The world is in the grips of a food-tech revolution. One of the most compelling new developments is cultured meat, also known as clean, cell-based or slaughter-free meat. It’s grown from stem cells taken from a live animal without the need for slaughter.

世界正在經歷一場食品技術革命。最引人注目的新發(fā)展之一是培育肉，也被稱為清潔的、以細胞為基礎的或無屠宰的肉。它是由不需要宰殺的活體動物的干細胞培育而成。

Proponents hail cultured meat as the long-awaited solution to the factory farming problem. If commercialized successfully, it could solve many of the environmental, animal welfare and public health issues of animal agriculture while giving consumers exactly what they’re used to eating.

支持者稱贊培育肉是期待已久的解決工廠化養(yǎng)殖問題的方法。如果商業(yè)化成功，它可以解決畜牧業(yè)的許多環(huán)境、動物福利和公共衛(wèi)生問題，同時給予消費者他們所習慣吃的東西。

Despite this, the public is uncertain about cultured meat. Scientists and high-profile supporters, including investors like Bill Gates and Richard Branson, are pushing for broader adoption, but it’s difficult to sell the public on new food technology – case in point, genetically modified food.
Do people want to eat cultured meat?
In a 2017 survey of public opinion, the Sentience Institute asked a representative sample of more than a thousand Americans whether they agreed with the statement "When [cultured] foods are the same price as animal-based foods, I would prefer to eat more of these [cultured] foods and fewer animal-based foods." Less than half agreed to some degree.

盡管如此，公眾對培育肉還是不太確定?？茖W家和包括比爾蓋茨和理查德布蘭森等投資者在內的知名支持者正在推動更廣泛的應用，但很難向公眾推銷新的食品技術，例如轉基因食品。
人們想要吃人工培育的肉嗎?
在2017年的一項民意調查中，感知研究所(對一千多名美國人進行了抽樣調查，詢問他們是否同意“當(人工培育)食品與動物性食品價格相同時，我更愿意多吃這些(人工培育)食品，少吃動物性食品”的說法。不到一半的人在某種程度上同意。

Strongly disagree 13%Disagree 15%Somewhat disagree 15%? No opinion 10%Somewhat agree 20%? Agree 16%? Strongly agree 11%

強烈反對13%? ?不同意15%? 有點不同意15% 沒有意見10%? 有些同意20%? ?同意16%? ?強烈同意11%

As a moral psychologist, my research explores people’s perceptions of cultured meat, both the good and the bad. Below I discuss some of the top reasons people say they don’t want to eat cultured meat, compiled from opinion surveys, focus groups and online comments. But I’m optimistic that champions of this new technology can alleviate the public’s concerns, making a convincing case for consumers to embrace cultured meat.

作為一名道德心理學家，我的研究探索了人們對培育肉類的看法，無論是好的還是壞的。下面我將從民意調查、焦點小組和網上評論中總結出人們不想吃人工培育肉類的一些主要原因。但我樂觀地認為，這項新技術的擁護者可以緩解公眾的擔憂，讓消費者接受人工培育的肉類成為一個令人信服的理由。

‘Cultured meat is not necessary’
While there is increasing awareness of the downsides of factory farming, this knowledge has still not spread to all meat consumers, or at least is not reflected in their purchasing behavior. Factory farming supports what many consider cruel and restrictive practices where animals raised in such farms are subjected to extreme suffering, and estimates suggest that over 99 percent of U.S. farmed animals live on factory farms.

“人工培育的肉不被需要”
雖然越來越多的人意識到工廠化養(yǎng)殖的弊端，但這種認識并沒有普及到所有的肉類消費者，或者至少沒有反映在他們的購買行為中。工廠化養(yǎng)殖支持了許多人認為的殘酷和限制性做法，即在這種養(yǎng)殖場飼養(yǎng)的動物遭受極端痛苦。據(jù)估計，99%以上的美國養(yǎng)殖動物生活在工廠化養(yǎng)殖場。

Animal agriculture is also inefficient. Growing and feeding an entire animal for only part of its body is inevitably less efficient than growing just the parts that you want to eat.
Factory farming degrades the environment and contaminates local land and water, in addition to emitting around 14.5 percent of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.
The use of antibiotics in farming leads to antibiotic resistance, which could have devastating consequences for human health globally. In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reported that over 70 percent of medically important drugs were sold for use in animal agriculture.

畜牧業(yè)也是低效的。僅用身體的一部分來喂養(yǎng)和生長整個動物，不可避免地比只生長你想吃的部分效率要低。
工廠化農業(yè)破壞了環(huán)境，污染了當?shù)氐耐恋睾退送膺€排放了全球14.5%的人為溫室氣體。
在農業(yè)中使用抗生素導致抗生素耐藥性，這可能對全球人類健康造成毀滅性的后果。2016年，美國食品和藥物管理局(fda)報告稱，超過70%的重要藥物用于畜牧業(yè)。

Some people who believe farmed meat is problematic would prefer a plant-based food system. Despite recent hype around veganism, the number of people who don’t eat animal products remains extremely low. Only 2 to 6 percent of Americans identify as vegetarian or vegan. And only around 1 percent of adults identify as vegetarian and report never eating meat. This figure shows little change since the mid-1990s, despite the ongoing activism of the animal rights and environmental movements.

一些認為養(yǎng)殖肉類有問題的人更喜歡植物性食品系統(tǒng)。盡管最近素食主義被大肆宣傳，但不吃動物制品的人數(shù)仍然非常少。只有2%到6%的美國人認為自己是素食主義者。只有大約1%的成年人認為自己是素食主義者，而且從不吃肉。自上世紀90年代中期以來，這一數(shù)字幾乎沒有變化，盡管動物權利和環(huán)境運動一直在進行。

I’d argue that the plant-based solution to factory farming is not a feasible outcome for the foreseeable future. Cultured meat might be. Individuals can still choose to eat a plant-based diet. But for those who are unwilling to give up meat, they can have their steak and eat it too.
‘I’m worried about the animals and farmers’
Some people express concern about the fate of chickens and cows, imagining them abandoned to die or released into the wild.

我認為，在可預見的未來，以植物為基礎的工廠化農業(yè)解決方案是不可行的。而培育的肉可能行。個人仍然可以選擇植物性飲食。但是對于那些不愿意放棄吃肉的人來說，他們可以想怎么吃牛排就怎么吃。
“我很擔心動物和農民?！币恍┤吮磉_了對雞和牛的命運的擔憂，想象它們被遺棄死亡或放歸野外。

The time frame for cultured meat renders this consideration moot. Even by optimistic estimates, large-scale production is likely still several years away. As new processes are adopted, the demand for farm animals will slowly decrease. Fewer animals will be bred, thus the animals at the center of these concerns will never exist.

培育肉類的時間框架使得這種考慮毫無意義。即使樂觀估計，大規(guī)模生產仍可能需要幾年時間。隨著新工藝的采用，對家畜的需求將慢慢減少。更少的動物將被繁殖，因此處于這些關注中心的動物將永遠不會存在。

Many people are also concerned about the negative impact a transition to cultured meat may have on farmers. But this new technology is far from the only threat farmers already face as the industry becomes ever more centralized. Eighty-five percent of beef in the U.S. comes from just four main producers.

許多人還擔心向培育肉類過渡可能會對農民造成負面影響。但是，隨著農業(yè)變得越來越集中，這種新技術遠不是農民已經面臨的唯一威脅。美國85%的牛肉來自四個主要的生產商。

In fact, cultured meat provides a new industry, with opportunities to grow and process products for use in cellular agriculture. The meat industry can learn a lesson from how taxis lost out to Uber and Lyft; they must adapt to new technologies to survive and thrive. And the industry is already taking steps in this direction – Tyson Foods and Cargill Meat Solutions, two of the biggest meat producers in the U.S., have made investments in this new future.

事實上，培育肉類提供了一個新的產業(yè)，為細胞農業(yè)生產和加工產品提供了機會。肉類行業(yè)可以從出租車如何輸給優(yōu)步(Uber)和Lyft中吸取教訓；他們必須適應新技術以生存和繁榮。食品行業(yè)已經在朝著這個方向邁出了步伐——美國最大的兩家肉類生產商泰森食品和嘉吉肉類解決方案公司他們在這個新的未來進行了投資。

‘Cultured meat is disgusting’
Disgust is a common reaction to cultured meat. It’s difficult to rebut, as it is not an argument per se – disgust is in the eye of the beholder.
However, disgust is often not a good guide for rational decision-making. Cultural differences in meat consumption illustrate this point. Typically, Westerners are happy to eat pigs and cows, but consider eating dogs disgusting. But dog meat is consumed in some Asian cultures.

“培育的肉很惡心”
厭惡是對培育肉類的常見反應。很難反駁，因為這本身并不是一個論點——厭惡只是旁觀者的看法。
然而，厭惡往往不是理性決策的好向導。肉類消費的文化差異說明了這一點。西方人通常喜歡吃豬和牛，但認為吃狗很惡心。但是在一些亞洲文化中，狗肉是被食用的。

So what is disgusting appears to be somewhat determined by what is normal and accepted in your community. With time, and exposure to cultured meat, it’s possible that these feelings of disgust will disappear.

所以什么是惡心似乎是由什么是正常的和在你的社區(qū)接受多少決定的。隨著時間的推移，再加上食用了人工培育的肉類，這些惡心的感覺有可能會消失。

‘Cultured meat is unnatural’
Perhaps the loudest opposition to cultured meat is that it’s unnatural. This argument relies on the premise that natural things are better than unnatural things.
While this outlook is reflected in recent consumer preferences, the argument is fallacious. Some natural things are good. However, there are many things that are unnatural that are fundamental to our society: glasses, motorized transport, the internet. Why single out cultured meat?

“人工培育的肉是不自然的”
也許對人工培育肉類最強烈的反對意見是它不自然。這個論點的前提是，自然的東西比非自然的東西好。
盡管這種觀點反映在最近的消費者偏好上，但這種觀點是錯誤的。有些自然的東西是好的。然而，有許多非自然的東西是我們社會的基礎:眼鏡，機動交通，互聯(lián)網。為什么僅僅排斥培育肉?

Perhaps the argument is only applicable to food – natural food is better. But “natural” food is a myth; almost all the food you buy is modified in some way. Moreover, I’d argue the oveuse of antibiotics in conventional meat and other practices of modern animal agriculture – including the selective breeding used to produce modern farmed animals – throws it into the same unnatural category.
Of course, naturalness can be a proxy for things that really do matter in food: safety, sustainability, animal welfare. But cultured meat fares far better than conventional meat on those metrics. If we dismiss cultured meat on the grounds of being unnatural then, to be consistent, we must also dismiss a vast number of other products that make modern lives better and easier.

也許這個論點只適用于食物——天然食物更好。但“天然”食物是一個神話；你買的幾乎所有的食物都經過了某種程度的改良。此外，我認為在傳統(tǒng)肉類和現(xiàn)代畜牧業(yè)的其他實踐中過度使用抗生素——包括用于生產現(xiàn)代養(yǎng)殖動物的選擇性育種——將抗生素歸入了同樣的非自然類別。
當然，自然可以代表食品中真正重要的東西:安全、可持續(xù)性、動物福利。但在這些指標上培育肉類的表現(xiàn)遠遠好于傳統(tǒng)肉類。如果我們以不自然的理由拒絕食用人工培育的肉類，那么，為了保持一致，我們也必須拒絕食用大量其他讓現(xiàn)代生活更美好、更容易的產品。

It’s early days, but a number of companies are working to bring cultured meat to the table. As consumers, we have both the right and obligation to be informed about which products we choose to eat. Yes, we should be cautious with any new technology. But in my opinion, the objections to cultured meat can’t hold a candle to the potential benefits for humans, animals and the planet.

現(xiàn)在還處于早期階段，但許多公司正在努力將人工培育的肉類帶到餐桌上。作為消費者，我們有權利也有義務知道我們選擇吃什么產品。是的，我們應該對任何新技術保持謹慎。但在我看來，反對人工培育肉類不能與潛在的對人類、動物和地球的好處相比。

（評論部分）

Sheila Davis
logged in via Facebook
I learn something new everyday. I’m really not sure whether it would matter or not. When I look at the difference in the taste and texture of the meats from naturally grown animals raised today, it really made make no difference. Meats today compared to the years before the 60s- I will even say 70s - taste somewhat bland - chicken and pork more so. Chickens were a golden yellow as well as their eggs yokes and the taste and smell was sharply chicken - unlike whispers of chicken which we eat today, the same with pork.

我每天都學一些新東西。我真的不確定這是否重要。當我看著今天飼養(yǎng)的自然生長的動物的肉在味道和質地上的不同時，真的沒有什么區(qū)別。與60年代以前(我甚至可以說70年代之前)的肉類相比，今天的肉類味道略淡——雞肉和豬肉更是如此。雞和雞蛋一樣呈金黃色，味道和氣味都是雞的味道和氣味——不像我們今天吃的雞肉，豬肉也是一樣。

Beef is not much better, and the ground beef is ridiculous. Those were the days when six blocks down the street you could smell the food and knew what was being cooked. Optimistic people born in the 80s and forward have no idea what untampered meat taste like, something my mother and I used to discuss often. So let them grow the meat in the lab what difference would it make - we are already consuming whatever antibiotics and chemicals they use in the food and on the animals now.

牛肉也好不到哪里去，而且絞碎的牛肉也很可笑。那時候，沿著這條街走六個街區(qū)，你就能聞到食物的味道，知道正在煮什么。樂觀的80后和樂觀的人不知道未經處理的肉是什么味道，這是我媽媽和我經常討論的。所以讓他們在實驗室里種肉有什么區(qū)別呢?我們已經在消耗他們于食物和動物身上使用的抗生素和化學物質了。

Joe Dirk
You present some logical and accurate counter-arguments to the general aversion of cultured meat. Despite that, I am somehow still not sold.

The picture attached to the article fuels my (illogical) aversion. It looks disgusting! You point out that disgust is in the eye of the beholder, and rightly so. But looking at the picture I cant help but suspect that the texture is completely wrong. Is there a range of textures that would be available, or would we be limited to a ground beef composition, or even worse, ‘pink slime’? Could we really have our ‘steak’ and eat it to? What about the flavor that the bones add, especially for gravies and stews?

你提出了一些合乎邏輯的、準確的論據(jù)來反駁對培育肉類的普遍反感。盡管如此，我還是沒有被說服。
這篇文章所附的圖片激起了我(不合邏輯的)反感。它看起來真惡心!你指出厭惡是在旁觀者的眼中，這是正確的。但看著這張照片，我不禁懷疑它的質地是完全錯誤的。是否有一系列的紋理可供選擇，或者我們會被限制在絞碎的牛肉成分中，或者更糟的是，“粉色黏液”?我們真的能吃到我們的“牛排”嗎?骨頭的味道怎么樣，尤其是燉肉和燉菜的味道?

I look forward to seeing more research and progress in this area. The future is always approaching!
Humans have been eating animals for many thousands of years. It will be a difficult task to transition to a form of farming that we have never used before. We are generally reluctant to change, in my opinion.

我期待著在這方面有更多的研究和進展。未來總是在向我們走來!
人類吃動物已經有幾千年了。要過渡到一種我們以前從未使用過的農業(yè)形式將是一項艱巨的任務。在我看來，我們通常不愿意改變。

i also feel that this will affect the farmers, despite your counter-argument. Perhaps most meat is sold from a handful of front companies - but those companies still rely on the individual farmer to maintain the cattle. And yes, we will need to adapt (such as the taxi companies), but adaptation almost never comes easily. You would have to train farmers to become scientists - quite a career change.

我也覺得這會影響到農民，盡管你反對。也許大部分的肉都是從少數(shù)幾家掛名公司出售的，但這些公司仍然依賴于個體農場主來飼養(yǎng)這些牛。是的，我們需要適應(比如出租車公司)，但適應幾乎從來都不容易。你必須訓練農民成為科學家——這是一個相當大的職業(yè)轉變。

Liza Whyatt
“Animal agriculture is also inefficient. Growing and feeding an entire animal for only part of its body is inevitably less efficient than growing just the parts that you want to eat.”
This comment is completely inaccurate. Farming is a business and every part of the body is used whether it is for food (for humans, pets, or plants), clothing (like your leather jacket, or shoes), cosmetics, soaps.

“畜牧業(yè)也是低效的。只靠身體的一部分生長和喂養(yǎng)整個動物，不可避免地比只生長你想吃的部分效率要低?！?/span>
這句話完全不準確。農業(yè)是一門生意，身體的每個部分都被用來制造食物(人類、寵物或植物、衣服(比如你的皮夾克或鞋子)、化妝品、肥皂。

The author also lacks an understanding of human nutrition essential for understanding the broader synthetic meat industry. Nutritional needs vary by season, light exposure (location), sleep patterns, work load, and genetic make up. This is a complex system that we are *just starting to uncover. With this in mind, and a perspective that Mother Nature is intelligent in her design, these meats would need to reflect all parts of the body - nose to tail - since that is what we’ve historically consumed.

作者也缺乏對人類營養(yǎng)的理解，而這是理解更廣泛的合成肉類工業(yè)所必需的。營養(yǎng)需求因季節(jié)、光照(地點)、睡眠模式、工作負荷和基因組成而異。這是一個我們剛剛開始發(fā)現(xiàn)的復雜系統(tǒng)?？紤]到這一點，以及大自然母親在她的設計中是聰明的這一觀點，這些肉需要反映身體的各個部分——從鼻子到尾巴——因為這是我們歷史上吃的東西。

it will be a LONG time before the labs are able to craft something as complex and complete as an entire animal, not to mention as tasty. There is a reason pork belly, crispy (pastured) chicken skin, and grilled salmon tastes so good… it is GOOD for us.

實驗室還需要很長一段時間才能制造出像整個動物一樣復雜和完整的東西，更不用說美味了。五花肉、酥脆的雞皮和烤三文魚味道這么好是有原因的……這對我們有好處。

Beer Ranch
logged in via Google
As one of the farmers that provide the cares for land and cattle 365 days a year, I’d like to ask for some documentation for a number of claims in the article. Specifically, the % of livestock raised on factory farms and how the only parts of the animals used are the ones eaten. In fact 97% of farms in the US are family farms, by USDA definition.I would also recommend people look up how BFS or Bovine Fetal Serum is used by this cell protein industry. I’d also recommend the writer visit a few livestock farms before writing about farms again.

作為每年365天提供土地和牛照料的農民之一，我想要求文章中提到的一系列主張的文件。具體地說，在工廠化農場飼養(yǎng)的牲畜的百分比，以及所使用的動物的唯一部分是如何食用的。事實上，根據(jù)美國農業(yè)部的定義，美國97%的農場都是家庭農場，我也建議大家看看BFS或牛胎兒血清在這個細胞蛋白產業(yè)中是如何使用的。我還建議作者在再次寫有關農場的文章之前參觀幾個畜牧場。

Dustin O'Bryant
logged in via Google
Ultimately it isn’t going to matter if everyone is convinced to go for lab grown meat. Enough people are on board that it is going to be a profitable endeavor, and the end result will be meat that is cheaper, safer, healthier, and better for the environment. Once it is available in grocery stores at a reasonable price it will almost certainly be adopted at a constantly accelerating rate.

最終，如果每個人都被說服去吃實驗室培育的肉，那就不重要了。船上有足夠多的人，這將是一項有利可圖的努力，最終的結果將是肉更便宜，更安全，更健康，對環(huán)境更好。一旦它在雜貨店以合理的價格出售，它幾乎肯定會以不斷加快的速度被采用。

From what I can tell, most people who are opposed to it are older, don’t understand the science, are afraid of change, have an illogical aversion to the idea of lab grown meat, and/or are somehow involved with an industry that may be negatively impacted by this. The only ones that I expect will really hold out for long are the ones who are involved with an industry that may be negatively impacted by this, and that is because they have the most rational position…it threatens their livelihood. It is an unfortunate situation in that case, but progress must go on.

據(jù)我所知，大多數(shù)反對這種做法的人年齡較大，不懂科學，害怕改變，對實驗室培育肉類的想法有一種不合邏輯的厭惡，而且/或者不知何故，他們所在的行業(yè)可能會因此受到負面影響。我認為，唯一能夠真正堅持下去的人，是那些可能會因此受到負面影響的行業(yè)人士，因為他們擁有最理性的立場……這威脅到他們的生計。這種情況是不幸的，但必須繼續(xù)取得進展。
?