4-19-13 Cultured Meat Workshop Notes
P = Person, CM = Cultured Meat, IVM = In-vitro meat, R = Researcher
Briefing
- initial background info is reviewed
P asks for clarification whether or not you need to get the initial sample from an animal, so it seems that animals could possibly be harmed in that process. R responds that it seems like the animal would not need to be harmed in the process of getting the initial sample from them.
P asks if you only need to take one sample from an animal to start growing CM, and if that one sample can be used indefinitely. A detailed explanation ensues.
P asks how CM can be vegan, it seems so contradictory. R responds that since veganism is related to cruelty and doing no harm, maybe CM is not at odds with how CM is produced. R adds that PETA is advocating for CM, but not all vegans are supportive of CM.
Would you try the CM that the waiter brings you?
P – Yes I would try the meat, and I would ask them what they think of the cultural and religious implications of introducing CM to society. I make the assumption that the food would be safe to eat because of the FDA and other institutions.
P – I would ask, “Was the production of this CM a sustainable and efficient process?” I only want to eat it if it is taking the production of food in a more sustainable direction. I would eat it if this criterion checks out.
P – I ask, “How do you simulate the goose’s liver exploding in the production of the CM?” I do eat it.
P – If I’m with colleagues I ask, “Who made it, where is it from?” If with friends instead of colleagues, I ask, “How is it prepared?”
P – I ask, “Is it good? Have you (the waiter) tried it?” If yes, I would eat it. If no, I would not.
P says there is a big distinction between fois gras and steak, and they would have a much different reaction to something that seems more like meat to them such as steak. Cultured fois gras isn’t so jarring to them, they don’t identify that as being real meat as much as meat from an animal.
R – I ask, “I have heard some companies are inducing the cells to become tumors so that they will grow immortally, so this fois gras is not cancerous right?” Other P asks why you would care. P responds that it is a completely irrational fear, but they would still ask it. Yes, they would try it.
R – I ask, “What is the relationship between labs and corporations and individual restaurants in getting these foods out in the market initially?” This P would not try the fois gras and is not a first-adopter of tech in general, and would ask for real fois gras, not cultured fois gras.
P – I ask, “Do you have ketchup?”
P – Not adventurous, so would probably not try the really experimental dishes. P would want to talk to chef to see if they made it, and ask waiter what they think of it. Would not eat fois gras, they hate it. But they would eat cultured steak, they love steak and wish there was a great alternative to steak and tofu, some sort of tofu that tastes exactly like steak.
P – Not an early adopter, but also likes to try new things. They would try the fois gras, but they would not ask the chef for cultural reasons. They would behave differently whether they are around colleagues or family. Cultural factors play a big part in their thinking. The culture part of them drags them down, so they would taste it, but not eat it.
P – Asks, “Can I have fries with that?” Also, “Does this thing have a PhD? Can it play the violin?” I would definitely have a genetically accurate T-bone steak, but I would not want fois gras.
P would also ask why they are giving it away for free.
- Background information is given, context for the subsequent discussion is set.
P asks if there are any unanticipated consequences? The automobile got rid of all the horse feces and (another P adds) the oats to feed the horses. Another R responds that there are so many scenarios that could happen, it is too soon to really say anything but to point to very broad trends.
P asks if you can get more recent data on land use, “it’s over a decade old”. Same P asks if the objective for 2050 is to get below the 2002 levels for land use as a benchmark. Other R responds we can assume the land use hasn’t changed too much from 2002 to 2013, and reiterates that these are very high level estimates.
- Economic Impacts Explained, the questionnaires are reviewed
Moderated Discussion
P asks if this CM that is the subject of the workshop is identical to real meat. R and P respond that you can change it to be better if you want, but it could also possibly be just the same. P says “I want to put opium in my steak so you will buy it like nobody’s business”.
P asks if the assumption that people will always continue to eat meat out into the future is well-established. Suggests it would be nice to have those projections. R responds that both USDA and UN are expecting continued growth in meat production and consumption. P says that meat consumption in the developing world will increase the most. P says that once CM becomes a factory product, a design space, it is hard to tell exactly how the design of meat will change what meat actually becomes in the future, and so we might get something that is very different from what we now know as meat today. P says that after 2050, the population trend will plateau, and you need to take that into account.
P asks if you have considered the increase in “organic” food consumption, as they can imagine a huge pushback from many different sorts of groups like the anti-GMO groups or the tea party members in Arizona. Organic is expensive, and so is a status item.
P points out that $230 of groceries at WalMart costs well over $500 at Whole Foods.
P says that the “why” of how this increase in CM comes about, what the driver is, is very important.
What kind of IVM are you going to design? What would you want not designed
P says you have to ask at point does what you are doing become drug development. When you turn meat into a design space, you have an input-output system and you can design anything you want.
P says they could easily imagine this meat starting at one place and ending up as something indistinguishable from what we now know as meat.
P responds that no, you could still recognize it, you have to market it. Think about cars, we have been changing the design to be broader and broader and now we have intelligent transportation systems. Big food companies are trying to design foods by putting a lot of sugar and things into them. What I could see is that Pharma and the factory food industry integrate so they can create designed structures that are optimized for the individual.
P says they would like to think about what the individual in 2050 would want with their meat. Do I need to put natural stuff in my body, do I need to know the origin, or do I just care about the taste? What are my values at that point?
P responds that your values will change through time, can’t expect everyone to have the same values.
P responds that guessing is dangerous. I would expect the system to evolve as the context evolves, and that you will get interactions that make the system, even theoretically, unpredictable.
P asks if there are any precedents for what we are talking about. Cars maybe? P responds they are thinking about sliced bread and how it took over the food system for a generation and a half. I remember my parents looking at it like a lab rat. It made us look cool. It was a status symbol. It was a status symbol, but it was also widely available too.
P says one of the biggest cultural changes in their lifetime has been the food revolution. All of these changes have been caused by improved taste, status, efficiency, etc. and asks if we are trying to map something like this onto CM?
P says white bread (sliced bread?) is now the antithesis of gourmet, there has been a big change since the industrial food production revolution in the 50’s. Also, keep in mind that food revolutions might only apply to certain populations.
P says organic food and yogurt exhibit high-growth food trends.
P says white bread has become a slur about boring people.
P asks if you could have predicted white bread becoming a symbol of boring people. Would it have been possible back in the 50’s? P’s grandparents said the white bread status symbol trend would never last.
P says that you in the 50’s would start by looking at the underlying cultural elements.
P responds that you would still not know where those cultural elements would take you. Even if you know you are moving away from modernity, things are still unclear. Factories can now be defined by 3D printers, so this impending food revolution is not a reversal of a reversal in food trends necessarily.
P says that there are a number of appeals that could manifest themselves, such as environmental benefits.
- Another question is asked about IVM
P – I would like to market CM as something that allows women to spend less time in the house cooking. White bread was appealing because it allowed women to prepare meals faster.
P says as you begin moving forward, what do you even need a kitchen for?
P says to remember that the kitchen is currently growing as a part of the house, the kitchen is a communal space and is also about the look. Other P adds that it is also about family. Other P says that they see the kitchen as a form of stress, hope it disappears.
P says she had a friend that was searching for a house without a kitchen, because she would feel guilty looking at a stove and not doing anything with it.
P says we are providing input based on us as consumers or what we think other people will think, we are not a good focus group. But we can be useful in thinking about how CM can be made to be versatile in adapting to future environments.
P says that the last 50 years has been about destroying the mass market. To support this scenario, we have to come up with a scenario in which this infinite customization has been reversed, or with one in which the product has become infinitely customizable.
- Future Visions
- Break
Moderated Discussion Part 2
Role-playing
Journalist – I want to be successful as journalist, get breaking stories, but I need to maintain credibility so I need credible stories. CM is a sensational thing now, so will try to exploit the hype and the benefits, and later I might switch over to how scary CM is, but I need to balance economic interests and credibility, but basically looking for a sensational story. I will also ask about 80 questions of a person and only report on the one sensational thing they say.
P asks if journalist has done any reporting on the regulatory environments? The process is possibly being patented, but the regulators are dropping the ball and we are not safe, they could be doing more.
P says if we integrate food and design, to what extent do intellectual property rights from food extend to the human?
P responds that biological principles are just being applied, something new is not being created.
Rancher – Has his own farm, own land, been raising livestock since they killed the Indians. Real men eat real sheep.
P asks if you ever have picketers outside of your facility? “Not any more”.
P asks, is it true you sell your meat for an enormous profit? “I will sell everything I can to the Chinese.”
Surgeon – Just came back from the orientation session for the ER. All the new recruits are excited to work with this new nano-surgery because once you learn the techniques with this tech, lots of possibilities open up. This tech can be applied to fancifully designed and decorated meat. Also, they can use the tech to connect prosthetics to humans in a very delicate and precise fashion.
P asks if Surgeon views food as medicine at this point. Surgeon responds that there is a wide variety of different quality in terms of the different kinds of CM, and so there is a whole spectrum of health effects from the meat, but so far there seem to be lots of health benefits with CM.
P says there was a report of using pork stem cells to stimulate the growth of muscle cells of people injured in war (in 2012 or so, this was a real story). Surgeon responds that the problem there was the lack of control you had over the outcome, what we can do now is more precise. P asks, what are the issues preventing us from designing individuals that are constructed from different kinds of tissues that are optimized for very different kinds of functions. Surgeon responds that transparency is key, as long as you specify how you are enhanced then equal playing fields can be established. P suggests that you would get a huge immune reaction by combining different kinds of cells. P responds that might not always be the case. Surgeon says these enhancements are more experimental, on the fringe at this point.
Military Officer – Represents US military. Presenting the designer super-warrior. Integrated systems-based approach retains competence of units 24/7, and because they are integrated across hardware and software systems, they are impossible to kill because a sense of self is maintained no matter how the specimen is degraded. The Cm has been made into a weaponized, geo-engineering tool. We are able to develop meat that degrades cognitive ability is large populations by 1 or 2 IQ points. Though this is small, we can now declare victory or China. Environmentalists have attacked our factories. Society will break down if the super warriors are released back into society, and so military and civilian society are permanently separated.
P asks have you modified the food the American civilians are eating. Officer responds they have not done anything that has been considered unethical.