[Skybird]

Originally Posted by https://www.achgut.com/artikel/cancel_cuisine_ein_braten_ist_mehr_als_ein_faserkl umpen"

Cancel Cuisine: A roast is more than a lump of fiber

An article recently appeared on Achgut.com about the supply of artificial meat and artificial milk to humanity. Do we really want this? I don't want it and I have good reasons. A rebuttal.

On the way back from a vacation in Provence, we recently stopped at the chateau of French friends on the Rhone, diagonally opposite a nuclear power plant that reliably supplies the patron's heat pump with cheap electricity. The landlady, a passionate cook, served us for lunch - in France the "dejeuner" is still the most important meal of the day - a post-Easter roast lamb, a wonderfully juicy, tender and aromatic piece of meat, three hours together in a heavy Le Creuset roaster cooked in the shell with chestnuts and garlic. Plus a pumpkin gratin gratinated with Comté cheese and fresh baguette. A dish from the Ardèche, French home cooking par excellence based on the best farm produce.

A few days earlier we had visited the covered market in Nimes, also a revelation of French food culture. And on every corner of this beautiful, gourmet country between the Rhone, the Southern Alps and the Mediterranean there is an oil mill where you can buy the famous southern French olive oil, which is difficult to obtain in Germany. The best is said to come from Nyons, where it has its own appellation contrôlée for the famous black Tanche olive. Not to forget the countless wineries, the small farms where you can buy fresh goat cheese, the first asparagus and fresh strawberries.

And in every larger town there is a market at least once a week where local producers offer their goods and where you can't get enough of it. With each visit, the supply that is transported home by car grows. The most important reason why I don't like traveling by plane. There is only enough space in the suitcase for at most a single bottle of olive oil and if it bursts and leaks as a result of rough handling at the airport, that would be a very unpleasant mishap.

If, under the spell of these impressions, you read an article that recently appeared on Axis (Meat and milk without animals? Don't dismiss it straight away!), the message formulated there seems a bit bizarre. The report advocates artificial meat and artificial milk from the bioreactor and declares traditional, rural agriculture to be phased out. After reading the headline, I initially just read the comments, as I always do when I prefer not to notice an article. I am committed to repressing things that are not good for me, even if psychologists think that is wrong. And yes, I also own up to my neuroses.

But then I read the report. One of the most important theses of the article: Synthetically produced meat is real meat and should therefore be treated and valued equally. “If the stuff from the bioreactor tastes like a steak, looks like a steak, feels and smells like a steak, then there is no rational argument not to accept it as a steak.” The same applies to artificially produced milk.

The fact that the German dairy company Hochland is among the investors in the Israeli artificial milk company Remilk says nothing and will not deprive the “Black Forest farmer” of her sleep. The former meat product producer Rügenwalder Mühle also made a lot of noise about its vegan substitute products and advertised it with sayings like “Gender is like sausage without meat”, but sales have recently plummeted. Apparently the woke strategy didn't work.

What I have so far consumed as a plant-based vegan meat substitute, for testing reasons and with great reluctance, had nothing remotely to do with meat or with the products that people tried to imitate with a lot of chemicals. I haven't tasted synthetic meat from the bioreactor yet. Such “meat” already exists, and it may be that at some point it will be possible to grow clumps of fiber that resemble meat in texture and taste at reasonable cost and in marketable quantities.

But a nice roast (see above) is much more than just a lump of fiber. It is a complex interplay of the genetic makeup of each animal, which is also the result of centuries of breeding efforts, its lifestyle, food and, if one considers the example of Japanese Kobe cattle (in whose stables classical music is sometimes played), the direct attention from the respective animal owners in the socio-cultural context of a long tradition. Does anyone believe that the textural and taste diversity cannot only be ignored?

We eat due to biochemical need. Not due to ideology, politics and religion, but due to the fact that our metabolism is the deciding factor that rules what is healthy and good for us and what not. What happens inside cells and in the metabolical context, is biochemistry. What happens outside of cells and the metabolism, is ideology and power politics to gain control over people. Every species has its species-adequate diet that supports its health and fostering. Violate this diet, and this species gets ill, and shortens its life span. That simple and factual it is. Zero room for ideology and politics.

Meat consist of such an enormous diversity of different molecule classes, of vitamins, minerals, trace elements, fatty acids of very specific and different qualities, different tissues, complex molecules forming further structures, that it is so far impossible to copy even just one single sort of meat on a 1:1 basis in the lab. The nutrient density and nutrient mix is different from real meat. Take cattle, and feed it with (species-adequate) grass, take the same cattle and feed it with (species-inadequate) soy and corn, and you get very different mixture of fatty acids in its fat cells and milk. If already the diet with oen and the same animal makes a material, health-deciding difference, how can one dare to think one can recreate the complexity of the essence of meat in the lab...??? And thats why I have changed my mind. In earlier years I would have said I would be willing to try lab meat. But I now say: no, never. Give me our species-adequate diet. The original - not the broken, corrupted copy.

If it were simply looks and nthat w elike the taste, then even a marcipane potatoe or marcipane steak made by famous company Niederegger would be a "potatoe", would be "meat". Obviously nobody eats a marcipane steak praliné and claims he is eating meat. Why would you claim that oat milk or soy milk is "milk" then? That lab meat is "meat"? Its part of the defition and meaning of the terms "meat" and "milk" that both are of animal origin. Real, living animal origin.

Reality stands in the way of modern revolutionists trying to replace everything. Thats why they want to claim dominance over redefining terms and meaning of words and terminology, and want to alter reality perception, even want to enforce that everybody has to comply with their new relabelings, and if he does not, he gets sanctioned, economically destroyed, even criminalised. Want to control the people? Control the language before anything else. Its about deconstructing reality, to take away from people every possibility to orientate themselves, to stand on a solid basis to make their own conclusions and choices and decisions. Control the language, then you can label even dirt as somehting healthy to eat. Orwell had so much to say about this topic alone: the importance of controlling language.

If it is completely man-made - dont eat it. If it is highyl industrially processed, dont eat it. If it is an artificially created copy of something from nature - dont eat it. You get the idea. We are biochemical carnivores, and pragmatic omnivores. We should stay with the first alone, if we can. Its better for our health, and life expectancy.