Artificial food coming soon.

[Urwumpe]

Would you claim that the life support system in a spacecraft is currently healthy? It sure isn't. It is enough for keeping you able to work for over one year, but even more than that is currently not recommended.

 

[Artlav]

Would you claim that the life support system in a spacecraft is currently healthy? It sure isn't. It is enough for keeping you able to work for over one year, but even more than that is currently not recommended.

So we are on the "something that seems edible in the short term" stage there, but long-term would take more research.

Once again, i don't see fundamental issues, only lack-of-knowledge ones.

 

[Urwumpe]

So we are on the "something that seems edible in the short term" stage there, but long-term would take more research.

Once again, i don't see fundamental issues, only lack-of-knowledge ones.

Well, I see lack of knowledge and a recommendable lack of trust. We already have the animals pumped full of so many chemistry that they are just barely alive without more chemistry, that I don't really want to imagine how much chemistry you could put into artificial food.

For a space station, this is pretty easy. If you can't trust mission control to build and operate a proper life support, you won't fly. But how strong is your influence as customer?

 

[Jarvitä]

I think the point is, you're mistaking our current lack of sophistication for a fundamental physical law that prevents us from doing something.

 

[Urwumpe]

I think the point is, you're mistaking our current lack of sophistication for a fundamental physical law that prevents us from doing something.

No, I don't. I am not that stupid to forget that "If something is not impossible, somebody will eventually do it." Yes, that means somebody will make perfect artificial meat for a fair price and without all those meat-based problems.

And then he will go bankrupt, because more people will simply sell the worst genetic engineering junk for less, and tell you it is healthy with all those genes and millions of different antibiotics in it.

There is also no fundamental physical law that prevents people from poisoning you. Sometimes you will even like it.

 

[Jarvitä]

No, I don't. I am not that stupid to forget that "If something is not impossible, somebody will eventually do it." Yes, that means somebody will make perfect artificial meat for a fair price and without all those meat-based problems.

And then he will go bankrupt, because more people will simply sell the worst genetic engineering junk for less, and tell you it is healthy with all those genes and millions of different antibiotics in it.

There is also no fundamental physical law that prevents people from poisoning you. Sometimes you will even like it.

You mean like all the free-range farmers have been driven out of business by factory farms?

Except they haven't, because there are still enough people who consider meat from free-range animals superior enough in whatever quality to be worth the price difference. With a properly informed customer base, that'll always the case. If it isn't, blame the customers, not the product.

 

[Urwumpe]

You mean like all the free-range farmers have been driven out of business by factory farms?

Well, not really. Even biological food, like you can certify in Germany, is often industrial, but with very high standards of quality and animal treatment.

I prefer to make the difference between "low quality" and "high quality" food.

Except they haven't, because there are still enough people who consider meat from free-range animals superior enough in whatever quality to be worth the price difference. With a properly informed customer base, that'll always the case. If it isn't, blame the customers, not the product.

LOL, you talk like everybody should be his own expert for everything. Fact is: Without people making legislation, nothing will change for long. if something is just amoral, one company goes down, the rest of the scum keeps their head low and charge much more for the remaining food. 6 months later, all is forgotten.

You always need somebody, who controls the food and who you can trust as customer to be the right expert. And controls only work, if the punishment for failing the tests is painful.

 

[Jarvitä]

You always need somebody, who controls the food and who you can trust as customer to be the right expert. And controls only work, if the punishment for failing the tests is painful.

Of course, that's what I meant by a properly informed consumer base. Food that will give you three kinds of cancer and a heart attack would sell a lot more poorly if it had to be labelled as such.

 

[Urwumpe]

Of course, that's what I meant by a properly informed consumer base. Food that will give you three kinds of cancer and a heart attack would sell a lot more poorly if it had to be labelled as such.

Yes, but in reality, you would find rules that make even the worst junk labeled in the most meaningless way. Like Cola in 100 ml portions, when you actually drink at least 200 ml (usually 400 ml).

 

[Jarvitä]

Yes, but in reality, you would find rules that make even the worst junk labeled in the most meaningless way. Like Cola in 100 ml portions, when you actually drink at least 200 ml (usually 400 ml).

You don't trust the average consumer to be capable of performing multiplication?

 

[Ghostrider]

Food that will give you three kinds of cancer and a heart attack would sell a lot more poorly if it had to be labelled as such.

Never underestimate the power of advertising: THREE differend kinds of cancer, and 1 heart attack FOR FREE! Don Draper would make it sell like sprinkled icy water in the desert. Ok, Don Draper can make you buy almost anything. Including the fact that he's Don Draper.

 

[Urwumpe]

You don't trust the average consumer to be capable of performing multiplication?

In terms of fine print? Absolutely. You have a huge "just 5 kJ" and then have the actual amount measured in very small letters.

 

[jedidia]

You don't trust the average consumer to be capable of performing multiplication?

the average consumer? No, not really... :lol:

 

[FADEC]

One doesn't really have to read lots of ingredient lists. Just cook your own food

Actually, up to 90% of all products in a supermarket may taste good, but are not really necessary for your organism (neither healthy nor generally unhealthy). They are just there for profit.

Buy fruits, vegetables, spices, flour, pasta and rice for the main part. Drink water and tea instead of limonade. Buy high quality meat. But not for 7 days a week. For 2-3 instead. Eat fish also, occasionally.

My nutrition basically consists of what I mentioned above, except meat (anymore). I only eat fish (3 times a week). The only other animal product which I buy is lactose-free milk (0,3% fat). My yoghurt is made of soy. I also like tofu (also 3 times a week). Due to lactose intolerance, and irritable colon symptoms caused by animal protein and fat, I have no other choice anyway. But my nutrition is rather tasty and I am perfectly fine. I don't have any problems with keeping my weight. No miracle since I abandoned all unnecessary fat and sugar sources (I only use agave syrup; no granulated sugar anymore). But I would not return to my previous, headless nutrition anyway. I did eat almost everything for years.

However, I would eat artificial meat if it would not contain antibiotics, bacteria and if it would not cause irritable colon symptoms and if it would be as nutritious as real meat. Provided it would not contain too much fats.

And I also agree: statistically speaking the average consumer is not capable (or not willing) of performing multiplication, not even to look at ingredient lists.

 

[Jarvitä]

Buy fruits, vegetables, spices, flour, pasta and rice for the main part. Drink water and tea instead of limonade. Buy high quality meat. But not for 7 days a week. For 2-3 instead. Eat fish also, occasionally.

This only makes sense if you replace cereal grains with nuts and tubers. Otherwise, your diet is every bit as "artificial" as surviving on fast food.

 

[FADEC]

This only makes sense if you replace cereal grains with nuts and tubers. Otherwise, your diet is every bit as "artificial" as surviving on fast food.

Cooking your own food by using fresh ingredients is not artifical. It's what humans usually do for thousands of years.

Except if one doesn't know how to cook.

 

[Jarvitä]

Cooking your own food by using fresh ingredients is not artifical. It's what humans usually do for thousands of years.

Except if one doesn't know how to cook.

It's not fresh ingredients that's artificial. But cereal grains - flour, rice, pasta etc - certainly are. We've only been using them for about as long as we've had organised agriculture, which is 10 000 years (give or take). For the majority of the history of our species, that hasn't been the case. If you want to base your diet on what we've evolved to survive on, you aren't looking back far enough.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Hmm...these foods seem pretty artificial :lol::

http://thisiswhyyourefat.tumblr.com/

http://www.diet-blog.com/05/the_30000_calorie_sandwich.php

 

[Pipcard]

Here we go again.

"Artificial" should not be used as a synonym for "unhealthy" or "fatty".

 

[FADEC]

It's not fresh ingredients that's artificial. But cereal grains - flour, rice, pasta etc - certainly are. We've only been using them for about as long as we've had organised agriculture, which is 10 000 years (give or take). For the majority of the history of our species, that hasn't been the case. If you want to base your diet on what we've evolved to survive on, you aren't looking back far enough.

Just to remember: I said that one doesn't really have to read lots of ingredient lists and that about 90% of what you find in a supermarket is not really necessary. Buy fruits, vegetables, spices, flour, pasta etc. and cook your own food instead to buy prepared foods.

Wheat flour consists of wheat. The pasta I buy solely consists of durum wheat semolina, i.e. wheat. There is no ingredient list required. Especially not for fruits, vegetables and spices.

Whereas prepared foods, packet soup, packet sauce, canned food etc. just all the industrial crap from the supermarket contains a lot of artificial substances (made in laboratories) and requires studying the ingredient list if you want to know what your are going to eat. It mostly consists of artificial flavours, flavour enhancer, water, fat, sugar and salt which leads you to believe that you are eating what is shown on the food package.

That flour, rice and pasta is "artificial" in a way because it's not the raw plant, is no excuse for all the artificial substances you'll find in food from the supermarket. But nice try though

---------- Post added at 05:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:42 AM ----------

"Artificial" should not be used as a synonym for "unhealthy" or "fatty".

And neither for healthy as well. Whether is becomes healthy or unhealthy depends on how much and how often you eat a certain kind of food. Although there are certainly higher and lower risks for widespread diseases and cancer etc. for food that contains artificial substances.

I personally chose to not buy food that contains artificial substances, i.e. coming from a laboratory. I'm tired to research abbreviations and certain kinds of substance which you don't actually know only by reading an ingredient list. I cook my own food instead.