Peta has a popular video at their GoVeg.com website called, “Meet Your Meat” about the horrors of factory farming.
Peta’s latest campaign to raise awareness and try to stop the immense suffering of animals raised for food promotes in vitro meat with a contest to motivate scientists to develop it sooner rather than later.
There is a big debate raging over Peta’s recent $1 million prize for developing in vitro meat so animals do not have to be killed for it. Instead of trying to explain what this all about, here is what Peta says about it on their website:
Scientists around the world are researching or seeking the funds to research ways to produce meat in the laboratory—without killing any animals. In vitro meat production would use animal stem cells that would be placed in a medium to grow and reproduce. The result would mimic flesh and could be cooked and eaten. Some promising steps have been made toward this technology, but we’re still several years away from having in vitro meat be available to the general public.
PETA is now stepping in and offering a $1 million reward to the first scientist to produce and bring to market in vitro meat.
Why is PETA supporting this new technology? More than 40 billion chickens, fish, pigs, and cows are killed every year for food in the United States in horrific ways. Chickens are drugged to grow so large they often become crippled, mother pigs are confined to metal cages so small they can’t move, and fish are hacked apart while still conscious—all to feed America’s meat addiction. In vitro meat would spare animals from this suffering. In addition, in vitro meat would dramatically reduce the devastating effects the meat industry has on the environment.
Reports are there is a civil war going on at Peta among its staff about whether it is conscionable to eat meat no matter where it comes from. Apparently, Peta’s idea of promoting in vitro meat is being hotly contested among its members as well. Ingrid Newkirk, co-founder and president of Peta, is quoted as saying she expects to lose a lot of support because of this latest strategy to end factory farming of animals.
Meat consumption is described as an addiction, like being addicted to fuel consumption. Americans must have it.
Well, popular thought is you must have gas for your guzzler, and damned the cost. That is another argument for another day.
Another popular thought is you must have meat to live, and damned the cost, in this case animal suffering, damage to our environment, and human health risks from consuming it which are proven to be many.
If you look at the food pyramid, it shows that for humans to maintain good health, they should consume a certain amount of meat. Humans should consume a certain amount of protein. There is absolutely no foundation for saying it should come from meat. That concept is marketed and lobbied for continually by the people who make their living from selling you meat.
Yesterday was Earth Day. We are encouraged to plant a tree, among other things. There is a huge amount of damage going on all over our planet to make way for meat producing livestock to graze. That is why we are losing so many trees. There are also the related greenhouse gas emissions that are causing destruction.
Insofar as eating meat being an addiction, doctors and scientists agree that it takes approximately 30 days for a person to lose their taste for meat. In some studies it shows that not only do people lose their taste for it after that length of time, but also begin to develop a repugnance for meat that increases the longer they abstain from it. Why would that be I wonder?
Could it be that dining on the carcass of a dead animal is not a tasty proposition to the human psyche?
Which brings us back to eating in vitro meat.
You are already eating meat from cloned animals and byproducts that come from them. Yet, there is already strong resistance to the idea of eating meat grown in a test tube.
Why is that more repulsive than eating the flesh of an animal who has been killed for it?