Thread

1. swiftcoder · 1790245532 · focus · HN ↗

   > Then, suddenly, the nausea hit... The problem was not the flavor, not the texture, but the knowing. The Knowing. Knowing about the fat tank, about the sticky white substance...

   I feel like squeamish people are probably not the best ones to write about novel meat products...

   1. FranzFerdiNaN · 1790246179 · focus · HN ↗

      So a tank is problematic, but a slaughter house is fine?

      1. vlan0 · 1790247474 · focus · HN ↗

         Nah, these are the same folks that have never watched earthlings.

         If we made it so before one could eat meat of the animal, it had to personally kill and watch the animal die, we’d eat less meat.

         It should be a requirement

         1. SubmarineClub · 1790285521 · focus · HN ↗

            Genuinely, how the fuck can you believe that when people have personally slaughtered the meat they consume for most of human history?

            My wife grew up in a country where people would still personally slaughter pigs to roast at major holidays. Didn’t keep her or any of her family from eating meat.

            1. thriving_earthw · 1790295522 · focus · HN ↗

               We eat far more meat now at a time when far far fewer people are personally slaughtering animals than ever before in human history, so I think the claim checks out.

               People who kill animals themselves regularly are probably subsistence farmers who consider meat a luxury, and what's more, the way they killed them was probably nothing like the incredibly high volume processing that goes on in a modern slaughterhouse.

               I definitely think that if most people had to visit a modern factory farm and see the life cycle of one of these animals, kill it and process it, they would probably be shocked at what is legal.

               1. swiftcoder · 1790317419 · focus · HN ↗

                  > We eat far more meat now

                  This statement is thrown around a lot, but it doesn't really check out. Per-capita meat consumption in most of the west is only around 66kg/year (increasing to 100-120kg/year for meat-heavy countries like Spain, Argentina, and the USA).

                  That's about one pig and a handful of birds - even many peasant populations could afford to raise that much meat each year. The well-off were consuming massively more meat that this throughout history. Not to mention the incredible quantities of fish consumed by coastal populations.

                  Records from Durham and Westminster cathedrals suggest monks were eating in excess of 400kg/year of meat and fish. Records from Italy in a similar period show labourers and even widows receiving in excess of 80kg/year of meat. And so on...

                  1. Ekaros · 1790347685 · focus · HN ↗

                     >Records from Durham and Westminster cathedrals suggest monks were eating in excess of 400kg/year of meat and fish.

                     I feel like I eat quite a lot of meat. And even I find that number rather suspect. Over a kilo a day? They did also do labour, but still that sounds extremely high even for pure carnivore diet of today... Or then there is some sort of significant waste.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.