Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

taptapper t1_je82ji0 wrote

Reply to comment by Senyu in Israeli scientists develop drought-resistant tomatoes by TheLieDetectorBro

So you're OK in a world without root vegetables

3

Senyu t1_je8e36z wrote

If hydroponics cannot replicate the conditions necessary to grow root vegetables then some agricultural aspects can remain outside of the cultural preservation of the practice. If root vegetables are a necessity for the environment then they can be exceptions to the process of shifting the bulk of our agriculture to tech like hydroponics & vitromeat. Regardless, moving most of our traditional agriculture to hydroponics + vitromeat is a boon that cannot be ignored simply due to the outstanding ecological & ethical aspects. And with further development the economical aspect would be better than the traditional birth to slaughter/grow on vast amounts of land cycle that we currently use. The logistical cost reduction of making every major city self sustaining not only helps the environment but it gives us a very viable means to actually end world hunger in a more effective manner than our current processes. The benefits of shifting away from traditional agriculture for the bulk of our planet's food needs cannot be ignored.

10

taptapper t1_je92mkz wrote

> If root vegetables are a necessity for the environment

People in some environments eat roots, some eat seeds. Potato vs rice. There is no single ag solution that applies across the globe.

Increased rice production means nothing to areas that don't eat fucking rice

1

Senyu t1_jeavb9b wrote

You are greatly misunderstanding the point of coupling hydroponics and vitromeat tech if you are worried about different regional dietary practices. There is no reason why different regions of the world couldn't grow different crops and meat based off their cultural practices. Food facilities simply means more food growing options, including crops that typically aren't grown in a region because the growth environment is contained and not typically susceptible to weather. All it does is open the door to more types of food including the ones already in the region.

1

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_je8nefq wrote

Vitromeat will cause immense health issues. The concept of a low impact food industry is great but in practice you will see the truth of its value. I agree that the world's method of growing food is hellish but evolving it even farther from nature is not the right path.

−2

Machiavelcro_ t1_je8sc5f wrote

Why do you think this is the case?

Created in a lab environment, isolated from dangerous contamination like e-coli and other bacteria, free from growth hormones, and with the added benefit that you can control the micronutrients in the growth medium, tweaking stuff like the amount of b12.

Let's be objective about things, not take some pseudo religious "we are steering further away from nature" mentality.

4

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_je8til3 wrote

My background is growing cells in mediums using controlled environments. Even in bsl3 environments contamination is still easy. If they are going to create immortal cell lines like HeLa the meat will literally be cancer cells. The chance of the nutrients being healthy are slim to none. Making a medium is not hard, but sourcing all the ingredients from natural organic sources will not happen in mass production. Religion is not the view point in this, science of man is. I know the science and because of it I'm happy to stick with creation.

Have all the lab grown meat you want.

2

Senyu t1_jeavt38 wrote

Which is why technology development for this kind of stuff must be aggressively persued. If we want to avoid a rapid fluctuation in our carrying capacity we must shift away from traditional agriculture and further develop our hydroponics and vitromeat technologies. The boons are too important to ignore. We can improve processes.

1

taptapper t1_je9379r wrote

> isolated from dangerous contamination like e-coli and other bacteria

Stop parroting pseudo science and learn the facts. Most varieties of e-coli are not harmful to people, but since it's presence indicates that harmful bacteria is present it's used as an indicator of danger.

Do you really think all of humanity's food can be grown in buildings? And "isolated"... Go watch Fantastic Fungi and educate yourself. We are part of a web of life with a proper balance between organisms. Hydro facilities spend all their time fighting infections

−2

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeacmxp wrote

The truth is, lab grown mediums have to use heavy antibiotics to grow cultures. People who are concerned with antibiotic resistances should be concerned about this.

3

Senyu t1_jeavxv2 wrote

An important point that must be considered as we further develop the tech. Thanks for sharing insight into the field.

2

TestaOnFire t1_jea9rkc wrote

>Hydro facilities spend all their time fighting infections

You mean depuration center or hydroponic?

1

GforceDz t1_je922lz wrote

Just thinking about some of the cheap junk food snacks that are made, imagine the meat version of that.

You know how they say banana flavor is based on how bananas used to taste.

Bananas are essentially cloned now and at risk of dying out because of a lack of resistance to disease.

Imagine this happening to lab grown meat.

2

TestaOnFire t1_jeaalu9 wrote

>Bananas are essentially cloned now

Because banana are sterile. The wild variety have this big seeds that cannot be eaten.

Plus, we still can create resistance to desease in bananas... GMO is the easiest one.

2

Senyu t1_jeawd03 wrote

Why not have cell stock refreshed now and then so we aren't dependent on a single cell lineage forever? However long a stock cycle may be, we can develop processes that periodically draw fresh cell sources from animals. It's not like farm animals are simply going to disapear, but ideally we can reduce the vast number of farm animals necessary to sustain our planet's food needs.

2

TestaOnFire t1_jea99i8 wrote

Hello, i am a uni student in agronomy (i dont know if this is the right translation from the italian word "Agronomo, which is basically the expert of vegetable production)

The concept was discussed first by Normann and Vought. The first wanted to basically create an enviroment where vegetable could be grown to the maximum, the second wanted a return to the "nature" of agricolture (putting a cap on the human population).

I personally dont side... But what you claim is totally stupid in any way. There is nothing natural in agricolture if we want to see it from the prospective of "nature".

0

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeabyjw wrote

I didn't say that the world's system of agriculture was natural. Your disrespect is noted.

You are free to defend the progression towards fifteen minute cities. I am free to defend the original growth of plants and animals.

We reap what we sow.

1

TestaOnFire t1_jeadb41 wrote

>We reap what we sow.

In your case... Nothing, because you cant feed the current population with just gathering erbs in the wild.

1

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeal6ft wrote

WE reap what WE sow.

I think your understanding of that is "We are entitled to other people's work.".

1

TestaOnFire t1_jeam3jb wrote

Explain the "WE", because you really sound like someone who didnt go to place where famine is a problem.

It's very easy talking about "Oh we should just produce things with the Biological metod" when you live in a country where you dont have to suffer food crysis... But trust me, the problem doesn't end an YOUR steps.

Start by buying only at biological supermarket, let's see if it is really that easy as you claim it is.

1

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeasgyb wrote

I live on a farm. So I can skip the supermarket at will and it is that easy.

"We" is a collective of people.

I am aware of famines. I am also aware of governments playing their part in the bounty of food not reaching those in need. While I don't agree with farming methods or gmo, I do know there is more than enough food to feed people.

What I am calling out as extremely foolish is getting rid of farms (which are the reason you are even alive currently) and believing that a city run industrial farming system will sustain you. What happens when something contaminates or corrupts the food systems? Talk about a food crisis. And that is besides the fact that the food will be extremely unhealthy and cancer causing to the human body.

The truth speaks for itself, and one day you will see the system you are fighting for let you down.

1

Senyu t1_jeb4u6p wrote

I don't see how food facilities in cities wouldn't be better than vast swaths of farmland that must transport its good. Sure, you raise an important point that there are real risks that must be addressed and of course any facility could have issues. But if the majority of the major cities in the world had food facilities then the issues of one become minimal until it's resolved given there is an overall larger net production of food.

The amount of land used by farms must decrease. While farms won't vanish entirely simply for cultural reasons they must not be solely relied on for feeding the planet in the future. Improving the food quality comes tech improvements, but farmland alone is not sufficient for our current population trajectory.

1

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeb62kf wrote

Prove the nutrition and health of the new technologies before you rush headstrong into it. There are red flags already. Look into the logistics of the new technologies from start to finish also. I do not understand why humanity is wanting to fix nature when it is not broken. Big agriculture is broken. If individuals became stewards of the earth at their own homes, reliance on external food sources would be extremely diminished.

You believe in science and humanity, it is clear.

It is an honor to receive your thoughts in a respectful manner.

2

Senyu t1_jeb9tr6 wrote

I agree that proof of nutrition and health must be ensured and verified before rollout. All new technological progress comes with hurdles, I have no disillusion that hydroponics and vitromeat tech has its own obstacles. However, I have faith in humanity's ability to solve those problems. I do not believe we can effectively becomes stewards of the Earth at a food production level without drastic population reduction. Our society & infrastructure is simply not geared to supporting individual made food production to meet the planet's needs. We must further develop and implement hydroponics & vitromeat in order to sustain the bulk of our population's food needs with minimal ecological costs to the planet. It has nothing to do with nature being broken or not, it's merely logistics of having a multi-billion sized population. Big Agra is most definitely broken, but even if that was resolved we still have vast amounts of people to feed and the ecological costs of traditional agriculture cannot be ignored simply because it's the way we've always done it.

We can become more effective stewards of the Earth in a general sense if we can off-load the bulk of our food needs to facilities located in every major city of the world. Traditional agriculture will still exist, most likely in a cultural preservation sense. But swaths of traditional agricultural land could be return to a natural ecological state if we implement hydroponics and vitromeat at scale.

1

TestaOnFire t1_jebuv0y wrote

>I live on a farm.

Good. Now give me some of the vegetable you grow and what system you use... Dont worry, i study this things, so if you want to be specific i can understand.

>What I am calling out as extremely foolish is getting rid of farms

No one wants to get rids of farms. They are not just place to produce foods... Or at least they shouldn't. They should be a part of the society and ecosystem.

>What happens when something contaminates or corrupts the food systems? Talk about a food crisis. And that is besides the fact that the food will be extremely unhealthy and cancer causing to the human body.

This happen faaaaaar more often in uncontrolled enviroment such as Farms... Hey, did you follow all the steps to be sure your soil doesn't have an excess in N? Because that might create a build up of carcinogenic substance in vegetable... But if you stay too low the N will be removed by water being drained...

You know what could solve this problem? If the water wouldn't go away... Oh that's right, a hydroponic.

0

Arrrrrr2D2 t1_je8mwik wrote

I feel old knowing how much better plants that grow organically in the ground taste.

2