mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Shamburger Test Run Set For Next Week


The first lab-grown 1/3 pound hamburger will be prepared and consumed next week in London. It will be the first test of its kind. The patty’s 3,000 strips of of muscle fiber were grown in test tubes over the course of years by scientists at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, at a cost of $325,000. Professor Mark Post, the scientist behind the burger, gave an interview to the Independent:

“It comes down to the fact that animals are very inefficient at converting vegetable protein into animal protein. This helps drive up the cost of meat,” he said.

“Livestock also contributes a lot to greenhouse gas emissions, more so than our entire transport system. Livestock produces 39 per cent of global methane, 5 per cent of the CO2 and 40 per cent of the nitrous oxide. Eventually, we will have an ‘eco-tax’ on meat,” he added.

Bit by bit, a revolutionary new agricultural idea is moving closer to reality. We’re still not there, but shamburgers and faux filets might be in our freezers within the decade. They may prove to be cheaper and healthier than old-fashioned meat, they could replace factory farms, and even lead to massive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

This is the kind of research smart greens should be cheering on. Faster, please!

Features Icon
show comments
  • Andrew Allison

    I can’t wait for the opportunity to buy a $325,000 hamburger! Prof. Mead, did it not occur to you to apply the impeccable logic which you do to alternative energy to alternative meat.

    • Bruce

      But Andrew – what a glorious world it will be without animal generated methane, CO2 and nitrous oxide.

  • Ooga Booga

    Good news

  • Corlyss

    I think there must be a Brussels law that requires every scientific story to have at least one mention of AGW in it. I noticed this with my 5 years subscribing to the British mag. New Scientist. It got to the point that every stinkin’ story they carried had to have some mention of green house gases and the relationship of the subject study, whatever it was on, to their ceaseless struggle to propagandize global warming. Even articles about ancient eras, like the Paleozoic, seemed to carry an “oh, by the way, there was evidence of global warming . . . ” or “this is good news because it will affect our carbon foot-prints.” I eventually canceled my subscription just as the climategate story was breaking because they were just too heavy-handed and obvious with their flacking the cause.

  • cubanbob

    A soy burger looks more appetizing. Cheaper too. Until the day a Star Trek replicator is invented this doesn’t look like a good idea.

  • EliseRonan

    Great until after twenty years they tie this monstrosity to increases in cancer, infertility and other horrible disease

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service