Where’s the Beef?

First great podcast, I really enjoyed listening to it. I do have a sort of ethical argument on the meat eating side that I did not see addressed, namely, stopping meat eating is, from a biological standpoint, disadvantageous for the domesticated animals.

My point, and not that this is necessarily my view, is that the species that we currently consume as food are distinct species that evolved because of our domestication efforts. Furthermore, we have taken these species and had them reproduce and spread all over the world. The numbers, kind, and range of these various domesticated animals far out stretches what they would have been able to accomplish had they not been domesticated. If we take the goal of any given species is to reproduce and spread, then domestication and use as a food source for humans, was a successful biological adaptation on these animal’s parts.

If we then cease eating meat, we no longer have any use for these animals, and their current numbers will likely not continue at the level that they do, and I see this a negative from a biological standpoint. Furthermore, it is left to wonder to what extent a number of these species would even survive at all in some of the locations that they current thrive because of human husbandry.

This is a sort of back of the napkin sort of argument, but the idea of what then happens to these domesticated animals if we stop eating them struck me listening to your podcast. I was further left with the thought, that to a certain extent these species only exist in their current form because of our meat eating habitats. I would love to hear your thoughts.

Why is that the same people who think it is horrible for vegans to suggest to them they not eat meat are perfectly comfortable telling others that eating dog meat or horse meat is wrong (and in fact is illegal in many parts of the US)?
Love the podcast.

Great series. My question is what would happen to the millions of cattle, hogs, chicken, and other livestock. My guess is that if farmers can’t use sell them for meat, they would slaughter them to avoid the cost of maintaining them, unless there was a government program to support those animals. Farm animals as we would know it would largely disappear from earth.

Also, if we ban meat, do we also ban dairy products, leather and other animal products? Even with a ban, illegal markets would pop up, just like we see with trading in ivory.

One last question. Does lab meat share the same health issues as current meat? My guess is not, so there will still be reasons switch to a more plan based diet.

My $.02 is that until economics of lab/alternative meat and dairy are sustainable, we will not see any such ban. That’s why oil is the prevailing energy source today. It’s much cheaper than alternative fuels.

This is the first episode I listened to, followed immediately by the previous two. I really love the premise, but I’d like to offer some constructive criticism.

I don’t think you’re being as imaginative as you need to be. The future you describe appears to be one in which meat is banned even though modern attitudes towards meat consumption haven’t changed at all, and phone menus still exist. I love in LA, and your future seems to take place in my past.

It would’ve made sense to present the future as one in which meat production was increasingly regulated for quality and ethical treatment, driving up costs, while meat alternatives grew more plentiful, and a generation grew up with fond memories of grilling lab grown meat or making aloo gobi with Grandma.

The holds true for the Revenge of the Retweet episode. I don’t know why the idea of an era of internet history is so shocking.

You posit two possibilities: that we’ll either grow to accept dumb things candidates do as teens, or we’ll only elect people who have no internet history. Firstly, this focuses solely on things people post themselves and ignores the fact that people can’t avoid leaving a trail to follow in photos others take and a wealth of metadata that will still let us track their doings as kids.

Secondly, you ignore a much more likely outcome: that nothing will change because candidates and their followers already invent narratives and then roll anything about the candidate into this narrative or ignore it.

Look at this picture of George W. Bush pushing a guy in a rugby match in college (http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/rugby.asp). Look at Mike Pence’s rant about Mulan (https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/mister-ill-make-a-man-out-of-you?utm_term=.tsxQmBM3K#.uewA9V1zP). Look at Donald Trump’s entire twitter feed and all of the awful interviews and books that are online for the last three decades. Nothing becomes an issue unless and opposition group chooses to focus on it ad nauseum. There is already more embarrassing content than we can use, and that doesn’t include the inexhaustible supply of nonsense people make up. Would Obama have been worse off if we’d had pictures of him smoking pot? Because we did, and instead his opponents argued that his birth certificate wasn’t real.

Your advertisements all sound far too contemporary, and the use of phone menus is distractingly weird. Again, I love the concept, but you seem like you’re behind the times instead of ahead.

While I think humans and the planet would ultimately be better off if humans ate little, or no, meat, I think making it illegal, especially suddenly, would be wrong and a bad idea. It would have to be gradual. We would have to slowly replace that industry (jobs). We would have to slowly change the land that is used to support that meat, either to farm land for food intended for human consumption, or change it back into forest, grasslands, etc. (like you mentioned). We would have to slowly change how media shows food.

My first concern to making meat illegal is the immediate impact it would have on people’s culture and tradition. To not be able to make you grandmother’s beef stew, your family’s secret fried chicken recipe, or have a 4th of July BBQ would be cruel. Tax meat. Make it unpopular to our mainstream culture. Don’t make it illegal.

Great episode Rose! One thing that occurred to me and you didn’t mention was the creation of a black market with meat. One of your guest said he/she would surely try to get some anyway, and I am sure many many others would too. I see three major problems arising:
1) Social issue. I see a similar situation as with your (USA) alcohol Prohibition or War on drugs but on a much larger scale. Cartels, smuggling, gang warfare, enormous load on the justice and police system, corruption, all that nice stuff.
2) Animal welfare issue. As husbandry is illegal, no regulations or standards are applied. The welfare of the animals bred illegally would decrease drastically. Moreover the need for secrecy would confine them to crowded underground spaces or small closets. Proper fodder wouldn’t exist or would be highly suspicious, they would be fed all kind of junk. Diseases would spread easily and wouldn’t be properly cared for.
3) Health issues. Diseases from animals could spread to human. Also, all animal products are highly perishable, food sold under the counter would be of questionable quality. People getting ill from such a food would be afraid to seek proper treatment.
In short, all the bad things arising from illegal drugs would apply here (except the plant does not really care about its welfare – well not as much)