Launch HN: Micro Meat (YC S21) – Technology for scaling cultivated meat

390 points by asmertgen ↗ HN
Hi HN community, Anne-Sophie and Vincent here, the founders of Micro Meat. We’ve developed new techniques for producing cultivated meat.

Cultivated meat is just real meat based on animal cells, but instead of getting meat by growing animals, it is grown in bioreactors. This will soon be much better for our planet: less land, water and feed required for the animals, less environmental impact from cutting down forests for farmland and feed production, less antibiotics, and of course, far less harm to animals.

The basic process for cultivating meat is known, but there remain difficult problems in bringing it to mass production. I’ll describe the process, the problems, and our solution.

Cultivating meat is similar to brewing beer, but instead of growing yeast, we grow muscle cells (plus fat cells for deliciousness!). The process begins with a handful of stem cells that are isolated from an animal. Initially, the volume is tiny and the cells are handled very carefully. They are mixed with medium, which is a mixture of growth factors like insulin, along with amino acids, and other nutrients that they need to grow. Then they are proliferated (multiplied) to upwards of 10M cells per mL.

After proliferating, the overall volume gets above 250 mL and shear stresses start to become an issue, meaning the cells get damaged and break apart. Traditional bioreactors use large impellers for mixing the cells and medium, along with a sparger which adds gasses like CO2 and O2. The impeller, gas bubbles, baffles, and internal surfaces are all locations where cells encounter damaging shear stresses. That’s not a problem if you’re cultivating bacteria, yeast, or other microorganisms that have a high tolerance for this. But mammal, bird and fish cells are very intolerant of such stresses, making it hard to cultivate meat. This is the first problem we address.

After the cells have proliferated from a very small volume to tens or hundreds of liters, they are still a mass of single, unorganized cells. In order to get delicious meat we need to make those individual cells merge and differentiate together to form actual muscle tissue that has the right texture. When cells differentiate, they change from being stem cells, into specialized cells and structures, for example, inside the cells myosin heavy chains develop along the actin cell-skeleton. These myosin-actin complexes are basically the motors of the muscle. For this, the cells get seeded onto constructs called scaffolds. A scaffold is like housing for the cells, a structure where cells can easily move into and grow. We usually try to make scaffolds that mimic the cells' natural environment in the animal's body so they feel as at home as possible.

Traditional methods pour the proliferated cells on top of the scaffold and hope that they “stick”. This is easy, but results in tissues that aren’t uniform—in some places the cells attach well, in other places not at all. Additionally, the scaffolds are not always edible—a major problem if you’re producing meat! Consistent cell distribution throughout the scaffold is the second problem we address, and edibility is the third.

The scaffolds are then reintroduced to reactors for another proliferation or differentiation, depending on the process. The cells are given time to mature, where they finalize their structure, orientation and internal make-up. At this point, you have muscle tissue, and the only thing left to add is components such as fat, which add to the taste and texture of the meat.

This process is immensely complex and the cost to produce it at scale is tremendous. To bring cultivated meat to the masses, the complexity and cost problems have to be solved. Many companies have spent years on R&D, but are still not able to produce at larger scales. We want to change that.

We asked ourselves, how could we protect these cells while they are in the harsh environment of the reactor, while also creating homogenous, high quality 3D scaffolds that are consistent throughout?

Our method addres...

204 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 254 ms ] thread
As a meat fan, and also an Earth fan, this is something I've always wanted to see happen. I've mostly fallen on the Earth side of the fence, which means I've been vegetarian-ish for years. I would love to be able to eat what I want without the climate guilt. Glad to see this tech is getting closer towards market, and I hope your business is successful.
Great to hear you are excited about this!
Same here. I dropped meat more because of being a "billions of living creatures living miserable, short lives before being slaughtered" anti-fan, but the GHG impacts are a nice side effect. Damn do I miss meat, though.
This is a very good article. I place lab-grown in the same mind bucket as carbon capturing. Both are futuristic technologies that don't exist today (not really) but get a lot of media hype. For both, there's a much easier solution that exists today (e.g, switching to renewable energies, switching to plant-based meats) that are great and are also gaining a lot of traction. With both tech, it's unclear if they will ever work at scale. For both cases, it's now more important than ever that we reduce emissions today, and not hope for a maybe technofix in the future.

I don't mean to dunk on your research and proprietary tech. I'm just often pissed to see that these kind of tech is completely overblown and overhyped in the mainstream and media. The worst part is, it gives people an excuse to not change their behavior today: "I'll switch to lab-grown meat when they sell", "I won't cut back on flying, doesn't matter since they will recapture that carbon anyways very soon".

Asking/forcing people to change their behavior doesn't have a great track record. Given that constraint, putting effort into tech like this makes sense, especially if it's in addition to making behavior changes less difficult, like you propose. It's not an either-or.
I didn't say we need to ask people to change their behavior. I know that that's futile. My point is that great alternatives already exist, that don't demand a behavior change. For example, renewable energies and plant-based meats (Impossible and others).
You did, though, it's right in your comment: "excuse to not change their behavior today."

And no, plant-based meat isn't there yet. It's something I often choose myself for environmental reasons, but it's still strictly worse than real beef. And non-ground meat substitutes aren't even in the ballpark.

I'd bet you a lot of money that most people can't make out an Impossible burger vs. a beef burger in a blind taste. Tasting has to do a lot with psychology (see Pepsi vs. Coke blind tastes), and that's why people think plant-based meat sucks (there's a big variance in quality, agreed). Lab-grown meat won't change this fact.
We're at the point of disagreeing over opinion, but I'm pretty confident you'd lose that bet :) I say this as someone who usually orders the Impossible option. It is the first plant-based meat I've had that actually crosses the threshold into "good enough," but it's still noticeably inferior to a good beef burger. Most plant-based meats genuinely do suck, I prefer just forgoing those and doing a mostly-vegetarian diet, personally.

I think lab-grown meat has a much better chance than plant-based meats of satisfying the "want" of meat, while drastically lowering the environmental effects of eating meat. And again, I think pursuing both options is the best choice. I eat less meat thanks to Impossible, and I hope they continue to succeed.

These both demand behaviour changes. Using renewable energy is a behaviour change (although no one's running their own oil refinery in their backyard) even if it's at a different tier and eating plant based meats is CERTAINLY a behaviour change. I think asking everyone to start eating mediocre faux-ground-beef is a pretty big behaviour change.
Following that logic, eating lab-grown meat will is also a behavior change. So, my point still stands.
I didn't say it wasn't a behaviour change. This was a response to your statement that your solutions didn't demand behaviour changes, when they both demand significant behaviour changes.

My argument, which I have yet to state in this dialogue, is that lab grown meat offers the opportunity to provide an experience very similar to eating "real" meat at a lower cost to the consumer, thus making it a viable alternative in ways that today's current plant based meat substitutes aren't.

I am definitely open to plant based meat substitutes taking that role, but in their current form that would still require a large behaviour change by a large percentage of the population.

Now renewable energy is different discussion and that requires a much smaller number of people to make (albeit much larger) behaviour changes.

Fair enough. But the reality is that lab grown meat doesn't exist, so we are not certain how it will taste. Plant-based meats have come a long way in the past 5 years. Let's see where they are in another 5 years, at which point lab grown meat still won't exist at a scale and price point that's available to the mainstream consumer.

I don't have anything against people pursuing lab grown meat research. I'm just a bit pissed that "futuristic" solutions get so much more mainstream media attention than practical solutions that already have an impact today.

Fair points. I like that we have lots of different smart people tackling the problem from different angles, though. I’m optimistic about technology here because I don’t think people will trade concrete quality of life now for abstract quality of life in the future.

What’s your favourite plant based meat? I’ll try it next time I go get groceries.

Impossible is by far the best (I moved back to Europe couple of years ago and sadly they don't sell it here yet). I also heard their new nuggets are great, but haven't tried them yet.

Beyond Meat is also good, but I think Impossible is another ballgame.

Tofurkey also makes great cold cuts (haven't tried their bugers yet).

And then there are a bunch of smaller brands making great products, too. But it's a bit of a hit and miss with them, so you need to try a bunch to find something you like.

For carbon capture, I don't think its the case that equivalent technology exists today. On our current trajectory the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is going to keep going up for the next 10-20 years, regardless of how fast renewable energy is deployed. And to be in the best position to stop and reverse CO2 levels we need to start developing carbon capture today, for it to be ready to deploy at scale in a decade or two.

I get the risk of giving people permission not to change behavior, but I don't think we actually see that happening today. Tesla sells every car it produces, and more and more governments and companies are making meaningful climate commitments and starting to follow through on them.

To address climate change we need all hands on deck, and that means exploring every possible approach to the problem. We can walk and chew gum at the same time, and don't need to write off technologies when they are in their infancy.

Great question. We had this discussion internally quite a lot. Since my co-founder comes from launching rockets let me use this analogy: 20 years ago Elon Musk was though to be crazy when he wanted to build reusable rockets. But now it works. It took a lot of smart minds, effort and money. But they did it. We believe it will be the same with cultivated meat. Completely changing a system, in our case food system, is always a risk and a bit crazy. We agree that the hype is not great. We don't want to make to bold promises. But we do want to change something and we will work hard to make our part to change a system.
Do you have a clear ideas of what will enable your solution surpass the $50-chicken-nuggets unit economics mentioned? Is that a mid term goal of yours?
If a batch gets infected and must be discarded, how is it disposed of, and what are the environmental risks of that waste material? How is it sterilized before getting dumped? And where is it dumped?
Awesome to see a pivot to climate tech by folks deeply skilled and driven in the space. Thank you for your efforts!
Hey! Bioengineering background here, how do you all embed the cells within the scaffold? Is your approach similar to other bioprinting approaches (initial cells seeded via extrusion, inkjet, or laser assisted deposition)? At first I would think this could be done with some sort of printable collagen scaffold but I'm curious for what your approach would be. In addition, as someone that is involved in therapeutics, I'm not too well versed in this space but was curious hearing from your perspective: How close would you say we are to being able to use FBS free media to culture meat at scale?
Very good questions there! 1) Yes, our process is similar to bioprinting but it is much more scalable than typical bioprinting. Because this is our proprietary tech I can't say much more than that at this point:) 2) We are currently still using some gelatin in our scaffold which is animal derived but of course we are putting a lot of effort into making it completely animal free asap. 3) There are companies who are focusing on the replacement of FBS and they are moving into relatively scaled processes now. So I would say we are close! Let us know if you have any follow up questions :)
Thanks a ton for your reply! I wish you all the best, tons of cool innovation to be done here.
“Fetal bovine serum (FBS) is a ubiquitously used essential supplement in cell culture media. However, there are serious scientific and ethical concerns about the use of FBS regarding its harvest and production.”

From an abstract of a research paper regarding FBS-free media.

(comment deleted)
Yes, exactly, getting rid of FBS is crucial for making cultivated meat more ethical and sustainable than traditional meat!
For those who have never heard of FBS, the "ethical concern" is that FBS is made by slaughtering pregnant cows, cutting the calf fetus from the cow, and then draining the blood from the fetus by sticking a needle in its heart. When I first read about that I was a bit shocked, even though I'm not a vegetarian and have even worked with FBS during a lab at university, blissfully unaware how they made that yellow fluid.
Wow. And I thought a komodo dragon eating a pregnant deer with fetus was the worst I have seen or imagined. Ethics aside, how do the people doing the procedure stand it without going crazy.
I'll answer your question, but it's really pretty simple. It's the same way that people have done all sorts of terrible things since the dawn of man.

Someone had to slaughter the livestock. Hunters ran down animals and killed them when they became exhausted, and to be a bit more blunt, we kill each other in wars and senseless violence every day. Look no further than our current conflict in Ukraine to see what that's like, even amidst our advanced society.

Humans have an enormous capacity for empathy and kindness, but we're also capable of some truly horrific acts if the circumstances require or demand it.

> Humans have an enormous capacity for empathy and kindness, but we're also capable of some truly horrific acts.

(fixed that for you)

Hey, excuse my ignorance. How difficult is to procure food you use to grow cells? You mentioned insulin and such.

Can you comment on how "green" are those materials?

Great question! So the basic medium composition itself is fairly simple, but the growth factors can be difficult to make. There are many places along the supply chain that are strained due to recent events. Because of this, procuring the food is somewhat difficult, but should become easier in the future. Many companies within cultivated meat (such as Heuros, Multus, Future Fields) are also working on animal-free growth factors by using precision fermentation. Precision fermentation is essentially beer brewing, but the yeast is genetically modified to produce a certain growth factor. As for being green, the industry is trending towards trying to find ways to utilize plants as much as possible across production phases. Eventually, besides the initial cells, most cultivated meat production could rely on common plants for the nutrients and growth factors for the cells. This could drastically decrease overall emissions, and even make the products carbon-negative.
As someone who is eating closer to organic these days, the concept of lab grown meat is more horrifying to me than factory farming. That said, we try to eat the highest welfare meat we can find, which is typically slaughtered by family members.

How can all the chemicals and sterilising agents ever be more safe for consumption and environmentally friendly than animal grown alternatives?

I have also worked with bioreactors. Sounds like you have made some great progress. Just a couple thoughts:

1) there are plenty of other niches for microbe production that could possibly use the same technology. I am not suggesting you switch now, but something to keep in mind for the future. In my opinion, the current standard processes for working with bioreactors are slow and manual. I think there is a lot of room for efficiency improvements but it is rarely worth it for individual companies to make those investments.

2) Is all of the growth happening in a single bioreactor or do you have multiple sized bioreactors for different stages? I don't have a scientific background and I'm trying to understand the standard practices better.

edit: fixed typos.

Can you share more about your ideas?
Which ideas do you mean? 1 or 2?

I realize now that I probably should have made two comments.

(comment deleted)
We definitely agree with you that the reactors currently used in biopharma were not really meant for the level of production required to scale cultivated meat. As for the growth, typically you'll find what's called a "seed train" for growing cultivated meat. This is basically a series of reactors starting from a small flask around 10 mL and ending in a reactor greater than 20000L! The train might have reactors along the way, 10mL, 200mL, 4L, 80L, etc. until the final reactor volume is reached. Some of these reactors, especially the larger reactors near the end of the process, are meant to handle the cells at a specific stage in the lifecycle, such as maturing, where the cells grow in volume.
Ah, got it. It is an interesting detail of the process that I would have never thought of coming into the industry.

Thanks for the explanation.

Interesting stuff!

I've read that contamination is a huge issue, essentially, bacteria grows much better and faster at the substrate than mammalian cells. So, how do you avoid inadvertently cultivating smelly plaques instead of delicious meat?

Or is that not really an issue and I'm misinformed?

Best of luck. We really need it.

Contamination is definitely a problem for cultivated meat. It is one of the leading risks when scaling because if the reactor is contaminated at all, you could lose entire batches of meat, and as you can imagine, this is a huge cost hit. To avoid this, cultivated meat is grown in sterile, clean environments. The same kind of equipment you'd find in a hospital (autoclaves) is used to sterilize the equipment common in cultivated meat. There are two basic ideas for preventing contamination. One is to use single use bioreactors, which are sterile after manufacturing. This is extremely common in the biopharma industry, and is preferred because it doesn't require complex cleaning systems. Of course, anything that is single use ends up in a landfill, so thats part of the trade off as well. The other option is to use reusable bioreactors. These require a steam clean after each batch, which adds to the overall operational and build costs of the reactor. This can also generate waste products which have to be handled. Maintaining cleanliness is a challenge, but with proper laboratory practices, and the right kind of bioreactor, contamination should be less of a problem.
I'm also assuming that with your system engineering background, you're also limiting personnel access to the reactors or better, to the rooms where they will be located as well as all security measures to avoid social engineering hacking into the facilities, right Vincent?

Congrats on the initiative, just absolutely fantastic!

Of course! As the factories get larger and larger, security becomes even more important, and traditional methods such as limiting access, badge-in/ badge-out, and access codes would be utilized.
Do these sterility requirements have an impact on the food safety concerns for the final product? e.g. does the meat end up either completely ruined vs. totally safe to eat raw? Just curious, I have no plans to eat raw cultivated meat :)
> I have no plans to eat raw cultivated meat :)

This could actually be one of the new doors it opens. Perfectly sterile sashimi can travel farther.

One of the most popular articles on HN with a whopping 900+ comments was about exactly this issue.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28621288

According to Paul Wood, the threat of bacterial contamination makes cultivated meat extremely expensive and un-cost-competitive.

Impressive initiative. I understand too little of this matter to judge the merits of your approach. However, it is clear to me that if cultivated meat achieves feature parity with "regular" meat and becomes cheaper to produce, it will be the biggest revolution in food since the invention of agriculture, and a possible world saver. Thank you for trying! :-)
Exactly that's what is driving us! Thank you for your comment!
I love this project as a vegan for the last 23 years!

Our group EarthPilot would love to provide support to this civilization scale project.

We work with some of the most brilliant and successful founders and teams on earth on leadership, mindset, high performance, culture and emotional mastery.

Can you comment on the total carbon emission compared to traditional method of producing beef? Assuming you can use completely renewable sources for all the electricity needs, how much more carbon is emitted per kg meat produced?
Good Food Institute has a great write-up on the reduction of emissions and land use which can be found here (https://gfi.org/blog/cultivated-meat-lca-tea/). To summarize it, with renewables along the production chain, estimates for the reduction of greenhouse emissions/land use for chicken, pork and beef are 17%/63%, 52%/72%, and up to 92%/95% respectively.
Honest question. Why make meat? Why not use your resources to create nutrition bars? You have to source everything the meat needs to grow anyway (and what are those sources/impacts?), why not just press it in a bar and be done? If you're afraid folks will really miss their meat, so you want to ply them with meat, let me just say - folks who love meat will find the meat they love. They won't likely shift to reactor meat for environmental reasons.

Conscientious meat lovers will invest in regenerative agriculture, lobby for ending corn feeding, reclaim all that land, return it to natural grassland, and let ruminant animals do what they do best -- feed the soil and make meat.

Just throwing one option in here, if lab-grown meat can be grown cheaper than regular meat is produced, there's definitely a market. I like beef. Beef is getting VERY expensive where I live. If I could get lab-grown beef that's, say, 80% the experience at 50% the cost, I'd happily do that.

I think achieving a future where eating real meat is treated like a special occasion, but lab-grown meat is the norm is possible.

Finally, very few people would eat nutrition bars as regular meal replacements. Maybe there's a (vaguely dystopian) future where people replace most their meals with joyless supplementation, but I think a lot more success will be found in replacing real-meat with lab-meat.

Maybe this is all just too optimistic.

Congratulations on the launch, I genuinely think this ranks among the most positive high-impact work one could be doing right now. The scale of animal cruelty is tremendous. Disrupting the meat industry is so important. Do let us know if you need any software engineers!
Thank you so much! We are extremely passionate about this and its great to see so much support here! Even though software engineering is not something we need right away we are very happy to connect with passionate people for future opportunities! You can drop us an email if you want to stay in touch!
As a born vegetarian(Religious reasons), I wholeheartedly support this project. I am going to be secretly following your progress and cheering for you. Godspeed.
Fantastic! Your product will help millions of people quit eating meat and save the planet.

Imagine diluting the affordable-meat market. "Is this salami real or fake? Ugh I don't know, I'd rather eat soy than glued together chimeras."

May be not specific to your technology but a general question i have is how are the tissues and cells protected from bacteria? Does the growth medium contain antibiotics? If so, how is the final product separated from it.
In research often antibiotics are added to avoid contamination from handling etc. However, large scale and automated production processes can be run antibiotic free because of their very controlled sterile environment. Then the product would also be antibiotic free.
I think this is liable to be an extremely confounding aspect of the venture - that meat naturally grows in the context of a living animals immune system which interfaces with the wider microbial reality. Diverse diseases arise and wane through extremely ancient dynamics which we are not close to having full knowledge or command over. I could not trust commercially driven scientific assurances from the present age, that food of all things can be mass produced safely in such a biologically novel scheme. It is not so long ago since all where shocked by the novel generation and danger of Prions in the food chain, some years later that "Junk DNA" is not in fact Junk, etc...

While some risk of strange new disease would still be chanced - it would be orders of magnitude less extreme if this cell cloning technology concentrated in early days, on mass producing leathers and furs, rather than the very matter we put into our living bodies.

its easy just add antibiotics to the slurry
Exciting stuff, congrats on the launch!

Does this mean that you are able to create adherent culture while still facilitating metabolic activities in multi-layer tissue?

Yes we are! While the cell metabolism is marginally diminished by our scaffolding method, the overall cell viability remains high.
Wow, I have so many questions. First, I really respect people acting on conviction. Anyway, I have lots of questions (all completely uninformed) so feel free to ignore any of them, haha.

1) Where are you in the development process? Have your scaffolds been used to successfully grow a piece of edible meat?

2) When do you think the value of cultivated meat will grow to a point to make the industry self-sustaining? Or even just for it to become a viable option for restaurants/consumers?

3) How is flavour added in the process? Since diet has so much impact on flavour, how can you experiment with flavour while growing it in lab? I understand this is specific to another step in the process, so if you can't answer, no worries.

4) When you say scaffolding, my mind immediately goes to a very visual/physically defined place. I'm picturing like a Ribeye Exoskeleton. What level of control over the sculpting of the end product do you have, or does the scaffolding function on a very general growth support level that results in the development of an end product that is then sculpted by the meat-maker?

5) Anne-Sophie, have you tried any lab grown meat?

6) How far away are we from seeing "at-home" kits for meat growing? I'm picturing a world where a restaurant has their meat-printer going all the time, experimenting with different flavours and textures for the next menu!

7) Does this have any non-edible use cases? Can this process be applied to growing functional muscle/tissue, not just edible muscle/tissue?

Thanks! Again, feel free to pick and choose.

1) We have already created our first piece of edible pork using our method!

2) ATKearney in their article "How will cultured meat and meat alternatives disrupt the agricultural and food industry?" estimates that about 10% of global meat consumption could be switched over to cultivated meat around 2030. While 10% is low, I think you'll start seeing restaurant experiences start cropping up more and more over the next 3-7 years.

3) For cultivated meat, one method of adding flavor is by cultivating fat cells and merging it with the muscle cells after maturing.

4) With our method, the final shape of the meat can actually get very unique. There really are no limitations on the shape/ layout of the meat, and the final shaping is done after maturing the cells. If you want to have chicken meat in the shape of a ribeye, you will definitely be able to with our technology.

5) We have not tasted it yet, but we will very soon!

6) We are probably closer than you might imagine. Our technology enables production at any scale, from a full industrial plant to a small "home brewing" set-up. Really, it just comes down to getting the medium and growth factors to be cheaper for the average consumer.

7) Generally yes, with some minor and not so minor adaptations.

I haven't had the chance to taste the meat of other companies sadly, but we plan on be ready for tasting of our product in the next months!
This is all very exciting. I am looking forward to a well marbled chicken steak in the future.

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

> Good Food Institute is estimating that about 10% of global meat consumption could be switched over to cultivated meat around 2030. While 10% is low

10% in the next 8 years seems very impressive to me. Do you have a link to the report? I searched but their State of the Industry report has a question mark instead of a date

https://gfi.org/resource/cultivated-meat-eggs-and-dairy-stat...

10% of the global meat market is around 30 million metric tons per year. What are we currently at?
Currently the only places in the world where the general public can taste cultivated meat products are one restaurant in Singapore and one restaurant in Israel. So very little amounts at this point :)
> 5) We have not tasted it yet, but we will very soon!

You need double blind taste tests. It doesn't matter if cultured meat is good for the planet, if Joe Sixpack won't eat cultured meat because it tastes bad or has weird non-meat properties and textures, then your product will get no traction

Beyond and Impossible is doing well. Like solar, replacement would be harder sale. Focus on uniqueness, specific use cases probably better.
This has been my experience. I'm pretty happy with more processed lab meat. Burgers, chicken nuggets, etc.

If the texture/experience of chicken breast or a filet mignon can be perfected though, then we're talking about mass adoption on a global scale.

I do wonder if this means a potential end to cooking methods like BBQ. The skeleton of the animal plays a huge role in that cooking environment, I wonder if we can replicate it as well?

Looking forward to the future!

Impossible is already pretty good on “ground beef as an ingredient in something”. It’s comically out of the range where it will succeed economically, but it’s also early; if they can get the price down to compete with utility ground beef, I think it would already do phenomenally well in the market on a taste and feel dimension.

It’s not going to knock off any boutique burger and obviously not even a round steak, but I think that cultured meat is at least even-money to take a 30% market share of “beef” in the next 30 years.

Joe Sixpack. Gonna use this one
It's a term that was made popular by Sarah Palin during the 2008 vice presidential debates to describe a regular average Joe who always arrives with a six pack of beer in one hand when he shows up to visit.
Just wanted to say this is probably the best launch HN description I’ve ever seen, and I’ve been here for the better part of the decade. Thank you for going into the real meat (ahem) of it and not being scared of writing at length.

Your cause, if successful, will hopefully indirectly result in orders of magnitude reduction in total animal suffering, so best of luck and godspeed.

Thank you so much! Highly appreciated!
Agreed, it was a particularly well-written description and if the end products manufactured with it reached the right taste/price, they're something I'd eat regularly
> but the climate crisis needs direct attention in order to stop, reverse and survive the impacts of climate change.

Since you brought it up, are you aware of how global average surface temperature is measured? Or the adjustments that have been made to historic records?

This is very interesting from a society/technology perspective. I support your efforts! I do have one or two fundamental questions about this industry/space, not necessarily related to this company, but this might be a good place to ask.

I am a vegan of about 10 years now, and as (potentially) a constituent of the addressable market, here's why I'm not going to buy lab-grown "meat": my primary motivations for dietary veganism are to do with non-renewable resource consumption: potable water, land use, oil/energy, emissions, etc. Traditional industrial meat consumption uses around 10x land/energy/ghg emissions as plant crops per calorie, and about 100x the water (or more). It's not clear to me how the lab-grown meat addresses these resource consumption considerations.

---

> Cultivating meat is similar to brewing beer

As a dietary vegan I don't know the first thing about meat, but I do know a little about home-brewing. In the case of home-brewing wine or beer, at least for me, it's about ~5x volume in water consumption (~5L of water makes 1L wine), including cleaning, mixing, etc. This is on a tiny scale; I'm sure if water consumption was optimized for you could do even less. Is cultivating lab meat closer in water use to brewing beer, or traditional meat farming? I'm also curious about the energy input; how many calories of energy in -> calories out?

If there are order-of-magnitude gains to be made in non-renewable resource consumption, I can get behind this even if I personally find it a little gross (sorry). At a small scale, I don't doubt the resource consumption is non-optimal, but how much can be gained by scale/optimization?

> dietary vegan

Plant based is probably the most common term for what you're trying to describe. Veganism is the ethical position.

I think of lab-grown meat as harm reduction. It will almost certainly be more resource-intensive than a vegan diet, but less so than raising an entire animal for the fraction that becomes edible.

It will also produce less waste, or at least better-controlled waste, than raising an entire animal. But again, more than a purely plant-based diet.

I can't give you numbers, but really, I can't see any reason for you to switch away from a vegan diet if you're satisfied with it. However, a lot of other people will switch from an animal-based diet to one that is somewhat more responsible and causes considerably less pain and suffering.

All meat eaters live with a certain cognitive dissonance on that, which most simply ignore because they consider plant-based diets insufficient. And as a vegan you know that a healthy plant-based diet isn't always easy -- though made a little easier recently by some highly processed products that aren't really all that much better for health or the environment.

Some future Black Mirror comments on this concept:

You haven't paid your protein bill this month, thus your micormeat subscription has been suspended and your Meat Machine (TM) will no longer grow any new meat for you.

We have given our executives and shareholders an exceptional return on their investments, and with your lack of being able to pay your Protein Bill, our record profits are hurting, Your account has been permanently suspended.

We have reviewed your appeal, and we found that our pricing model of 'meat by the gram' is sound and we have done nothing wrong in preventing you from getting your weekly allowance of allowed protein substance [Product] and hereby will be blocking all access to our services. This is an automated message, you have no recourse and may never contact an employee of Made Meat. Do not reply to this message.

Oh good! I got downvoted!

Alright, MF'rs - I apploud everything about this busniss.. but lets talk long term:

The stem cells are from which organism?

Where did they come from?

---I have an aside from a hospital at UCSF Dog Patch was researching how to express stem cells to a particular tissue.

I watched this machine in fucking person...

Where did stem cells come from?

There will be a black market in ~15 years for stem-call based organs that originate in non human sources.

There will be a bio-ID using the foundation f CRISPR to "digitally sign the origin of the DNA manufactured by this system" -- wait until you have digitally assigned, approved and allotted genes in a hemogonist platform of Micro-meats.

If this get to market, it would make a lot of us, vegan by default.
Does the scaffold you use become dissolved during processing, or are edible and incorporated into a final product?
Great question: part of the scaffold will dissolve, part of it (edible materials) will be in the final product. The amount of it in the final product (basically the degradation kinetics) can be tuned depending on needs and desires
Stop before you destroy the planet and people with unsustainable fake food. Cows are an important part of the carbon cycle. https://www.sacredcow.info/
This seems wildly alarmist. I'm not sure anyone's arguing for the complete removal of cows from the ecosystem. I'm also confident people won't stop eating real beef, even if factory farming is reduced and real beef becomes slightly more novel.
Yes it is alarmist for a reason. We have about 60 to 100 years of topsoil left unless we get cows and ruminant animals to help rebuild it.
It’s a shame cows will be extinct in 100 years. After the lab-meat craze of 2042, the military will use their vast domestic drone fleets to exterminate all remaining cattle from the surface of the earth to appease progressive anti-methane voters.