Tag Archives: War on Meat

GMO Pusher Bill Gates Teams Up With Richard Branson, Hopes to End the Meat Industry As We Know It With Lab-Grown Beef

althealthworks.com
4 May 2020
by AltHealth Admin



Meat grown in labs has been a hot topic of conversation for the last seven years, with some media outlets hailing it as the future of food and a “cleaner” way to do meat.

But when the real thing hits supermarket shelves, will customers be kept in the dark about how it’s really made, and perhaps more importantly, will anybody actually want to eat it?

Ready or not, lab-grown meat from stem cells is on its way, and it’s being propped up by one of the most controversial names in the world of genetically modified food (GMOs) — Microsoft founder and long-time Monsanto supporter Bill Gates, along with another wealthy investor, Sir Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group.

Just recently, the two famous figures placed a big-time bet on the self-proclaimed “clean” lab-grown meat company Memphis Meats, to the tune of $17 million.

But will customers flock to this new so-called “murder free” meat, or are Gates and Branson making a mistake in betting on a an under-tested technology with big claims and unknown effects on human health?

Startup Companies to Grow Meat in the Lab

Memphis Meats and Hampton Creek (recently accused of labeling lies with its other products aimed at reducing animal agriculture) are the most commonly-heard of, but not the only companies who are working on creating lab-grown meat.

MosaMeat of the Netherlands, founded by Professor Mark Post, first started with a product with a $325,000 price tag.

Today that number has been trimmed to a far more manageable $11.36 per package. The founder hopes to decrease the price even more if it succeeds and goes commercial.

The company also has serious financial weight behind it in Sergey Brin of Alphabet (the parent company of Google), and hopes to develop affordable mass-produced lab-grown meat or “cultured meat” within the next 10-20 years (a ways off from its competitors).

Another company is SuperMeat in Israel. Also founded by a professor, its goal is to create lab-grown chicken meat. The company raised $229,269 on Indiegogo to begin its efforts.

These companies are just the tip of the iceberg for what industry insiders hope becomes the new standard for meat eaters everywhere.

Further Examining Lab-Grown Meat Promises

All of the lab-grown meat companies have a similar mission, as evidenced by these slogans and promises:

  • “A method that doesn’t require raising and slaughtering animals.” – Memphis Meats
  • “Let’s change the way meat gets to the plate.” – Memphis Meats
  • “Eating meat without killing animals.” – SuperMeat
  • “Real meat without harming animals.” – SuperMeat

Besides their pledge to save animals, lab-grown meat companies make big claims when it comes to helping the environment.

Memphis Meats says they expect the following results from their products:

  • An up to 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional meat
  • The same reduction of land and water use
  • Better meat for human health

MosaMeat says they will help solve the food crisis and combat climate change, but doesn’t say much about animal welfare. Their main technique requires one sample of muscle cells to be taken from live animals for every 20,000 tons of lab-grown meat, saying the biopsy is harmless and noting that the animal survives the procedure.

SuperMeat promises to be humane, eco-friendly, to fight world hunger, and to create meat that is supposedly healthier and cheaper.

How the meat is actually grown, however, is another story entirely (and one these companies don’t exactly seem eager to reveal to future customers).

While a humane, environmentally friendly and even “healthy” burger sounds like a dream come true for meat lovers, there are plenty of misconceptions here that the public is being kept in the dark about.

The first issue with lab-grown meat is how the meat cells are being harvested.

What happens is as follows: if a cow in a slaughterhouse is pregnant, when she is slaughtered, the fetus is removed and brought into a blood collection facility. While still alive, the fetus is drained of its blood until it dies by a process of sticking a needle in its heart. It takes about five minutes, and this is what produces FBS, and ultimately, these so-called healthier burgers.

Even though cows and bulls are kept separately, the percentage of dairy cows who are pregnant is between 17 and 31 percent. As a result the number of fetuses being slaughtered is in the millions.

The FBS from these slaughtered fetuses can then be used in the lab, grown in a petri dish into a meat-like substance by feeding the cells nutrients for about a month. Fetal bovine serum is the easiest to grow, because cells when separated from the body are suicidal. The FBS contains growth factors that prevent them from killing themselves.

This process is not the only way to make lab-grown meat, but it is the fastest way. It can be used on other types of meat cells as well, and may be added to a petri dish with chicken cells to create a similar product.

At the end of the day, this reliance on FBS means some animals are still being killed for lab-created meat; cultured meat is definitely not vegetarian as some may hope.

The moral question of killing animals still remains: is slaughtering fetuses to make this highly unnatural product really any better than killing adult farm animals?

The controversial FBS is also used in creating vaccines for people, and it also comes with about a 1 in 40 billion chance of contracting mad cow disease. This low risk is much higher in cultured meat, which is why the Food and Drug Administration discouraged its use for the past 25 years (before wealthy investors like Gates and Branson decided to bring it to the forefront of the food industry, that is).

Is Lab Grown Meat Really A Better Choice?

What will the cultured meat companies do, and can Gates and Branson steer clear of the controversy that is sure to arise when people find out how these meats are actually made (much like genetically modified organisms from Monsanto)?

Each company ends up hiding its true plans because their products have to be licensed, and there are plenty of proprietary issues that come into play. It seems that they are trying to avoid FBS, but there are no conclusions to be drawn yet.

Hampton Creek says they will try to create meat using plant-based products to make the cells grow using bioreactors or giant tanks, using a process that will look similar to beer brewing.

Memphis Meats said they have developed the first product without FBS, and are now working on applying it to all of their products.

Neither company will say what they actually use because of the fear that the idea will be stolen. As a result, transparency goes out the window (sound familiar?), although we do know that there’s a chance the process may end up using GMO yeast, at least according to a representative from the company Finless Fish as quoted by Gizmodo.

The environmental claims made by lab grown meat companies may not be what they seem, either. Hampton Creek for example says its lab-meat will be up to ten times more environment efficient than conventional meat, but the evidence is lacking.

A 2011 study concluded that this type of meat product might produce less greenhouse gas, yet that it uses the same amount of energy as the pork industry. Another 2015 study estimated that it will require the same amount of energy as the conventional meat industry.

Despite the controversies, It seems that many animal rights groups are supporting lab-grown meat.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) offered a one-million dollar prize to the first company who can produce a commercially successful cultured meat. However, the deadline of the contest has passed as commercial lab-grown meat is still in the works.

It seems that company gave up on inspiring everyone to cut out animal products and is willing to compromise.

“People are surprised to learn that PETA is interested in lab-grown meat, but we have overcome our own revulsion at flesh-eating to champion a breakthrough that will mean a far kinder world for animals,” PETA statement said.

Mercy for Animals also supports “meat that is produced through cellular agriculture instead of slaughter.”

It might not be much better for the environment after all.

Meanwhile, the consumers are being fed an eerily-hypnotizing ads to hype up our expectations.

Watch a TV report about cultured meat that includes laboratory footage:

America’s biggest meat corporation is also jumping on the bandwagon:

The Corbett Report: Guess Who’s Growing Your Meat? – #NewWorldNextWeeks

Welcome to the 406th episode of New World Next Week — the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week: Story #1: Bill Gates Worked To End Livestock Production, Pushed Lab Grown Meat https://bit.ly/2YguWlq President Trump Readies Bailout For Nation’s Food Suppliers https://bit.ly/2ybnwoT Bill Gates Among 117 Foreigners To Be Decorated By Japan https://bit.ly/3aVzGjf Please Stop The Ride https://bit.ly/35fIfnA Story #2: New Microsoft Bitcoin Mining System Set to Transform BTC Mining https://bit.ly/2W6JDoq Episode 145 – You Are Being Gamed https://bit.ly/2Skik97 Video: Bill Gates Gets Pied In Belgium, Circa 1999 https://bit.ly/2VPNTtm Story #3: CT Cops Cancel Spy Drone, Showing Resistance to Medical Martial Law Can Work https://bit.ly/2ycXzFl Updated Press Release: Westport Police Department Statement on Drone Pilot Program https://bit.ly/2Wft0a2 California Cops Heckled As They Tell 93-Year-Old Couple They Can’t Sit in Chairs on the Beach https://bit.ly/2yX8mU8

IceAge Farmer: CORONAVIRUS, MEAT, & SOLAR MINIMUM

As it becomes clear the Chinese government has covered up the true extent of the Wuhan coronavirus–as they did with ASF–“experts” are blaming climate change for the virus spreading, and pinning meat as the source. Studies link viral mutagenesis to solar minima. Though the crisis is nascent, already meat is being blamed.

The Vegan Crusade: UK activist wants to make veganism protected like a religion, unleashing the zealots

rt.com
2 January 2020
Dr. Frank Furedi, author and social commentator is an emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Kent in Canterbury.


British ‘ethical vegan’ Jordi Casamitjana hopes to have his whole movement recognized by an employment tribunal as a protected belief, similar to a religious faith – which could give vegan zealots free rein in the workplace.

Casamitjana says he was fired from his job because of his beliefs – he disclosed to other employees at the League Against Cruel Sports that it invested its pension funds in firms involved in animal testing. He couldn’t leave well enough alone because he is an ‘ethical vegan’ – someone who doesn’t just avoid animal products, but also holds veganism as a “philosophy and a belief system”, and, apparently, feels the need to spread it around.ALSO ON RT.COMUnashamedly intolerant: Veganism promotes a religion of hate, attempts to guilt-trip & ridicule meat eaters

During hearings on Thursday and Friday, Casamitjana hopes to convince an Employment Tribunal that his beliefs should enjoy the same status as long-established religions such as Christianity, Judaism or Islam. Beyond merely vindicating the man in his job dispute, the process could end up opening the door to endowing veganism with the authority of the sacred.

In an era where lifestyle identity and politics dominate public life in the Western world, there is a constant tendency to transform individual beliefs into a sacred cause. Vegans are only the latest of a long line of life-style warriors who have demanded that their beliefs should enjoy the legal protection afforded by the Equality Act. In response to these demands, the courts have adopted a relatively relaxed attitude towards dishing out protected status. In 2011, a court ruled that belief in the sanctity of animal life should be protected. As a result of recent rulings, the status was bestowed on the conviction that fox hunting is evil, and the belief that it is possible to communicate with the dead using psychic powers.

RT UK@RTUKnews

“Vegan from ma head tomatoes”.

Hundreds of #vegan activists marched through central London on Saturday to raise awareness of animal rights.455:10 AM – Aug 20, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacy38 people are talking about this

‘Protected beliefs’ dilute the idea of what’s sacred

There is, of course, a weighty argument against the proliferation of protected beliefs; which is that it undermines the moral authority of long-established religions. As more and more everyday views are accorded the same moral status as long held religious ideals, the idea of the sacred becomes diluted and emptied of meaning. 

Nevertheless, I do not mind if veganism gains legal recognition for what it really is – a proselytising would-be religion. The zealotry of many vegans resembles the attitudes and forms of behaviour that are generally associated with the worst features of theocratic intolerance.

Crusading veganism needs to be distinguished from the personal decisions to eat only vegetables and avoid animal products. It regards non-vegans as akin to ignorant heathens, who must be converted to the cause. Towards its critics it has adopted the ruthless temper of the Inquisition. Vegan fanatics have targeted turkey and livestock farmers, butchers and steak houses.

Even the mainstream of this movement has adopted the intolerant habit of treating meat eaters as their moral inferiors. They ceaselessly moralise and lecture people about how they should live their lives. Unlike vegans in the past, who regarded their attitude to food as a private dietary issue, their contemporary brethren believe that converting others to their way of life is a public duty.ALSO ON RT.COMPaper beer bottles & wooden cutlery: Do eco-moralists care more about the environment, or turning people’s lives upside down?

Vegans unleashed to set their rules

The real question at stake is not whether or not veganism becomes as protected as a religion, but the practical consequences of this decision for the rest of society. In a democratic society, individuals are entitled to hold strong beliefs. However, they are not entitled to impose those beliefs on others. Nor are they entitled to expect that employers, colleagues and other people must accommodate to their beliefs. Yet, that is exactly what the drive for protected status for veganism hopes to achieve.

The most significant issue here is to what extent the public will have to accommodate to the ambitions of veganism. Recently a nursery that introduced a plant-based only menu was forced to backtrack after the children’s parent revolted against its unilateral imposition. If nurseries believe that it is OK to enforce their doctrine on little children, how long before other institutions follow suit? Will employers be expected to provide employees with vegan meals? Will they have to accommodate to vegans’ dislike for leather chairs and clothes because of the ‘stress’ and ‘mental harm’ they cause them? Though the answer to these questions is far from clear, it is likely that protected belief status will embolden these attempts to impose a certain lifestyle on the rest of us.

In reality, veganism does not need protected status, because it enjoys significant support from the UK’s cultural establishment. The Economist rightly predicted that 2019 would be ‘the year of the vegan’ and that veganism would go mainstream. Celebrities like Arianna Grande and Benedict Cumberbatch regularly endorse their vegan diet. On the media and the domain of youth culture, a vegan diet is often portrayed as a mark of virtue. However, for the vegan crusade, the adherence of celebrity culture to its cause its not enough. It wants to force itself on the meat-eating majority. Gaining protected status for its dogma would provide them with legal clout to further that ambition.

The War On Meat: New York City Bans Hotdogs

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio used executive powers to push through Green New Deal policies as part of the ‘One NYC 2050’ aka the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals. The new policy will phase out processed meats and reduce beef by 50% for all schools, jails, hospitals and cafeterias where government workers eat. Looking further into the policies reveals a slow creep towards an eventual mandated vegan diet in the name of ‘climate change’.

Why I Sing So what if I eat meat; and the war on meat

On this Vlog Matthew cover why There is a War on Meat by cover articles to show the proof the we at war; it’s a war on those eat meat. Also I cover about you tuber who interview ex-vegan like Frank Tufano and Sv3rige why it’s worth subscribing to thier channel because those ex-vegan do tell their story and why Vegan diet is unhealthy on a long term basics.

Also on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/video/GGkL7s…h

That why we need animals in our diet.

Eco Liberty Conclusion: This documentary explains why we need meat on our diet to maintain human optimal health. Why there an agenda to us sick on a vegan diet because the elite want us sick. Why people are more likely to commit crime while their cholesterol are lower than their optimal cholesterol level which that is required for our brains to function.

Those who for taxation on meat is for a sicker society but those who for a healthier society will be against taxation on meat because meat is health.

That why Eco Liberty will expose the lie that the elites are putting out to deceive people by telling that meat is unhealthy, that meat is bad for the planet because they want us sick and gone. Because I want you people to be healthy and not fall down into that trap of deception so we human can live a healthy life and thrive.