Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
The Future of Food - By Brewing??
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 08. 2024
- Precision Fermentation: Skip the waitlist and invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks: masterworks.ar...
Everyone loves ice cream and cheese, but everything that's needed, cows and all, leave some people feeling guilty. We brew beer using yeast, so what if we could brew food? What if we could grow way more food, with less land and water? What are the unintended consequences? Let's talk about Precision Fermentation, and why it's about to disrupt the entire food industry as we know it! The Biggest Disruption in History That No One is Talking About!
》》》TWO BIT DA VINCI《《《
I'm Ricky, This is Two Bit da Vinci, and if you're interested in learning about the future of Technology, Energy & Transportation, subscribe & Join us for the ride!
》》》SUPPORT THE SHOW!《《《
In-Depth Content @ www.twobitdavi...
Become a Patron! twobit.link/Pa...
Become a CZcams Member! geni.us/TwoBit...
Buying a Tesla? twobit.link/Tesla
One Time Donation: geni.us/PaypalMe
》》》GOING SOLAR?《《《
Energy Sage for Solar ⟫ twobit.link/En...
》》》COMPANY OUTREACH 《《《
Sponsor A Video! sponsors@twobit.media
》》》CONNECT WITH US 《《《
Twitter 》 / twobitdavinci
Facebook 》 / twobitdavinci
Instagram 》 / twobitdavinci
Chapters
0:00 - Introduction
0:50 - Food Shortages
2:05 - "Cellular Farming"
2:55 - Precision Fermentation
5:00 - How it works
5:48 - GMO?
6:33 - Companies Involved
8:55 - Insulin Production!
10:00 - Benefits
12:11 - Challenges
14:11 - Costs
15:45 - Impact on Dairy Farmers
Purchase shares in great masterpieces from artists like Pablo Picasso, Banksy, Andy Warhol, and more. 🎨 See important Masterworks disclosures: www.masterwork...
what we'll cover
two bit da vinci,precision fermentation,precision fermentation milk,precision fermentation food,brewing milk,replacing cows for milk,creating meat without animals,impossible burger,fake meat,brewing milk with yeast,the future of food,how precision fermentation is the future of food,Brewing REAL Milk,future of food,solving the food crisis,precision fermentation process,beyond meat,food technology,beyond burger,lab grown meat,cultured meat,future food, feed the world, Breakthrough Tech Will Feed the World - 95% Less Water & Land!, Your Next Meal Might be BREWED - The Future of Food?
#PrecisionFermentation #beyondmeat #futureoffood #food #cowlessmilk #syntheticmilk #labmilk #feedtheworld #newmilk #wegotmilk #wegotlies #newfood #fermentation #nasdaily #gotmilk #milkwithoutcows #nastopics
Ricky, I know you need sponsors to survive, but you should drop this one. Fine art is not an appropriate investment for the bulk of your audience, most of whom do not have the experience to evaluate the risk of art investments. I am an accredited investor, and my advice for your audience is to avoid anything with a fake “waiting list”. If you go ahead anyway, read their prospectus/terms of service carefully and be prepared to lose $$.
Good insights... So, no need to show us the Monet? 😉👍
Given the prices Hunter's art commands, it seems a very strange investing plan for anyone but the knowledgeable and even then there are no guarantees.
"I am an accredited investor". I expected you to follow that up with some Bitcoin scam. CZcams comment scams have taken their toll on my expectations.
@@commerce-usa 🥁🥁🐍
I was going to say something similar. Like "Ponzi" ... but I try to ignore how the money happens if the message is at least good. ... we all prostitutes ourselves in one way or another.
I was about to say the skip the line scam is getting old.
The reason so many people are starving is not the shortage of available foods but rather the distribution of such. All over the world there are third world governments with acres of wheat and other food products going to waste because it is not being given to those who need it.
I don't think this video was about solving a hunger problem, but rather, it is about solving a resource efficiency problem. Namely, it reduces land usage, water usage, feed expenses, and other overhead. That being said, if the price of certain foods falls due to much higher production, that can change how it gets distributed. On the other hand, there's a lot of politics that inevitably becomes involved with drastic changes in food prices, whether up or down.
The video stated that it would be impossible to feed everyone on an "affluent meat-based diet", indirectly saying we can't feed everyone with meat. He was making the point that by using PF generated meat, we could meet the nutritional needs of 100x the current global population.
@@killax1000 Thank you. I missed that :)
Totally correct. There are more food products created than can possibly be eaten by all the humans in the world. 40% of all food created for human consumption never gets into our mouths. If anything, helping farmers and ranchers grow better actually hurts them because the supply is already outstripping demand. Helping them increase supply only drops the price they can charge.
This is untrue. We were one of the largest Midwest farms. The food grown is so poor quality, it is like eating plastic. When we put up another 90,000 bushel bin, my dad said, "we can grow so much food, but people are still starving." No nutrition in it at all. It is grown in dirt, not soil. No microbiome in dirt. Cattle suffer indigestion from it.
111 acres for 1 year per person?? Is this a joke?
Yes. This figure really needs to be cited. Just from a macronutrient perspective, one acre of soybeans produces enough calories, fat, and protein to feed five adults for a year.
@@binjahmon I guess it depends on the definition of a high-protein diet.
In this particular case, the comment about the acreage per person per year is related to the surface of farmland needed to feed a person with a high-protein diet sourced from animal protein. Not soybeans!!
@@Israel_Two_Bit I'm not suggesting that we should get all of our calories from soybeans. However, the amino acid profile of soybeans is a complete protein. Soy beans are also 40% protein by weight.
@@Israel_Two_Bit incorrect. The 111 acres cited is for a "meager diet with just enough calories to live". Presumably the meat-based diet would be much higher than this. I'm stating that his figures are wildly incorrect, since the meager diet could be met with only 20% of an acre per person per year.
I have a cattle farm with 500 head, and I honestly hope this doesn’t take over the market. I see my cattle how most people see their dogs or cats, they are my pets, and I don’t know what I would do if I had to sell them off. I can tell you a backstory of every individual one from memory cause I care about them so much. Venting sorry
Meat or dairy? Coz if it's meat you aren't really treating them like pets.
Unfortunately (for some) I think this is inevitable. Eventually "artificial" meat and dairy products will be cheaper than "natural". You might be able to switch to growing crops (easier if you have water access). Those will still be around a long time I think, except those used for feedstock. There will probably always be some people who refuse to eat the new stuff, and will even pay more for the old. Those are probably the same people who spend more on organic foods, so if you can get certified organic you could still have a market with decent prices.
Bless you for that, I hope this poison doesn’t become normalized
Well if they’re your pets you won’t have to send them to the slaughter so you can keep bonding with them 😅 and they can mate and make more cow pets 😂
Please tell us what you do to make money off of them. That's the interesting part.
It means.. u can have ur cattle as pets and not money toys. I dont see my dog as a means to make money, it costs me money to take care of him. And i wish him a long life.
My concern for this is if there is a major war or event that knocks out the power grid, this food production grinds to a halt. Whereas cows will still produce milk, have babies and provide meat without power. And we can do it locally. This new method leaves everyone dependent which is fine when all is good. But when it goes bad…
This is why we need microgrids based on local renewables
When it goes really bad; most people will die. Regardless of current logistics or future.
I’m no prepper but I do know that everything is much more fragile than you might think. If everything collapsed, stores will be empty in days even when it’s not looted.
Yes, cows will still produce milk but the means to harvest the milk will not work, the means to pasteurize it, the means to ship it, etc. will not work. Dairy farms and the downline infrastructure of our modern farm industry rely on power to get the job done. You are not going to get thousands of cows milked, pasteurized, bottled, shipped, accounted for, paid for by hand.
When the apocalypse comes, you'll see cows with full udders trying to run from the zombies.
@@stevenschmidt - “micro grid”
EMP
@@bakkerarjen - “everything collapses”
Those with fruit trees 🌳, gardens, and animals will be in good shape…
… until they run out of bullets
111 acres for 1 person to be continuously fed??? Not likely at all. Many have survived just fine feeding their entire family with less than 111acres
Agreed. Closer to 111 square metre. My 100 m2 backyard very productive for 3. Grain 5 tonne per ha, 1 person eats 35 kg pA, so 70 m2 per person. Back of envelope calc.
More like one acre, so maybe referring to 1.11?
@@iandavies4853 So closer to 111 per acre. Probably was mistake for m².
Yeah this jumped out at me too. This is definitely an incorrect statistic
This might be a nightmare for Food security. On my book the main issue with GMOs is that all power over production is handed down to the few companies providing the seeds. With this it will be similar but 10 times worst, all calories for whole countries will depend on just a single company doing business on one location, probably outside of the control of their government
I'm not sure that'll be the case. Most protein sequences are readily available in public-domain repositories. This isn't like GMOs (in fact, it isn't GMO at all) where you have Monsanto suing humble farmers to bankruptcy. Producing yeasts that can ferment feedstock to produce a particular protein is relatively straightforward nowadays.
Once you have the yeast or whatever other microorganism you prefer, brewers can just buy it from a biotech company and then keep reproducing it over and over again, just like a yogurt factory does.
In the case of GMOs, the whole organism is produced by the farmer so you need to keep buying seed from them since they're usually modified in a way that you can't reproduce it yourself. This isn't the case with precision fermentation. It works pretty much like making beer, only with some added steps to purify the desired protein.
I agree, even though some companies may be able to "brew" up their own concoction, the majority of products will be controlled by the big name companies that already have a monopoly in our stores but are hidden under an umbrella. My concern is that this will make it much more easy to add vaccines to the food that we do not need which no one knows the effects of bioaccumilation. Bill Gates has already mentioned vaccinating us through spinach and other foods.
LMAO yeah. Not to mention the cost of the infrastructure will be unaffordable to most of us (if anyone sells it to you at all) so good luck being dependents.
artificial true silk is what gets me most excited out of anything here. affordable quality "natural" fiber without the devastation of cotton farms? yes please. (not that the raw ingredients used in the prices are impact free)
Also cow free dairy products, dairy farming is probably the most environmentally destructive farming on the planet.
Ricky, I've been vegan for over 50 years but I would have no issue with lab-grown meat, eggs and dairy. However, I know a lot of vegans that would greatly resist eating such products. If meat eaters eat the products then animal farming is done and dusted and that is good enough for most vegans (and animal rightists). So, bring it on, I say.
Some just don't like the taste of meat, which is fine. I have a friend who's pescatarian, and she nearly vomited when she accidently ate a meat substitute. I think it's weird that we could have food that is "vegan" without being vegetarian though.
@@Pushing_Pixels We live in weird times.
@@Pushing_PixelsI switched to being a vegan though I liked the taste of meat and fish. However after nearly 5 years without I have gone off meat to the point that the smell of animal fat cooking makes me feel nauseous. And my tastes have radically changed in that many plant foods I didn’t like as a meateater I love now. So even though I think meat produced this way is vegan I doubt that many long term vegans will adopt it.
@@robsengahay5614 Yes, it's weird how tastes can change. I used to drink milk, but I switched to soy when I was living with someone for a few years who was lactose intolerant. Now I find the taste of milk very unpleasant. I still like and eat dairy foods like yoghurt, cheese and ice cream, but I can't stand milk on its own, and keep using milk alternatives for coffee and cereal.
My friend died of Mad Cow Disease and she lived in Canada. Our food is as safe as you are going to get.
My family has been farming for over 500 years. I'm the first generation off the farm. My family that is still in farming is having a hard time making it. It's not only pressure from corporate farms, but also climate change threatens even their ability to access water for drinking and household uses, let alone irrigation and water for livestock. I'm all for this.
Hey Blue Bird. I love your input. I think it's up to people like you to help your family think of ways to adapt to the new normal as things change. In this particular case, farmers can transition into producing feedstock for precision fermentation.
Actually, they have vines they brought from the old country over 150 years ago where they were wine makers. I think going back to wine making is the way forward for those who want to continue farming instead of raising cattle. But most of them have left farming.
honestly, to those who are worrying about jobs being lost, dont be. Theres gonna be a whole ton of new jobs coming with this. Now we gonna need so many mechanics and labour workers in the meat facilities. its just a change of jobs, not a loss.
New jobs yes but not necessarily for the old workers. The new jobs will be skilled labor jobs. Not all (not most?), of the old workers will be able or willing to learn new skill sets so there will be a huge disruption.
111 acres per person per year to support a meager diet? Do you not realize how utterly absurd that statement is? Not even remotely close to reality!
Definitely a missing decimal point there or the completely wrong number. Growing up on a 250 acre farm we grew enough crops for almost 100 head of cattle (milking around 45 head), 40 pigs and 100 chickens. While we did buy some feed supplements we also sold thousand of bales of hay to local horse farms and multiple transport truck loads of corn eery year. The volumes sold far exceeded the few pickup trucks of minerals and supplements we purchased not to mention the 200+ gallons of milk we produced and sold per day and the hundreds of eggs we sold every week. The number is likely closer to 1-1.5 acres of good farm land per person
There is plenty of land to provide humanity with real food. The technology to accomplish this is called permaculture.
Permaculture techniques have been around for centuries (see milpa and chinampa for reference).
While it is a smarter way to produce some food crops, it has no way of fixing the fact that most of the farmed land is used to feed cattle for beef and milk.
Precision fermentation is mainly about replacing the source of animal proteins. If we free all that land we currently use to raise cattle, we'll have more than enough farmland to produce everything else we need.
@Israel Parada Yes, these techniques have been around for ages. That said, how overlooked is permaculture? It's certainly not a predominant farming technique. I'm not interested in lab grown frankenfood personally. Such a wonderful thing a sustainable option is available to us.
Some of this is missing the point, If I am a farmer growing food for cattle, it is my business, it is not the governments and it is not your business. If you want to grow food for people instead, go by a farm and start farming. If any individual can start a fermentation business and produce dairy products for 10% of the cost of having a dairy farm and you can convince people to purchase your product then none of this matters anyway, you will put the dairy farmer out of business. Currently all we see is large corporations handling this, if it is so easy, where are the entrepreneurs that should be springing up everywhere?
This would be a relief. Less pain and cruelty. This will be used for space missions, and then it will get cheaper, I guess.
Absolutely. That was one of the first things that came to my mind when I learned about this topic: This is how we drink milk sustainably on Mars!
One problem with all this is that a steak isn't just protein, it's a physical structure too. You can't replicate that in a vat.
Why not?
@@itsROMPERS... You can make sausage out of steak but you can't make steak out of sausage. If you can't comprehend why, you're simply not qualified to be a part of the discussion.
@@ububox2087 What an amazingly dim-witted response, with not the slightest bit of thought about the actual subject.
If you don't actually want to discuss something, why respond?
Thank God we don't have to rely on people like you to figure this out.
@@ububox20873d printing
Great video Ricky. I am involved in agriculture and it give me something to think about for the future of the company I work for .
I've been reading about this industry recently out of interest. It still has two big issues to overcome, energy use and they are having trouble scaling the production. I would think you should have covered this. I agree it's the future but the timeline is very uncertain.
Yeah idk where he said energy use would be less.
Also every person who tries it says its gross. This is not the way.
@@freddybell8328 He actually did say energy production would be less, he also mentioned the problems with scaling
EVERY PERSON? HYPERBOLE POLICE...@@usofliberty
And you're a terrible troll!@absolutemadchad8637
This whole concept gets a lot of VERY mixed emotions from me. The answer to lots of our problems - but then taking me back to Soylent Green!
100% agree with you
At least it's not people, lol.
So far....😮
Absolutely
@@Pushing_Pixels
Yet!
Correction: the issues isn't that the product is identical to the source, the issue is the micronutrient you might miss and that we haven't identify and which might be beneficial. Also looks at the diversity of "designer eggs" in japan, where each chicken is fed in certain way to have eggs be as nutritious and flavorful, rot duplication of identified useful substance will only flatten everything to a poor commonality, it' has already happen for food and we lost diversity in fruits, like in banana variety, and our tastes suffer from it.
Don't you think that being able to create a variety of nutritional profiles and flavors would be easier with PF than with doing strange things to chickens?
@@killax1000 strange things? It's not strange things, they give a richer more balanced diet.
@@killax1000 - “doing strange things to chickens?”
Allowing chickens 🐓 to live in diverse environments, where they eat different kinds of bugs 🐜 🐞 🐛 & worms 🪱, allow for eggs 🥚 to be differentiated.
I agree. Also imperfections and "bad" ingredients are probably very much needed for "training" human resistance in the long term. Just look at the rise of allergies now already...
@@DavidHalko allowing the 80 billion meat chickens we eat each year to wander about being natural is an even bigger natural disaster than keeping them in sheds
Very inciteful video. Funny that most of the comments are about this not being real food or won't taste the same. Seems like they just didn't grasp the concept.
What not being real food, protein powders?
Or maybe they're just not naive?
I agree. I wonder what nomads thought of the first farmers: Those apples aren't natural, they grew on a tree you planted!
That said, except for milk and other simple foods, these foods will probably taste differently, because normal food is made of thousands of components, not just a couple of them. But as the tech progresses, I imagine they'll be able to reproduce the composition more accurately. But that about this not being "real" food... it's either they don't understand it or they have a biased point of view, which is perfectly fine, IMO. Every technology needs as many critics as it can get, as long as they're constructive critics, not just a bunch of ignorant ranters.
I wish I could believe the resource reduction numbers (10:23), but I'm skeptical. My biggest concern with this technology is that it will be unhealthy in some unforeseen way, but it will go forward whether it is or isn't I'm sure. We need to get the corporations to stop marketing sugar to children and start actually caring about the health of consumers. The status quo doesn't leave me trusting corporations in general to do the right thing with regards to people's health.
I have to agree with you 100%! Regardless of the promise of the product being the same protein structure as the original, does anyone actually think that this is a true replacement even if it tastes exactly the same? Will the yeast give use the correct form of iron to have healthy blood and not cause issues with our livers? Will yeast grown B vitamins be of sufficient quality to fulfill their significant roles in eyes, heart and colon? Researchers have recommended that individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), glaucoma, and hypertension avoid using nutritional yeast because it could make their symptoms worse. Sadly we might accept lab meat very quickly and then 20 years later have some type of mass health issue for which health establishments have no cure: perhaps decimate us to point that we are back to hunting (at least the few that are left).
My husband and I had precision fermentation ice cream (Brave Robot) three times about a year ago when it was available. It certainly didn't hurt us one bit.
Rest assured. Animal proteins such as casein are unhealthy in many forseen ways already. The only difference is that you will only eat casein without all the antibiotics and hormones that you will "unforseenly" find in todays animal products.
Making food this way is how we will have to do it if we want to become a spacefairing civilization.
I do worry about us missing some vital trace element or other in the synthetic foods that leads to some heretofore unknown deficiency disease and it taking us years to figure out what is going on.
im sure they could test for that quite easily
One correction Ricky, there are no essential amino acids that aren’t found in plants. In fact, amino acids are only made by plants. The “complete protein” argument is about the proportions in which they appear, not whether they appear. And it’s a non-issue anyway, there’s not one example in the medical literature of a patient who got sufficient calories that suffered a protein deficiency. The argument about eating complete proteins misunderstands how the body works: your body breaks down proteins into their constituent amino acids, and then stores and recombined them into a myriad of different combinations.
I will second that. I was a vegetarian for 30+ years and when I first became a vegetarian I used to grab books to find all the list of essential amino acids to make sure I was getting enough. I quickly found it difficult to come up with a palatable diet that didn't give me enough amino acids. The people who have problems with this are people who highly restrict themselves to very small selections. In general, if you read that a vegetable has, say, 20 grams of protein per serving and a different vegetable has, say 30 grams, it is very common that combining the 2 vegetables ends up giving you 100 grams or more because when they say how much protein is in something they only count the limiting essential amino acids. So if one plant had only enough leucine, for instance, to count as 20 grams of protein and another had only enough threonine to count as 30 grams, it's not uncommon for the one lacking enough leucine to have large excesses of treonine and vice-versa. The only vegetarians struggling to get protien are the ones who limit themselves to a tiny number of vegetable sources. Anyone who gets vareity easily gets a surplus.
You didn't mention the complete amino acid chain being superior though. As is typical, vegans tend to be very passionate about how they eat, so they don't perceive information in an unbiased way, because they almost desperately want to eat that way. I don't want to change your mind though, frankly your diet makes my meat cheaper, so keep doing what you're doing...
@@djackson4605 You're right, I didn't mention the complete amino acid chain being superior. That's because there's no evidence that it is. In fact, the evidence is to the contrary. I'm not talking about being vegan or not, I'm talking about being scientific or not. Firstly, almost every food has the complete amino acid chain (just in varying proportions). Secondly, eating a supposedly "complete protein" is likely not beneficial as doing so would unnecessarily limit your food choices. And eating an excess of protein is inversely correlated to longevity, so eating an overabundance of protein is a distinct negative.
I think this isn't a story about vegetarians but rather how to make a beef burger, without the cow, that tastes like a juicy, meaty, bloody, beef burger. I am not vegetarian although I eat mostly veg. But I am shocked so much money goes into creating the beef burger and dairy products when so many people are obese and need to eat more veggies. Again, we need more research in make PF that is healthy and makes it easy to lower calorie content. 😮
@@extraincomesuz These days I eat a whole food plant-based diet. But Beyond Burgers, etc., were helpful in the transition period after I gave up animal products, so I think they have their place. And if they can make actual meat where an animal didn't die.. well, it's still full of cholesterol, saturated fat, and estrogen (and other mammalian proteins) so I wouldn't eat it. But if it means less suffering and death for animals, then I'm nonetheless all for it. So I fully agree with you.
This still feels a bit as fusion energy to me, it is coming but when?
On the topic of lost jobs, my great grandfather started out making horse saddles in the late 1800s, a common career at the time. Almost nobody does that anymore. I made my living in the software industry, and I had a much higher standard of living than he did. The same will happen here. The transition will be difficult for sure, but in the end the jobs we create will be much better than the ones we lose.
correct-amundo!
I agree. There will always be disruption no matter what when new technological breakthroughs come around.
One thing I liked here was the idea of adapting to the new era by shifting from cattle farming to farming feedstock for precision fermentation. Given the massive difference in the feed efficiency, this would mean a big increase in available feed, lowering prices and increasing protein availability for everyone.
And flagship wagyu farms will keep being profitable since it'll still be a luxury commodity that the wealthy will gladly pay hundreds for
The point of these machines is job elimination. If AI can do anything a human mind can and a robot can do anything a person could but better and faster there will be no jobs, which is why we made machines in the first place. We don't NEED jobs.
The bad thing is that only a few big multinational companies will do these new food.
My confidence in FDA after the Covid 19 issues has gone from 99% to near zero. All they said was to trust the science when they really meant "POLITICAL SCIENCE". I would be very cautious with engineered food.
100% True Well Said
Would this be more like raw milk which has all the strains of beneficial bacteria? Or more like pasteurized milk with limited numbers of bacterial variety and denatured proteins from heating?
You can add beneficial bacteria to your gut through a pill. No need to increase risk of contamination.
You could have both! The first product would be almost absolutely pure milk with perhaps a couple of leftover yeast cells here and there (nothing to worry about). But companies could definitely inoculate the milk with beneficial probiotics to make it even more healthy. The key is you're making milk (and other products) from the ground up, so you can make it be whatever you want.
If it kills the bacteria that causes tuberculosis I'm cool with it. Any cooking that has milk in it will be heated higher than pasteurization.
I’m all in for this! I love animal products, but would love them even more if they were cruelty free.
I’m with you. I love animals and enjoy eating them, BUT I would feel much better not having to kill them to get their protein.
Look up "animal protein and insulin resistance" on Google Scholar, or, "animal protein and disease." In the United States, vegetarian men live for an average of 10 years longer than non-vegetarian men - 83 years compared to 73 years. For women, being vegetarian added an extra 6 years to their lives, helping them reach 85 years on average. Good luck!
111 acres per person? An acre of wheat yields 3 million calories. At 2,000 calories per day, single acre can feed 4 people for a year. That is 400x lower. Of course you need crop rotation to keep the soil healthy but so it won’t be that high but definitely at loss less than 110 acres per person.
I belive thats also taking in other sources of food and method - feeding cows for milk, beef, chickens, eggs, etc. as no one person can eat wheat everyday and not have other issues.
@@adr2t Let’s assume vegetarian diet and 1 acre per person. Like you said, you can’t just eat wheat although it is a staple and you could get the majority of your calories from it. You could grow 3/5 acres of what and 2/5 acre of vegetables. Or to feed 5 people, 3 acres wheat and 2 acres of vegetables. If an acre of a crop yields a similar number of calories then splitting the fields between different crops for variety won’t effect the carrying capacity.
Of course not all crops are the same in terms of yield and not all land is as good for farming but in terms of providing a minimal diet to not starve, my figure is more in the right ballpark than 111.
In terms of beef, for grass fed you will need around 1 acre per cow for grazing and get around 0.5 million calories. So around 1.5 acres of land to feed a person just in beef. Or around 1/3 of an acre to get 25% of calories from meet.
With 1/3 devoted to beef grazing and 2/3 devoted to wheat for consumption , that is nearly 6,000 per day for a year. 3 2,000 calorie diets provided for.
If we assume real world yields are half that and give people a hearty 3,000 calories per day then that is still 1 person per acre. Which is 111x lower still.
Watch the video again. This is the amount of land you need to feed a person with a high-ANIMAL-protein diet. It's not about the calories or the proteins for that matter. It shouldn't be compared to other sources of protein like legumes and such. We can all agree that there's enough land to produce protein for people all over the world, but the fact remains that most of the land is used to produce feedstock for live farming which is an incredibly inefficient way to produce protein.
The number reflects how unsustainable and totally stupid it is to keep eating beef, not to other types of protein
@@Israel_Two_Bit He said 110 acres for basic diet and MORE for a high animal protein diet.
@@username65585 For some reason your math doesnt sound right... like you dont take into the account time it takes to grow the food on that same land + time it will be when you can't grow the same food + time it takes to recover said land + other factors. All this happens over months - not days. So you will have much much more down time per crop yield that needs to again feed both the person + the animals that person is going to eat as well + the time it takes for said animals to grow + the number of yields per groping + the time it takes to also do the same for said animals (grow/mature, reproduce, etc etc). All at the same time some of that food will go to waste because we either can't eat it fast enough and spolies or we dont have said money along with other factors that make food not last as long. If it really took less land as ou said - we would have food supplies wouldnt be a main factor for any country, but yet, it is for all of them to some level.
Precision fermentation is a lot harder than it sounds. I'd guess more like 2030 for it to get cheap enough and scale up enough to start seeing significant impact on the dairy industry, and if it gets cheap enough by 2030 maybe by 2040 it will have replaced dairy cows. Before 2030, it may gain a subset of vegetarians and vegans who will buy it at a premium price - and vegetarians are about 5% of the US market. But it'll be interesting to see if it can happen faster.
what if it gets government subsidies equivalent or greater than traditional farming
@@grimaffiliations3671 Research support - absolutely should be done, but not clear if that changes the schedule that much. We may eventually see govt subsidies once it gets close to economic viability. I suspect that's not soon for most PF food products, so it's likely not looming large on the politicians' radar.
There no reason to doubt that subsidies accelerated wind and solar and EVs, getting their costs down. And once PF is viable for subsidies, that may happen. The downside is that it becomes a political football, probably with farm lobbies on the opposing side and one of the political parties taking up their cause. It becomes a political football. And at some point that might be counter-productive. E.g. we've got people who "oppose" EVs - simply because their favorite politician roused resentment against them.
I would say that the countries that are threatening to drive some farmers out of business in the name of reducing nitrogen emissions, maybe should be focused on advancing PF instead. Reducing their own nation's food production will simply mean they import food and so shift food production somewhere they don't control, with the same or worse nitrogen emissions resulting. That's feel-good-politics, at best.
After reading a book about this topic titled "Rethinking Food and Agriculture" by Catherine Tubb & Tony Seba (who was mentioned in this excellent video), I tried Brave Robot brand ice cream that was made with animal-free milk protein created with precision fermentation by Perfect Day, which was also mentioned in the video. I got it at a Ralphs grocery store in San Diego and it was good.
I find these innovations interesting and compelling but as someone who is deathly allergic to soy< I keep trying to find out the ingredients that feed the cultures. If we are basing the feedstock on some of the most common allergens (that have to be cultivated in grain fields) I fear that is a critical factor.
We have to keep animals out in fields, and be less dependent upon them using feed stocks.
As long as we have the US congress run by corporations, it'll never happen. The beef industry has tons of cash to buy congressmen.
A question from a kansas farmer.
What do the cells in the fermenter consume to grow the food product?
the same place energy inputs from farming comes from? If he's right suggesting beef farming is 4% efficient, even if lab products are slightly more efficient, then it would be hard to compete?
sugar
I avoid meat and dairy primarily for environmental reasons, but it would be interesting to know if the these synthesized replacements actually have improved environment impact and if there is a health benefit.
No specific health benefit as it’s molecularly identical to the animal produced version but definitely better for the environment as less energy and water used and less co2 emissions.
There totally is. In fact, the environmental impact is the most important part of the entire thing. If you remove cows from the equation, you can free up sooooo much land we could then plant forests on, AND you'll be able to free up soooo many freshwater resources. Imagine cutting water consumption by two-thirds in one go! We could let rivers flow, naturally, less chemical pollution from fertilizer use, you name it!
He runs through the numbers in the video, basically 80-90% less resources intensive in every metric than traditional production.
This is great topic, thanks for covering it!
thanks Robert!
Last news I heard of this technology in regards to meat production was that it was prohibitively expensive.
There was the issue of fetus blood needed for stem cell growth that wasn’t yet solved. Has there been any changes in regards to that?
Precision Fermentation (PF) is not the same a cultured meat. It does not require bovine fetal serum and it produces something quite different from meat. The products from PF could conceivably be used to produce meat. But PF itself does not produce meat.
The article is great, but the consequences are very troubling. Being carnivore for the past 2 years I am worried about the long time risks vs benefits of changing to fermented processing.
You ONLY eat meat?
For like, breakfast, lunch, dinner, tea and supper?
Wow
Yooo ty for the further knowledge into a more sustainable life. Already made the switch to beyond and wanted to know how they did it. Ty
Better than GMO for sure. If they are smart they will make laktose free A2 milk. Both laktose free and A2 milk are more expensive than regular milk, so it's easier to compete with price.
This is essentially GMO. The sooner that we realize that GMO is the future of food production, understand it, and properly regulate the better off we'll be.
Amazing Information and Video' Thank you!
While I, myself, am not too opposed to this, the way you were so enthusiastic about how these companies are targeting end-product makers rather than consumers, especially to hide the origin of our food, gives me cause for concern. I get being excited about new tech, but it was as if you were excited about not having any of this disclosed. Granted, we've mostly already accepted this state of affairs, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily right. Some things are reasonable to accept as synthetically made, but I'm not sure dairy or meat can ever join that category, considering how ingrained it is in our psyche that it come from a live animal.
There's also something to be said about livestock being useful for making unarable land productive. Freeing up that land from livestock doesn't automatically mean it's gonna be useful for crops or anything else.
It would be nice to make these proteins at home, just like making beer or sauerkraut!
Or beer!
Where does 111 acres per person per year for a meager diet come from? That just does not sound believable. I suspect that if I had systems in place, I could feed myself on about 3/4 acre. Gonna go see if I can find any reliable sources for a real average.
Another commenter mentioned that an acre of wheat production contains enough calories for 4 people yearly. Obviously you can't survive on just wheat, but this helps put things in perspective. The 111 acres per person figure is a complete absurdity, not even remotely close to any kind of objective reality.
@@tom8437 "acre of wheat production contains enough calories for 4 people yearly"
so 33 by 33m is enough to feed 1 person? damn thats actually pretty small
1:00 - “why”
The problem is transportation. Food can not safely & efficiently be brought to where it is needed. This is usually do to war & revolutions.
1:20 - “agricultural land… pasture… crops”
This is a fairly simplistic perspective, simplistic to a fault.
Often, pasture lands are not suitable for crops, so pasture land uses animals to harvest grass from less fertile & less desirable land. Animals fertilize the less desirable land, organically, and will eventually help to make less arable land more fertile.
Also, animals are basically walking refrigerators. The food is walking around & harvested when they are needed. Compare this to fresh food, which requires refrigerators & will spoil if not consumed fairly soon, animals are a huge benefit to medium term food viability.
Not vegan, still meat. But without the negative connotation.
Good topic. I’m sure as cost comes down, regulation will go up keeping cost up too. Also the agricultural space will lobby and lobby just because it their business.
That's a good point. They'll start making hell for precision-fermented foods convincing people that it's the devil's work, until they figure out that they'll make more money by transitioning to producing feedstock for precision fermentation.
I agree that there will be risks and probably some mistakes made as this technology progresses. I also agree that the disruption to many peoples way of life is troubling. I have to say though that I have a different perspective than most since insulin grown through this technology has been keeping me alive for the last 25 years. The old insulin which was harvested from animal sources had long term side effects which reduced the life expectancy and quality of life for diabetics.
I was thinking about the vegan question within the first minute.
I say it's vegan. All that comes from an animal is the information in the genes that code for the proteins. What about you?
This is the coolest thing ever. We need large government subsidies asap
A burger that meets all my nutricional needs would become my daily diet ❤
If the food product; tastes the same, is nutritionally the same, and lower in price will lead to customer transitions. You need to hit all three.
Agree
You forgot safer or at least as safe!
Somewhat ironic that during a discussion that emphasizes that the end products are identical and therefore should not be scary, you imply that vanillin made from PF is somehow “safer” that the identical molecule made from petroleum. Can’t have that both ways.
In addition, PF is good at mass producing a single compound but most foods are a complex mix of hundreds of compounds combined in thousands of ways - both chemically and structurally. Vanilla, for example, has hundreds of flavor compounds of which vanillin is only one. Strawberries are famously complex at an aroma/flavor level. And even if you had bioreactors for every one of them, you still need to create the structure of the strawberry - fiber, vesicles, liquids, fats, flavor compounds, proteins, acids, sugars all in nested structures of incredibly complexity.
Dairy is the low-hanging fruit as most of the fats, minerals, sugars and proteins are free floating in liquid. But that liquid also has a microstructure - small weaves of proteins, fatty-acid chains that are cross-linked in complex ways to create “butterfat” (that is completely distinct from olive oil or lard or safflower oil, etc). You may be able to get something “close enough” to add to coffee or cereal but getting something that performs in exactly same way as “real” milk is not as simple as dumping a bunch of bioreacted compounds in a vat.
I expect to see much better versions of vegan substitutes from this work and it will fill certain niches (maybe that whey protein for protein shakes) but this take is too utopian. Beyond Meat is already hitting hard times and laying of employees - just a few years ago it was the poster child for the agricultural disruptor set. But atoms are a lot harder than bits.
Nothing died to create it. It doesn't matter what the final product is. It is vegetarian. Vegan to me is an entirely separate cultural classification but the basic rule is nothing with a mother, so this still qualifies. But since this is a personally defined attribute, if someone says it isn't vegan they are correct according to their own definition, if not mine.
This would be a godsend in Brazil, which is basically a big farm at this point.
So true. The rate of deforestation there to make room for cattle and soy farms is alarming!
great video! thanks
have you seen the last video from the channel "What I've learned"? It touches on this as well, great info
These technologies have the potential to provide so many benefits to both humankind and the environment. While it will no doubt disrupt some communities and some people's livelihoods, the drastic reduction of the wasteful, damaging pastoral industries will be a boon to humanity. Just the amount of fresh water that will be saved is enough reason to pursue it, let alone the huge increase in land area available for other purposes, both pastoral and agricultural land no longer used for feeding animals instead of people. We could end deforestation and even reverse it. Not to mention the drastic reduction in GHG emissions. It's a win!
ANYTHING that minimizes animal exploitation, imprisonment, abuse, rape, torture and killing is a POSITIVE in my mind and any other compassionate humans mind. Reducing environmental devastation caused by industrial animal exploitation is a huge bonus.
Thank you. Eventually, it will enable us to produce food at home. We can already produce energy at home, home water production is already possible but still expensive.
Universal income might be needed to overcome the economic shocks.
I only eat real food, I want only real meat and milk to start with.
This is real food, real milk. Seems like you havent seen the video
@@gatonegativa9582 I never said it wasn't, I was saying I only eat real food.
I'm honestly looking forward to PF products
My husband and I have been vegetarian for 51 years. We are not interested in the precision meat as we like the current veggie meats (Morning Star, Loma Linda). However, I had considered going vegan about a year ago for the planet, but when I saw the protein in vegan cheese, I saw that wouldn't work. Then I found videos on precision fermentation and I was very pleased about companies making milk and cheese without cows. We have actually had Brave Robot Ice Cream made from precision fermentation a few times. I bought it at Ralphs. It was about a year ago. But the last time I looked, Ralphs doesn't seem to be carrying it.. You can buy PF milk but it is flavored strawberry, chocolate, and vanilla. I am especially interested in plain milk and cheese. I wish the development was going a little faster. By the way, the ice cream had no negative effect on us. We are 74 and 75 and in extremely good health for our age. Flexitarian Times CZcamss have some videos about precision fermentation.
As a Soylent consumer I'm excited to see more edible forms of fake food, especially since it means we won't all have to start eating bugs to get enough protein.
11:08 I feel attacked :p
LOL Also, there won't be any bugs on Mars!! I'll bet Elon is all over this.
I dont understand why the don't feed almon fish and other animals with the grown bugs. I won't eat some worms EVER, but I love salmon.
Two completely separate things
1) For the two camera interview bites, it's more natural if you cut in the middle of the movement instead of after the movement has been completed. If the movement doesn't match, try adding a quick graphic transition to mask that but, if you go down that road, you need to be consistent. It's a good idea to switch between those two angles, though, and keep the eye busy.
2) You bring up the example of whey protein being the first to switch and they possibly will with whey being "whey" easier to synthesize than ground beef but I believe that fast food will be right there once cultured ground beef is a fraction of a penny cheaper than traditional ground beef. It'll be cheaper and healthier. I honestly believe that will be the tipping point for a massive influx of capital into this technology.
Thanks for your input. We just started working with 2 cameras in the studio. Glad you noticed it 👍🏻
@@claudiaroy9455 My pleasure! It's great seeing this channel grow in viewers and creativity! I'll be happy to provide editorial input for future episodes
OMG, I had exactly the same thought about your first comment. I initially thought it would be better to switch cameras just as the head movement started, but not afterwards.
I'm not too worried, considering the opportunities of contamination and toxification (is that a word?) like herbicides, insecticides and fungicides by big business. I might be if I was a farmer, but trades keep moving. Our farm employed 2 people in 1999 when there had been 10 in1900. There aren't many coal miners now by comparison with 1823 and fewer farriers, but more biochemists and nature wardens. The only constant is change.
When food gets 'cheap' via 'tech solutions,' it means we are paying thru the nose elsewhere. This is just another way for corporate conglomerates to profit --bigly.
This is just to tie up food markets for the conglomerate and funnel more wealth to the 0.001%.
Look into Mark Shepard and restoration ag. It's different from most practices labeled 'regenerative ag' or 'organic' as it is deeply holistic and positive in approach. It is vastly different from misnomered 'sustainable' ag.
It allows those interested in farming or wanting to stay in farming a cheaper way that is profitable, ethical, maneageable, and highly productive.
It uses rapid, natural soil building practices, builds farmer resilience. It can be done on a larger scale than most permaculture practices which means more land can be converted to better practices.
*This means avoiding:*
• chemical inputs that destroy soil, and lessen food nutrition. Replacing it with healthy soil biomes and livestock to manage disease, weeds, fertility and pests, as well as many crop residues (crop residues are what is leftover after harvest).
• heavy irrigation dependency.
Annuals are relatively heavy water users during their entire life cycle (restorative ag uses mostly food producing perennials, trees, vines and shubs which require much less irrigation support after the third year). It uses rainwater harvesting techniques like keylining, swales, check dams bunds, etc. This allows bypassing pumping water most of the time. It has the side benefit of allowing aquifers and water tables to recharge.
• avoiding monocropping of annuals and instead use interplanted, diverse species of trees, perennials, shrubs etc. Interplanted crops grown this way work symbiotically to increase fertility, preserve water, move nutrients to where they are needed, improve soil quality, etc.
• avoiding bare ground/fallow practices. Bare ground dries faster, loses the ability to retain water, or soak it in; is prone to wind and rain erosion. It contributes to increasing CO² in the air;
• instead of growing plants that need fussyness after planting,
using biome-appropriate plants. Biome-appropriate plants are better adapted to soil and rain conditions and avoid the need for heavy supplementation, etc. If it fails to do well, replace it, it's likely the wrong variety for the soil.
Most of the area West of the Mississippi has ongoing water supply problems. The Oglala Aquifer is below 20%, it has been a source of water for a large area in the Midwest.
Another person to follow is Brad Lancaster. He is an expert on rainwater harvesting and has excellent guidelines. This can be done everywhere.
It will mitigate flooding, drought, wildfires, ground subsidence, heatwaves, assist wildlife, etc.
Suggest you checkout their books, websites and YT videos for great info, proof of concept, instruction, etc.
A conglomerate can sell fertilizers, health supplements, farm implements, fuel, poor quality food, health insurance, etc under their umbrella and still do well:
Modeling poor farm methods that are destructive; prone to failure/need crop insurance; require lots of heavy equipment, pumps, piping; need expensive GMO seeds, weed killers, amendments; destroys natural fertility; loses topsoil (carbon rich soil); contributes to more overall pollution than stated in UN reports; adds to general soil degradation; high tech 'climate saving' *expensive* tech that is patented and requires expensive maintenance and parts etc adds to profits.
Selling poor quality, low-nutrition foods and livestock feeds; and convincing others to sell poor quality food and feeds (usually in ignorance) contributes to human and animal obesity, malnutrition; sales of supplements, medicines; etc.
Bad methods that contribute to the problem means more profit. Things labeled 'sustainable' are often greenwashed code-words for the 'same-old, same-old' practices.
In the US we have more than *seven hundred areas* that have been destroyed by conventional farming methods and can no longer be used for farming.
Restoration ag is profitable, but restoration ag is reasonably and ethically profitable as opposed to the heavily exploitive methods of conventional conglomerate ag.
I have been waiting for this to take off for two or three years now. Finding out that it has already started, in the vanilla products and others that you mentioned, is great! My mouth is watering for some hamburger meat not grown from a cow that was terrified when it was slaughtered! Same for chicken.
well said!
Where dio you think they get the parent material from? Not an animal that was terrified at slaughter?
I feel the opposite about this. I find it quite frankly terrifying, this type of technology. I wonder they first bothered to test this new technology against regular/organically grown meat and plant material?
@@JeshueMArcher
I agree. The potential is there but no one is accounting for human and corporate greed. I see this leading to a population 100% dependent on corporate interests for food survival and the elimination of the small farms through regulation of safety concerns. Look at the regulations in California prohibiting the collection of rain water by individuals. Rain is free and now it is prohibited from collecting it.
@@JeshueMArcher They knew what they were doing when they created a safe and effective medical procedure that had been in the pipeline for 20 years with no success, and many dead animals along the pre release trials. Man is so busy playing God he has gone insane.
It would seem ironic that those who find the idea of food coming from "factory farms" distasteful would want food that is literally factory made
In this case, factory-made food doesn't have the animal welfare issues of factory farming.
The problem is not the factory lol.
What could possibly go wrong, one company makes a product for another company to make a product. With the current population collapse, this potential problem is gradually decreasing.
What happened to going to the butchers for half a cow, gathering the eggs from the yard and vegetables from the garden, months of food for the family in one hit
The problem is that a vast majority of the world population lives in confined urban settings where there is no possibility of raising your own hens, let alone a cow, or even farming your own produce. If everyone on Earth had a quarter acre of fertile land at their disposal, a) there wouldn't be enough land for everyone and b) there wouldn't be any cities
"Most people on 6 figures can't save any money these days"
"Anyway, invest in this picture "
Yeast grown, A2, MTC,low carb ice cream? I'm In!
I would imagine the resistance to lab grown food will keep the local dairy's and ranch open. It might be the industrial ones that start reducing first. Also, this will probably take off for space based locations as tourists and researchers start moving out there.
" It might be the industrial ones that start reducing first."
Those are the ones that make more affordable products, with the lab versions being the least affordable.
I think I've already become comfortable with the idea of artificial meat because of Beyond Meat and Impossible Burger over the past several years. So I'd be comfortable eating artificial meat. I can't speak for vegans since I'm not one, but I would guess that most of them will be comfortable with lab grown meat. The vegans I've spoken with are opposed to meat primarily because of their feelings on how the animals are treated.
Unfortunately o find the taste and texture horrible in both cases.
Excellent content 2BD . . . Keep it up, please. And thank you!
thanks for doing the research. Hope you will continue with this topic, love your show. I have been following you for at least a year now. Keep up the good work.
Been raving about this for years now. I truly believe that the vast majority of agricultural land will be out of farming use in 20 years.
Here in Québec hydro is owned buy the province.
I heard that some insurance company are not insuring house that has solar panel?
I'm interested in 2 health situations. #1) If because of a medical problem a person is told not to eat beef, will this PF beef be okay to eat? #2) I have noticed that products like the "Impossible burger" and it's competitors are much higher in sodium than the real beef product.
If it's an allergy of some kind, or a difficulty digesting certain components of meat, then no you shouldn't eat it. Lab meat will be genetically virtually identical to non-lab, so will probably come with the same issues. But if it's about avoiding fats or cholesterol they can probably make the leanest meat around. Meat substitutes have come a long way in recent decades. They used to be gross, but some of the new ones are not bad. Not exactly the same, but close enough to be palatable. Sodium will vary from product to product, so you will need to check each.
Salt is a preservative.
Awesome video!!! Getting a Yerba Mate ready to sip while watching
LOL Love it! I'm more of a coffee person myself, but half my family is Argentinian and mate was a big part of my culture growing up.
I had been following Tony Seba for the past 10+ years. Read more about his theory on Disruptive technologies that is shaping tomorrow's world at 'RethinkX'. He talks a lot about Precision Fermentation, Electric Vehicles, AI ...
PS: I am surprised that he is yet to speak about Block Chains/ Crypto currencies/ NFTs ... which I think is going to disrupt the Financial sector too.
It is missing fats tho - a rather important part of dairy products.
What are they using for fats? Hydrogenated oils?
I don't care where or how food comes from, as long as it fits my taste and is not stuffed full of additives and cheap fillers, salt etc.
An important part of milk for me is the bacteria and enzymes which make it digestible for me by having raw milk. Each cows raw milk in each region will have unique bacterial variety and quantity.
Precision fermentation sounds like a way to make protein powder like whey or casein.
I'm willing to bet that most people share your thoughts about food (except for hardcore vegans, obviously). I think yeasts can also be bioengineered to produce fats (it's all biosynthesis in the wild anyway). Maybe they'll get that to work too! Any biologists/bioengineers/biochemists here that can shed light on this??
@@Israel_Two_Bit There was something about Swedish company last year. But there is barely any info on any of that - besides that they "found some way".
I think the categorization of vegan or vegetarian is completely irrelevant.
If anyone who is vegan is opposed to PF foods because technically they are an animal product they hold that opposition in stark contrast to the misery being imposed on animals under our current industry. The only thing served there is ego, not the animals.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head when we just call it cheese because that’s what it is.
The dairy and meat industries will be where real opposition comes from, particularly in products where that opposition already occurs such as specialty and craft products that have protectionist legislation and naming conventions.
This is such awesome technology. I know a lot of people in ranching and agriculture who will likely be significantly affected by this, so it's good to learn what this is.
Personally, I think this is an awesome technology. Startups will be able to custom design unique protein formulations and come up with unique flavor profiles and textures using the same exact constituents of naturally-derived foods. Biotech companies with thrive by creating specific yeasts for each protein (there'll be no shortage of new proteins to produce), and farmers turned brewers will use those yeasts to produce specific proteins at scale.
It won't surprise me if the same coop business model continues where several farmers join forces to build a massive centralized brewery to produce multiple proteins and protein blends while the farms produce the feedstock for the yeasts to feast on.
It's garbage. If you think they will use it for anything positive you obviously have not been paying attention to the world the last few years. And what happens when the power goes out? You see the sun is there every day and will grow crops and lessly meaning we can still feed Beef, Pork, and other animals. The moment the power goes out your precious created meat is done. This is the problem with people today. They think they have a great idea and rush into it without asking what might happen next. What a joke.
Unique flavor profiles = more processed foods, the further we differentiate from the real thing , the more processed our food becomes. I’m not for this, we need regulation asap to prevent the collapse of real cattle farming before it’s to late
You mentioned human recombinant insulin in this segment. But you fail to mention that before. Synthesized insulin, it used to only cost a couple dollars a bottle. Now it costs 30 to 40 times that amount and more.
Part of this is due to government mandates requiring insurance companies to cover insulin. That's when the cost of insulin shot up because pharmaceutical companies could pass on price hikes without directly charging the consumer. This is also why our medical insurance shot up sky high because other providers did the same thing. Which showcases the law of unintended consequences.
Currently corporations to increase their profits happen. Raising prices using the end of COVID as justification to raise prices even more than it's justified.
Once corporations are able to control the food supplies, why do you believe that they would make it any cheaper? Or the corporations could use food as a weapon to control the masses--either you agree with what they do or they will starve you to death!
This is the most frightening part of bioengineered foods or. Precision fermentation as you are calling it.
Only real big concerns will be like we see in teh seed industry. If any number of hand full of companies pretty much control the whole market - they will have the power to control pricing from the ground up. Plus the costly startup just to get into the game means very few companies will even have the power to compete. Even if there is still people that grow the cow + plants - it still leaves a hole that can be used as a power tool. In that light, we would need HEAVY government influnce in these sectors - other wise we're going to risk pretty much everything on a few sources of basic food product stables and that would be something I would be totally against. I am already against the idea what the seed industry does already. If anything, more pressure should be put into these companies to be as "open" as possible and as "cheap" as possible or start paying more taxes and fines for using such products. Let alone - this cuts some major BIO factors such as cells that change over time to new virues that wont have the chance to "change" with the times. Bananas anyone?
Although you make a good point, I'm not sure if it'll be the case that a handful of companies will control everything. I have a scientific background and know firsthand that most of the information and technology behind this is open-source and publicly available. Anyone with a reasonable education in molecular biology could, in principle, create the yeasts they need to make the protein they need. Research labs all over the world do this on a daily basis. While it is true that most of them rely on companies like Merk and Sigma-Aldrich to source things like genetic primers, that too can be done in-house without violating any patents and getting sued.
111 acres per person per year. WRONG!!! Sorry, but you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
I live on a third of an acre in the city and I produce at least 2000lbs of fruit per year and about 6 eggs a day. And half of my yard is still ornamentals and driveway. In Canada.
I like the Impossible products and use them myself. I like the various kinds of milk such as almond milk and such. I'm only concerned for the animal farmers and how they'll pivot to new occupations going forward. Change is always coming for all of us. It has already come for me.
Agreed
Those products are very unhealthy and full of estrogen mimicking molecules... Also, have 3 times the footprint of regular animal products, look it up.
UBI would allow them to retrain or develop new pursuits and still maintain their life.
….So will brittle bones and atherosclerosis
@@03samjon1 😄😁😆😅🤣...and death.🤩😆😅🤣
About your question concerning the term "vegan", it depends on how one defines "Vegan". Since the term is commonly used to mean not processed via animal internal biochemistry, and since the products are produced by the internal biochemistry of bacteria, fungi and yeast ( all of which are non-animal organisms), then by definition such products are "vegan".
As long as the chemical composition of vegan meat(protein) is the same/identical as animal(non-vegan) produced meat, then the biochemistry of the foods within the human body should be the same. Once these foods are broken down into their nutrient components, absorbed into the bloodstream and taken into the cell, there should be no difference in what the cells do metabolically with these nutrients. The recipient cells have no of "knowing" how these nutrients where packaged into the foods that contained them.
The real question concerns the vitamin and mineral composition within these Precision Fermentation food products. When one eats the body of a plant or an animal, we are ingesting the cell contents of that organism which include the vitamins, minerals, carbohydrates, lipids(~fats), protein and water. From what has been described in this video, there was no mention of how the vitamins and minerals are incorporated into these PF foods. Minerals cannot be produced via cellular metabolism. Vitamins by definition are nutrients that cannot be produced by the cellular metabolism of that organism and therefore must be taken it by that organism. Ascorbic acid( vitamin C) is a vitamin for humans, guinea pigs, some bat and primate species but not for most other organisms.
BTW, the term "organic" is scientifically defined as a compound in which carbon and hydrogen atoms are chemically bonded. The definition had to be changed from a compound that could only be made by an organism because in the late 1800s(~1890s)they were able to made urea in a "test tube". It was thought up till that time that urea could only be made by a living organism. Thus water is inorganic be there are no carbon atoms comprising the water molecule. Beer and wine are, however, organic vegan drinks which are made by fermentation.. And from a scientific point of view, the term "natural" has no real meaning. It is akin to calling a tomato a vegetable when it scientifically is a fruit. Such terms have different meaning among the lay public.
It will be interesting to see if this can be scaled up though.
I love Impossible Burger and Beyond Burger. I enjoy Lactaid Milk and other milk substitutes. I don't eat a lot of animal protein, but don't consider myself a vegetarian. So, when I changed my thinking, suddenly the switch was easy!
A choice that only the affluent can make.
Excellent video Ricky, there's no human this doesn't affect but how are the Huge food corps going to push back?? the same old FuD strategies i bet?! change is exciting for some and terrifying to others and always has been. This is also a big positive to Climate change where Animal agriculture produces 65% of the world’s nitrous oxide emissions which has a global warming impact 296 times greater than carbon dioxide. So yep nearly 85% of all the damage done. I could sure get used to different tasting steak in trade for the survival of our planet... who wouldn't?
I agree. I'm glad to see people who are conscious enough to make these types of calls in their lives. Sadly, most people just want to carry on the way they are now because, as you say, change scares them.
That said, this is one of the things I like about this technology: The idea that the disruption is going on behind the scenes in a B2B setting where most consumer input isn't required. By the time the whey hits the fan, it could be too late for some big corps to fight back.
Am I being too naive and idealistic?
Chat bot!
@@thirdnormalform Whose a chat bot? You a chat bot?
The marketing sounds as good as Soylent Green...
A single acre can yield 30,000lbs of potatoes. There is no way it takes 111 acres to minimally feed a person even using manual labor farming.
This is very exciting. I imagine in the future everyone will have access to the finest lab-grown wagyu steaks that would normally cost $100+. And there's no reason scientists couldn't make foods taste even better than their "natural" versions.
Improved flavor is exactly what I was thinking. Our generation will be weaned off real food, needing a 1:1 substitute. The next generation will have a more objective view for what tastes good.
@@madcow3417 Brussels sprouts is a good example of what recent genetic engineering has been able to improve. They used to taste awful, now they actually taste pretty decent.
@@SpykerSpeed Mom? Are you trying to get me to eat brussels sprouts again? First you tell me they're an airplane coming in for a landing, now you're stalking me on the internet telling me they're genetically engineered...
I may have missed it, but what are the long~term health risks with these products?
At minimum further monopolization of food by corporations. This will free up a massive amount of farm land that can be used for urban sprawl and further increasing the world's population. At what point do we reach the tipping point where there is not enough green vegetation to create and maintain necessary levels of oxygen production and carbon dioxide fixation in plants and the soil. If the carbon dioxide ends up in the oceans that will eventually turn them into carbonic acid.
Would biopork be cocher? Bacon milkshakes here we go. I hope it get to the point you can ferment it at home. Sourdough and home made butter
Sources in description would be great
How much power does that food production take, I wonder...