I wouldnt eat it. Its not natural, God only knows what the heck is in this stuff, or how it is made. Does anyone know the long term effects of eating this stuff? I guess I just dont really agree with messing with nature.

Posted by: Christina | May 16, 2008 12:08 PM

I kind of wish there were more questions to the poll, because, while I personally would not eat "clean meat" myself, and thus had to answer no, I do think it is a great idea for society in general and would suggest it to the people I know who do eat meat.

Posted by: Laura | May 16, 2008 12:09 PM

That's a brilliant name for it!

Let's try to coin this as the term for "in-vitro meat." It makes it sound so much better (as it should sound) and points out how filthy "real meat" is.

Posted by: Mark Devries | May 16, 2008 12:11 PM

I think it would also be worth noting how much it would cost PETA or whoever made it. The cost to make it even without the safety standard would be outrageous.

And it's worth telling people the truth, that there would be no way to know how safe it really is until it's been "tested" quite a bit, either on animals or people.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | May 16, 2008 12:38 PM

I think there are some flaws with this poll, because it doesn't differentiate between those who say "No" because they don't want to eat meat AT ALL, and those who say "No" because they want to eat normal meat... so basically the two opposite ends of the spectrum get clumped together under 1 response. Y'all need to hire a statistician over there! =)

Posted by: Matt | May 16, 2008 12:46 PM

You're really not going to get clear results from this. You should at least ask people if they are meat eaters or veg and also if they support the production in general.

Posted by: Rebecca | May 16, 2008 01:15 PM

I agree with Laura. I am supportive of the idea of clean meat for both the animals & the environment (mostly the animals :) but meat just grosses me out now...

Posted by: Robyn | May 16, 2008 01:26 PM

You really do need more options on that poll. I voted "Yes", only because I'm in support of it, but I honestly wouldn't touch the stuff since it would just be /too/ much like the real stuff for me. If you could have a "No, but I would be in support of it" option, that would be great. Thanks!

Q3

Posted by: Quwen Qyiz | May 16, 2008 01:48 PM

To my mind this is no less unnatural than the way animals are intensively reared on farms. So it uses new technology, and people are afraid of that, but surely anything's better than ingesting faeces and growth hormones and god-knows-what else in "real meat"?

Yes, it will take a long time to perfect, and come up with an economically viable way to produce clean meat. However. For the sake of the environment, the animals, the starving millions and the state of our physical and moral health as a species, I think it's an absolute necessity, and will support it in any way I can.

Posted by: Rachel | May 16, 2008 01:59 PM

Christina you're too funny!! And Matt you're right!! But as for me I don't think I would eat it. It still would have to come from a cell from an animal and even the word laboratory makes me cringe!! But on a lighter note it may make people think that the blood soaked packages of MEAT they buy in stores maybe really is "unclean"!!

Posted by: Carla | May 16, 2008 02:21 PM

Christina,

When it comes to most of the things we have done to this world, we have messed with nature (and even have gone against it) and as a result the eco-system is out of balance.

Although, I do agree that messing with Mother Nature is wrong, if this creates a humane alternative, then, I'm all for it.

I will say, for me, I enjoy being a vegetarian and would never go back to eating meat (in-vitro or not).

As far as this poll is concerned, I would be interested to no what Vegetarians/Vegans would actually eat this meat due to the humane circumstances surrounding it.

Maybe there should be a splash page to this poll, with two choices: One for Meat Eaters and on for Vegetarians/Vegans. This poll might produce more accurate results.

Posted by: Eric Silberstein | May 16, 2008 04:35 PM

the only reason i wouldn't eat clean meat is i like saying i'm a vegetarian. i will refer it to my meat eating friends and family, though!!

Posted by: amber | May 16, 2008 04:40 PM

Its not that I dont think its a good idea though. If it will end the suffering of millions of animals, then it sounds good to me. If people want to put it in their bodies, awesome. I personally wouldnt buy it or serve it up to my daughter lol, but thats just me.

Posted by: christina | May 16, 2008 05:07 PM

I wouldn't eat Real meat or clean meat

I don't believe in messing with nature, isn't that what people are doing wrong with animals? but what are the long term health effects? What about cholesterol and other nutritional facts? Fat, sodium, etc...

I'm sticking to my soy faux "meats"

Posted by: Janers | May 16, 2008 08:33 PM

I agree with the above who said it's not fair for people who said no to be clumped together without asking why. I personally would not eat it for a few reasons- 1) the thought of eating meat is just gross to me now that I am vegan, 2) because even though it wouldn't be diseased or pumped full of antibiotics, there are still health issues involved in meat consumption, and 3) It would probably validate the case of nonvegetarians when they say that meat is irresistible and other things like that because even though it is not "cruel" meat, if vegetarians all of a sudden start eating clean meat it would still probably send out the same message as if we all started eating regular meat again.

While I will admit, if I had to choose between eating cruel meat and eating clean meat, clean meat would win. However, that would be in the case of having no other options.

While I am glad that these scientists are trying to do this, because it would mean less cruelty in this world and there are so many people who would actually eat it especially those who already eat meat, I probably still would not eat it because of the health problems meat in general causes such as cholesterol, heart problems, etc. But for those who really want to eat meat, I am truly thrilled for them and I also like the term 'clean meat' because of how gruesome real meat is.

Also, if it were to replace 'real meat' it would help with the issue of worls hunger, not only because the meat could be produced without the wasted resources associated with factory farming, but the amount of food fed to cows alone in the united states if given to the worlds hungry would end world hunger. I think they are really onto something with the clean meat idea- I still probably wouldnt eat clean meat but I would suggest it to everyone I know who wants to eat meat.

Posted by: Andrea | May 16, 2008 09:56 PM

If this moves meat eaters away from the killing of animals, I am all for it...

I my self have been vegan for so many years, I dont think I would want to eat it.

Go Vegan

Posted by: Holly | May 17, 2008 08:18 AM

I understand why AR people advocate for this, but don't agree. Eating meat is not good for the human body and I don't think this clean meat is going to be any better. What effect are we having on our species long term by not promoting healthier living? Think about all the drugs that parents take, whether for cholesterol, diabetes, whatever. I can't imagine those drugs won't affect the children and the species as a whole. I know the clean meat is a short term solution and mine is long term, but I think we need to really think about what we are doing to the species. There are so many obese and unhealthy people these days compared to 50 or so years ago when it was not acceptable to be that way. We need to stop letting people think that an unhealthy lifestyle is a personal choice and we need to stop encouraging it.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | May 17, 2008 11:18 AM

This is a great idea by PETA due to how deeply entrenched meat-eating is in people. I would not eat it, but this is an excellent tactic to go for and keep at.

Posted by: Gerry Ardigliano | May 17, 2008 01:35 PM

As others have said, this poll is seriously flawed - vegans/vegetarians who find meat unpalatable, period, have to answer "no" even if they otherwise support the idea.

Posted by: Andy J | May 17, 2008 02:14 PM

It would be wrong NOT to eat it.

If we have the opportunity to support and promote something that can spare millions of animals from endless suffering, and we don't do it, we are guilty of helping those animals suffer.

Posted by: Mark Devries | May 18, 2008 01:13 PM

this is just a bad idea =/

Posted by: Hannah | May 18, 2008 02:53 PM

the mayority of people don't want to quit eat meat, so I think this is a good idea, they can eat clean meat, like this the animals are going to have a better life and don't need to be killed for humans pleasure

Posted by: liliana | May 18, 2008 07:51 PM

"I kind of wish there were more questions to the poll, because, while I personally would not eat "clean meat" myself, and thus had to answer no, I do think it is a great idea for society in general and would suggest it to the people I know who do eat meat." ~Originally posted by Laura~

Yeah, I'm the exact same way. But I feel that I'm giving negative feedback, when I actually fully support it.

Posted by: Nathaniel Ed | May 18, 2008 10:22 PM

I became a vegan for animals. That's the sole reason. So, yes, if I could eat meat that caused no suffering to any animals,I'd eat it.

Posted by: lynda downie | May 19, 2008 12:59 AM

Going veg may not be an option in the future. With the ballooning human population, and diminishing arable land, we won't be able to spare 12 pounds of grain to produce 1 pound of beef. Clean meat may be a possible answer.

If you're willing to accept a transplanted liver cloned from your own cells to save your life, then you shouldn't be opposed to clean meat (assuming, of course, you're even interested in eating meat in the first place).

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | May 19, 2008 10:00 AM

I marked 'no'... but only because the idea of eating flesh weirds me out. I've been a vegetarian since I was 3 years old - so please don't take my 'no' as a vote of no-confidence in the product. I'm all for 'clean meat' as a sub-in for people who can't stop eating animals. It's an incredible alternative.

Posted by: Jen | May 19, 2008 05:57 PM

isn't it STILL meat? no thanx!

Posted by: MeL | May 20, 2008 08:42 AM

Sooo, they are still raising animals, just for stem cells instead of slaughter. Or am I not understanding this? I don't trust any industry to raise animals to be treated humanely.

Posted by: Liza | May 20, 2008 06:05 PM

umm last time i checked meat is meat and no matter how u bull shit around how its "clean" i dont trust the industry!

Posted by: Jenny | May 21, 2008 11:11 AM

Yes, the poll needs more options. I would not eat it b/c I enjoy my vegetarian diet and the thought of eating any kind of meat grosses me out now, but I think it's a great cruelty-free option for those that do eat meat. The fact that it's not natural is a concern though.

Posted by: April | July 19, 2008 11:13 AM