Sure it's now scientifically possible to grow meat in a factory. It’s also possible to factory build a fuel cell automobile excreting water purer than tap water. So why don't we see more of those on the roads today? The answer is the cost of course, also the economic dislocation of putting hundreds of thousands of industry workers out of work. In a way the initial high cost of producing such products would almost be an economic blessing, allowing these workers to be phased out or phased in to the new economy over decades instead of the few years it took for the computer industry to take off, for example.

I once read an article which suggested that the methane produced internally and externally by cattle (<link>), was a significant contributor to global warming. “Grazing animals, such as cows, produce a great deal of methane, one of the leading causes of the greenhouse effect.” Also: “Methane has 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2 and nitrous oxide has 296 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide.” (<link>).

I’m not even sure if the cattle we have here quite replace the vast herds of buffalo that once roamed the plains but that’s irrelevant since, firstly, two other countries, India and Brazil hold the largest number of cattle in the world, and secondly, with respect to global warming, the goal is not to revert to things as they were, but to deal with them as they are. To digress a little, that last point is the rebuttal to those who argue that global warming is part of a natural cycle and not man-made. Neither is a 1000 ton meteorite headed for Los Angeles man-made, of course, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to do anything about it, even with a one in a hundred chance of success.

As for the twin opposing arguments, either that it’s an artificial product and therefore less appealing than the real thing, or that it’s still an animal by-product and therefore forbidden to all vegetarians, the answer to both these arguments is that it would be neither more nor less artificial than cheese or fat free milk which both come directly from an animal and are then treated by man made intervention.

As far as the artificial argument is concerned moreover, I don’t know if many vegetarians today still bother to find out if their lettuce or tomatoes were grown hydroponically under what amounts to laboratory conditions. And to clinch the argument, or to stretch it even further, who would argue that Louise Brown the first test tube baby, who turns 30 in a few months or that Heather and Todd Tilton who turned 25 on April Fools Day (I dare you!) are any less human than any one of us. (But then it is still being argued, in this country, that all men are born equal but white males more so than others. I hope we put that one to rest sooner rather than later, in November perhaps?)

Notwithstanding the digression, the point I started out to make is that there is nothing wrong with us, mankind, using our brain to optimize our choices in this universe. Like treating our food with fire, it’s not by accident that this makes food tastier. Natural selection gets rid of those who prefer the sweet taste of raw untreated germ-laden foodstuffs. So we need to make the choices that make the most sense, to the best of our abilities; and to set our natural fear and resistance to change aside. (Especially in November!)