see how far human society has come, and the basis of which is an increase in general intelligence. Essentially our brains have evolved based on the impact of our surroundings and the demand for us not only to keep up with them, but to also make our lives easier. Behind this theory is fact. I’d like to take this time to direct you to a quote from Jamais Cascio’s piece titled, “Get Smarter”. In his piece Cascio states that, “The neuro­physi­ol­ogist William Calvin argues persuasively that modern human cognition—including sophisticated language and the capacity to plan ahead—evolved in response to the demands of this long age of turbulence. According to Calvin, the reason we survived is that our brains changed to meet the challenge: we transformed the ability to target a moving animal with a thrown rock into a capability for foresight and long-term planning. In the process, we may have developed syntax and formal structure from our simple language.” By reading this quote we can see how we have evolved by way of a response to our surroundings.
While I agree with Cascio and his theory, there is still some skepticism from other camps who feel that our progress in evolving technology has enabled us to simply use at as a crutch that we can’t seem to live with out. I personally disagree with this idea and feel that what we have gained from technology is more beneficial and progressive than it is harmful, but I think it is important to touch on both sides of the argument while addressing this revelation I have made. Nicholas Carr discusses this side of the argument in his article titled, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” His thesis is that we as a society have become so reliant on Google and other web based assistants, that we are becoming less intelligent. He feels that instead of thinking for ourselves we are simply jumping onto the neared Internet source and searching for the answer. And while this may be the case for some people, I truly feel that the use of such a tactic will help us in the long run. Our ability to pull information from a database at such a fast speed can lead to a quicker way of learning. For example if I had a question about neuroscience I could search Google and find out the answer to most any question I have much quicker than going to the library and searching for a book that I would in turn need to read a great deal to find specifically what I was looking for. The use of such technology has granted me a quick and easy way to gain information, and in turn become more intelligent!
But can we know everything? I guess I’m not sure how to answer this question. I think that as time progresses and we (humans) have inhabited earth long enough, we will know almost everything ON it. Not to be mistaken with everything ABOUT it. I feel that we are becoming more and more capable in figuring out earth, but we are still light years away from figuring out our universe. I’d have to agree with Nancy Ellen Abrams and Joel R. Primack who discuss in their essay titled, “Cosmology and 21st-Century Culture”. These two open this essay by getting right to business and stating, “We like to think of our generation in this Information Age as the smartest and most knowledgeable that has ever lived. Yet most people in modern Western culture have no idea what our universe looks like or how to begin to think about the way we humans may fit into the cosmos.” I agree with this quote and have to say that most people I know are not aware of our place in the universe, even myself. The whole idea is too big for many to even ponder, and for those who wish to can’t even grasp the entire thing!
In all this class, Scientific Revolutions with Cyndi Brandenburg, and the works we’ve been required to read have granted me the opportunity to have the ability to make the revelation that humans are getting smarter. We can see by way of both observing our surroundings and taking a close look at the past, that we have evolved greatly from an intellectual standpoint. Our intelligence directly relates to our advancements in technology, which have in turn improved our lives greatly by providing quick and easy access to information that may have consumed much more time to locate in the past. Our lives have evolved from something so simple to something very complex in a matter of centuries. Just think of the possibilities to come as we continue to evolve.



-This video depicts the human brain and how we as humans are able to learn new things by way of repetition. The video continues to explain how we have adapted and in turn have become generally more intelligent.


Works Cited

Abrams, Nancy and Joel Primack. "Cosmology and 21st-Century Culture." Science. September 7, 2001. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/293/5536/1769

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. 2007.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google

Cascio, Jamais. "Get Smarter." The Atlantic. July/August 2009.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200907/intelligence

In my searching process for something related to the way technology has shaped society I stumbled upon a New York Times article that explained the struggle of raising a child the correct way in a world that is so technologically advanced. In this day in age it seems almost normal to see a child with a cell phone that may many times be their own. What baffles me is their need for such a device where they ultimately develope alternate ways of communicating as opposed to face to face. Instead these children become more comfortable with text messaging a form of communication I find to be quite impersonal. The article goes on to depict other "gadgets" that adults should monitor their children's use of. The internet for example is a key component of technology that should be restricted to children until they are of an appropriate age to search and explore. In all I found this article to be suitable for what this class's main focus is. Check it out!


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/technology/personaltech/12basics.html?_r=1