Recently, I was invited to participate in a brainstorming discussion about better ways to monitor calving in cattle herds. Historically it has been a difficult task requiring frequent checks both day and night to ensure that no problematic births are missed and interventions made when needed. The discussion ranged through a whole series of ideas from the obvious such as a monitor attached to the ident tag on the cows ear, to the ludicrous like a bioengineered virus that makes the cow turn bright orange when about to go into labor.
It was an interesting discussion and I enjoyed the food, ideas, and free pizza. What I couldn't get out of my head however was the thought that this seemed like it might be a poor idea for a new product. That whatever business developed as a result of this would be eclipsed before very long by other, much more revolutionary, new technologies that are being rapidly developed and will revolutionize how we eat and how we get our food. These are myriad and range from the small to the epic in size but taken separately they don't do all that much. It is when they are considered in aggregate that we can see large shifts in how we may eat in the future.
The most notable of these at the moment is the ability to grow cells independent of the rest of an organism. At first this might seem just another scientific curiosity. Something that research labs might pick up and use but is of little consequence to the average individual. This knowledge and ability however, is one of the most important discoveries of the century since it allows us to change how we approach biology. With this ability we can grow organs for transplant in dishes and distribute as many as needed or wanted wherever they can be of use. This is an amazing medical breakthrough to be sure but there is no reason we cannot use organs and tissues in other ways. When we eat meat we are simply consuming the organs and flesh of some kind of animal. Animals are notoriously expensive to produce in monetary, temporal, and ecological costs. Much of that animal wasn't terribly useful for meat and while we have found uses for much of it they tend to be less cost effective than the meat for which the animal was primarily raised. If we can simply put it into a vat and grow just the parts we want though, it becomes far cheaper to produce the meat on all counts. No longer is it necessary to grow hooves when what you really want is the tongue or feathers when what you want is the breast. When grown in a sterile environment there is less chance of spreading diseases to other animals or to humans and that means we can cut back on the need for excessive shots or medications in our food. It can be made tastier too. We can produce just those cells or groups of cells that make the most desirable meats and eat those preferentially at little difference to cost since they can be grown at similar rates to other meat types but are not limited in quantity as they are in the original animal.
With all these benefits and more it seems only a matter of time before this becomes the new industry standard. The current price of a hamburger made by this method is getting cheaper all the time. When it might start to really challenge the market is hard to say exactly but there are multiple researchers and startup companies looking to do just that. All of which comes back to the original question of how long or viable the current cattle industry and its associated companies might be. Can they find some way to compete with cheaper meat by another source? How long will it take the eating public to finally feel comfortable eating lab beef? Would you choose to eat something like this or even a lab grown carrot? A healthy discussion in the comments is welcome.
References and further reading:
Bartholet, Jeffrey. "Inside the meat lab." Scientific American 304.6 (2011): 64-69.
Galusky, Wyatt. "Technology as responsibility: Failure, food animals, and lab-grown meat." Journal of agricultural and environmental ethics 27.6 (2014): 931-948.
Post, Mark J. "Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects." Meat Science 92.3 (2012): 297-301.