9 ms·

I'm delighted to see any and all advances on technologies that satiate our desire for meat without the ecological impact of meat. That said, oysters are probabl

I'm delighted to see any and all advances on technologies that satiate our desire for meat without the ecological impact of meat. That said, oysters are probably the meat least in need of a plant based substitute. Oysters don't really have a nervous system to speak of. Being roughly equivalent to a carrot in terms of capacity to suffer means there isn't really an ethical reason not to eat oysters, unless someone just doesn't like the idea of eating something that is taxonomically in kingdom animalia. And oysters improve the environment where they are farmed. As such, I've been told that oysters are something of a virtue good. That is, the more you buy and eat, the more the environment is improved in the areas where they are grown. Lastly, I don't know about the nutrition of real oysters, but I'd imagine they're pretty healthy—high in protein, low in the kinds of fats that you wouldn't want. They mention potential for food-borne illness with real oysters, so I guess there's that. Kudos for for making this, but their upcoming squid and scallops would seem to have better ecological / ethical comparative advantage for the target audience.

calvinmorrison 4y ago
Well half the time take out places serve imitation crab for costs reasons. Maybe we can start getting cheap foyster takeout
- peatmoss 4y ago
  If these can be made more cheaply / improve geographic distribution for landlocked people who want fresh oysters, those are real wins. Especially if cheap foyster takeout is used as a substitute for more ecologically intensive goods like cheap beef takeout.
  - FollowingTheDao 4y ago
    In what way are these going to be anything like real oysters? They are not real oysters. They will never substitute for real oysters. Do you have any idea of the nutrient value of real oysters? So we satisfy their taste, but deprive them nutritionally?
    - tingletech 4y ago
      the article says they are also working on grown-in-the-lab cell-culture oysters, but they are still ramping that up
- autarch 4y ago
  Imitation crab is fish, not a plant-based substitute.
wartijn_ 4y ago
According to the article, the problems are that "Conventional oysters are known to carry risks of foodborne illness and are currently threatened by overharvesting and pollution." They don't link to any source though.
- peatmoss 4y ago
  I buy the foodborne illness argument, but I'm not sure I agree with where they're going with overharvest and pollution. Pollution is certainly bad FOR oysters, but synthetic oysters neither mitigate pollution, nor does reduced oyster farming lead to more wild oysters in the environment, as far as I know. Oysters can (and I gather often are) grown on structures that facilitate harvest, rather than necessarily competing for space with the wild ones. Plus, seeding oyster growing areas pretty much ensures more propagation of oysters in where they are farmed. And since oysters filter the water, growing fewer oysters (farmed or otherwise) would just increase pollution. Since oysters are pretty easily cultivated, the solution to overharvest is to build more oyster growing structures and increase production... which leads to better water quality, which leads to healthier oyster populations. A virtuous cycle as I understand it. EDIT: I must also confess here that I don't particularly love eating oysters. The irony of my positivity towards oyster farming is not lost on me :-)
  - photochemsyn 4y ago
    Yes, oysters and similar molluscs filter the water column and hence improve water clarity... but they're the filter. They may accumulate a wide variety of interesting materials and compounds, such as microplastics, heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, organochlorine and organophosphate pesticides and herbicides... and then people eat this equivalent of a swimming pool filter? No thanks. For example: (2008) "Contamination profiles of heavy metals, organochlorine pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and alkylphenols in sediment and oyster collected from marsh/estuarine Savannah GA, USA", Kumar et al. https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.08.011 https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.08.011
    - peatmoss 4y ago
rgrieselhuber 4y ago
Fertilizers and pesticides don’t count at ecological impact?
nathias 4y ago
we don't all base ethics on the capacity to suffer
- vore 4y ago
  This is a fun one-liner, but what would you base your ethics on instead? Basing it on suffering, all things considered, is a pretty solid choice.
  - nathias 4y ago
    Complexity, life, spirit ... Absence of pain is never a sufficent base, otherwise killing as much people as you can (painlessly) would be the highest good.
Avalaxy 4y ago
> but I'd imagine they're pretty healthy How about them absorbing microplastics/PFAS?
colordrops 4y ago
The oyster thing is a bit of a meme at this point, considering I've seen the same thing about 5 times in the last month. For vegans, avoiding eating any animal is easier than trying to discern which animals can truly feel pain. There are always updates to our understanding about what animals feel, and it's vastly easier to draw a line between kingdoms than to create some fractal border of which animals are ok to eat. Also, people thought newborns didn't feel anything decades ago and performed circumcisions without anesthetic. There isn't a final word on how awareness and pain work and the nature and location of the seat of consciousness, so it's better to be conservative on this.
- Cerium 4y ago
  Besides - feeling pain is not the only reason people are vegan. I was vegan for about 15 years and it had nothing to do with how animals are kept or killed.
  - colordrops 4y ago
    What was your reason for being vegan? And it sounds like you no longer are vegan, why the change?
    - Cerium 4y ago
      I was vegan from when I was about 11 to 25. My family decided to try out vegan eating as a healthy choice, in part due to my dad's high cholesterol. We all felt more healthy and enjoyed the food we were eating. I gave it up when I started traveling to China. I decided that it was more important to me to be able to enjoy the rich culinary traditions and be a part of the communal culture than keep to my diet at the time.
      - colordrops 4y ago
        LOL I was a vegetarian for 6 years then I moved to China and gave that up quickly. I'm now vegan, and I think I could go to China and make it happen now. But I lived there for a while so no longer have a desire to try everything.

calvinmorrison 4y ago

Well half the time take out places serve imitation crab for costs reasons. Maybe we can start getting cheap foyster takeout

peatmoss 4y ago
If these can be made more cheaply / improve geographic distribution for landlocked people who want fresh oysters, those are real wins. Especially if cheap foyster takeout is used as a substitute for more ecologically intensive goods like cheap beef takeout.
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  In what way are these going to be anything like real oysters? They are not real oysters. They will never substitute for real oysters. Do you have any idea of the nutrient value of real oysters? So we satisfy their taste, but deprive them nutritionally?
  - tingletech 4y ago
    the article says they are also working on grown-in-the-lab cell-culture oysters, but they are still ramping that up
autarch 4y ago
Imitation crab is fish, not a plant-based substitute.

wartijn_ 4y ago

According to the article, the problems are that "Conventional oysters are known to carry risks of foodborne illness and are currently threatened by overharvesting and pollution." They don't link to any source though.

peatmoss 4y ago
I buy the foodborne illness argument, but I'm not sure I agree with where they're going with overharvest and pollution. Pollution is certainly bad FOR oysters, but synthetic oysters neither mitigate pollution, nor does reduced oyster farming lead to more wild oysters in the environment, as far as I know. Oysters can (and I gather often are) grown on structures that facilitate harvest, rather than necessarily competing for space with the wild ones. Plus, seeding oyster growing areas pretty much ensures more propagation of oysters in where they are farmed. And since oysters filter the water, growing fewer oysters (farmed or otherwise) would just increase pollution. Since oysters are pretty easily cultivated, the solution to overharvest is to build more oyster growing structures and increase production... which leads to better water quality, which leads to healthier oyster populations. A virtuous cycle as I understand it. EDIT: I must also confess here that I don't particularly love eating oysters. The irony of my positivity towards oyster farming is not lost on me :-)
- photochemsyn 4y ago
  Yes, oysters and similar molluscs filter the water column and hence improve water clarity... but they're the filter. They may accumulate a wide variety of interesting materials and compounds, such as microplastics, heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, organochlorine and organophosphate pesticides and herbicides... and then people eat this equivalent of a swimming pool filter? No thanks. For example: (2008) "Contamination profiles of heavy metals, organochlorine pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and alkylphenols in sediment and oyster collected from marsh/estuarine Savannah GA, USA", Kumar et al. https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.08.011 https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.08.011
  - peatmoss 4y ago

rgrieselhuber 4y ago

Fertilizers and pesticides don’t count at ecological impact?

nathias 4y ago

we don't all base ethics on the capacity to suffer

vore 4y ago
This is a fun one-liner, but what would you base your ethics on instead? Basing it on suffering, all things considered, is a pretty solid choice.
- nathias 4y ago
  Complexity, life, spirit ... Absence of pain is never a sufficent base, otherwise killing as much people as you can (painlessly) would be the highest good.

Avalaxy 4y ago

> but I'd imagine they're pretty healthy How about them absorbing microplastics/PFAS?

colordrops 4y ago

The oyster thing is a bit of a meme at this point, considering I've seen the same thing about 5 times in the last month. For vegans, avoiding eating any animal is easier than trying to discern which animals can truly feel pain. There are always updates to our understanding about what animals feel, and it's vastly easier to draw a line between kingdoms than to create some fractal border of which animals are ok to eat. Also, people thought newborns didn't feel anything decades ago and performed circumcisions without anesthetic. There isn't a final word on how awareness and pain work and the nature and location of the seat of consciousness, so it's better to be conservative on this.

Cerium 4y ago
Besides - feeling pain is not the only reason people are vegan. I was vegan for about 15 years and it had nothing to do with how animals are kept or killed.
- colordrops 4y ago
  What was your reason for being vegan? And it sounds like you no longer are vegan, why the change?
  - Cerium 4y ago
    I was vegan from when I was about 11 to 25. My family decided to try out vegan eating as a healthy choice, in part due to my dad's high cholesterol. We all felt more healthy and enjoyed the food we were eating. I gave it up when I started traveling to China. I decided that it was more important to me to be able to enjoy the rich culinary traditions and be a part of the communal culture than keep to my diet at the time.
    - colordrops 4y ago
      LOL I was a vegetarian for 6 years then I moved to China and gave that up quickly. I'm now vegan, and I think I could go to China and make it happen now. But I lived there for a while so no longer have a desire to try everything.