5 ms·

> those animals are killed for sustenance Even if we accepted that this somehow makes the ethical conundrum of killing beings that can feel all the pain, horro

> those animals are killed for sustenance Even if we accepted that this somehow makes the ethical conundrum of killing beings that can feel all the pain, horror, fear, terror and dispair thus inflicted, despite having more than enough alternative food sources available to us, magically disappear... ...different studies indicate that western households waste ~1/5th of the food they buy. So, simplifying of course, this would mean that ~16 Billion creatures, who feel pain just as much as humans do, are killed every year ... just so we can throw their rotten carcasses in the garbage. > hopefully we at least agree that there's a meaningful difference there Oh, absolutely, only I guess not in the sense that you think we do. Because these vat-grown lumps of neurons don't feel. They are not conscious. They don't experience pain. Even simple E.Coli bacteria grown on an Agar-Medium have more resemblance to life than they do, because the bacteria at least are beings fully capable of existing outside of a lab-provided growth medium. So yes, there is a difference: Probing around in lab grown lumps is research, and killing billions of conscious beings so they can then rot in our garbage bins is morally indefensible.

naasking 3y ago
> Because these vat-grown lumps of neurons don't feel. They are not conscious. Being conscious is not a prerequisite for them feeling something as far as we know, and you simply don't know that it doesn't feel anything. I agree that food waste is an issue that requires better education, as does nutrition in general. Then again, nutrition research has been abysmal until only very recently, so people have been getting confusing messages for decades now.
- usrbinbash 3y ago
  > and you simply don't know that it doesn't feel anything. Yes, I do know that, because I know that pain reception requires nociceptors [1]. In fact all bodily sensory information requires a periphery of sensory neurons. The central nervous system itself, is simply incapable to collect sensory information on its own. And our complex emotional lives are the result of a developmental process that involves pathway selection by usage patterns. None of these things are present in a lump of cells in a growth medium. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nociceptor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nociceptor

naasking 3y ago

> Because these vat-grown lumps of neurons don't feel. They are not conscious. Being conscious is not a prerequisite for them feeling something as far as we know, and you simply don't know that it doesn't feel anything. I agree that food waste is an issue that requires better education, as does nutrition in general. Then again, nutrition research has been abysmal until only very recently, so people have been getting confusing messages for decades now.

usrbinbash 3y ago
> and you simply don't know that it doesn't feel anything. Yes, I do know that, because I know that pain reception requires nociceptors [1]. In fact all bodily sensory information requires a periphery of sensory neurons. The central nervous system itself, is simply incapable to collect sensory information on its own. And our complex emotional lives are the result of a developmental process that involves pathway selection by usage patterns. None of these things are present in a lump of cells in a growth medium. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nociceptor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nociceptor