My model here is there would be transition to lab grown meat, and moving this transition few years / months / days into the earlier time is the thing that matters most
And also in general, I have really cautious stance on population ethics with respect to animals. And i think most utilitarian approaches handle it by not handling it, just refusing to think about it. And that’s really weird. Like, if i donate to animals welfare of chickens? I bet the beneficiaries is next generation of chickens from the one currently existing. I want to donate in such a way as to prevent their existence, not supply them with band aids. I think causing creation of 20% less tortured chicken instead is like insane goal for my donation.
From what I’ve seen, lab grown meat (or rather cellular meat) will face significant challenges before it can replace meat at a large scale (regulatory, technical, opposition from the industry). I think it’s still worth investing into, but even it does work, it will take a long time before getting becoming large scale (unless a super AI solves that for us). Some other alternative proteins might be more promising—such as single cell protein.
While certainly worth donating to, I think other venues are necessary, such as improving the conditions of animals in the decades before alternatives replace everything (hopefully).
Moreover, alternative proteins can’t solve everything by themselves. Maybe fish or something else will be super hard to replace. In that case, other venues that help heving people care more about the topic is important—this includes corporate campaigns that shift the overton window, legal campaigns, research into wild animal suffering (population ethics is a tricky one here)...
If cellular meat takes 30 years to take hold, reducing by half the suffering of millions of beings in the meantime is still pretty incredible.
>developing plant-based alternatives
This too can be useful, but less so.
My model here is there would be transition to lab grown meat, and moving this transition few years / months / days into the earlier time is the thing that matters most
And also in general, I have really cautious stance on population ethics with respect to animals. And i think most utilitarian approaches handle it by not handling it, just refusing to think about it. And that’s really weird. Like, if i donate to animals welfare of chickens? I bet the beneficiaries is next generation of chickens from the one currently existing. I want to donate in such a way as to prevent their existence, not supply them with band aids. I think causing creation of 20% less tortured chicken instead is like insane goal for my donation.
Very interesting.
From what I’ve seen, lab grown meat (or rather cellular meat) will face significant challenges before it can replace meat at a large scale (regulatory, technical, opposition from the industry). I think it’s still worth investing into, but even it does work, it will take a long time before getting becoming large scale (unless a super AI solves that for us). Some other alternative proteins might be more promising—such as single cell protein.
While certainly worth donating to, I think other venues are necessary, such as improving the conditions of animals in the decades before alternatives replace everything (hopefully).
Moreover, alternative proteins can’t solve everything by themselves. Maybe fish or something else will be super hard to replace. In that case, other venues that help heving people care more about the topic is important—this includes corporate campaigns that shift the overton window, legal campaigns, research into wild animal suffering (population ethics is a tricky one here)...
If cellular meat takes 30 years to take hold, reducing by half the suffering of millions of beings in the meantime is still pretty incredible.