Is lab-grown meat really a solution to climate change?

To tackle the threat of climate change, there has been a proliferation of harebrained solutions. Right now, the fad du jour for climate activists is cultured meat. Fawning editorial coverage paints a picture of a world where every burger is grown in a lab.

While few would eagerly choose a burger grown in a petri dish — even proponents of cultured meat admit as much — the environmental benefit is touted as paramount to our gut reaction. One startup claims its process would produce less than a quarter of the greenhouse gas emissions compared with raising livestock.

Such claims are boloney. Cultured meat is not the answer to our problems.

Related on the SLP

Promoting lab-grown meat as ‘high-tech’ innovation could fuel consumer fear of alternative protein Why are we not eating more cell-based meat? Blame over-regulation, protectionist states, and skeptical consumers

Challenging creation of a ‘vaccine injury clinic,’ NIH research scientists rebuke Kennedy for politicizing and undermining science

How the “wellness” movement has turned into a rigid cultural belief system

Vaccines, religious freedom, and protecting children’s health: New York Amish appeal to Supreme Court after $118,000 in vaccine fines for blocking shots

In fact, it may actually be worse for the environment than raising livestock. Consider a recent Oxford study that gauged the environmental impact of raising livestock and found that the traditional metrics which compare it with lab-grown meat are flawed.

Read full, original article: Column: Farmers can create greener, more humane world