Globalist want us to eat Bugs & Human flesh... seriously

[revelarts]

to save the environment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1UlIy7isac




A new company called BiteLabs is using celebrities including Kanye West, Ellen DeGeneres, James Franco and Jennifer Lawrence to pitch the idea of eating human flesh to consumers.BiteLabs promotes the same idea the World Economic Forum have been pushing for years now. According to Bitelabs:“Celebrity meat production requires less than 1% of the amount of land needed for traditional farming. Currently, 70% of the world’s farmland (almost 30% of the entire earth’s surface) is used for raising animals. Meat production today is simply unsustainable: unless a radical change is made, the price of meat will eventually rise out of control. Lab grown meats are the future.”Judging by the reaction on social media, it seems the public aren’t quite ready yet.The public might not be quite ready but mainstream media is doing its best to prime the public to start eating each other.The New York Times caused a stir on Twitter this week by claiming “Cannibalism has a time and a place” — and suggesting that time and place is right here and right now.


http://www.bitelabs.org

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FbgUVkTWIAEFPAX?format=jpg&name=small

.....................

in related news...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYny2TOXEAAvRad?format=jpg&name=large

....................

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYjfKeEXgAAYL0t?format=jpg&name=small

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/ou...estival-2022-7 (https://www.businessinsider.co.za/oumph-fake-human-meat-burger-winning-awards-cannes-lions-festival-2022-7)

" A plant-based company called Oumph! produced a burger they said tastes like human flesh.
The company advertised the Human Meat Plant-Based Burger around Sweden last year during Halloween.
"No humans were injured in the development of this product," the company said.
For more stories, go to www.BusinessInsider.co.za (http://www.businessinsider.co.za/).
A plant-based meat brand decided to take an unusual — and cannibalistic — route to sway people to try their product.
European company Oumph! developed the Human Meat Plant-Based Burger — a burger they say tastes just like people — for those willing to indulge in fake human flesh.
"We developed this burger in no time as soon as we knew what taste and texture we were after," Oumph! Co-Founder Anders Linden said in a YouTube video.
During Halloween last year, the company set up a food truck in Stockholm, Sweden, serving the "scariest plant-based food ever." The company released a short advertisement, complete with a sinister voiceover depicting dark scenes in a kitchen as a a chef develops the human-based meat. The commercial then dares people to try it. ...

"civilization" has left the building.


Missionary from Europe & the U.S. used to go to foreign countries to present the gospel and as a result of conversion cannibalism ended in those "savage" realms... basically around the world.

Seems we need some evangelism here.
A hardcore revival would be pretty nice right about now.

[Black Diamond]

to save the environment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1UlIy7isac






http://www.bitelabs.org

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FbgUVkTWIAEFPAX?format=jpg&name=small

.....................

in related news...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYny2TOXEAAvRad?format=jpg&name=large

....................

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYjfKeEXgAAYL0t?format=jpg&name=small

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/ou...estival-2022-7 (https://www.businessinsider.co.za/oumph-fake-human-meat-burger-winning-awards-cannes-lions-festival-2022-7)


"civilization" has left the building.


Missionary from Europe & the U.S. used to go to foreign countries to present the gospel and as a result of conversion cannibalism ended in those "savage" realms... basically around the world.

Seems we need some evangelism here.
A hardcore revival would be pretty nice right about now.

Some are trying to make that happen.

[Gunny]

There are people that firmly believe in drinking their own piss too. I don't listen to them either :rolleyes:

[revelarts]

There are people that firmly believe in drinking their own piss too. I don't listen to them either :rolleyes:
the piss drinkers aren't working with our federal or local water purification agencies though.

These Bug eaters and cannibal people are working with food manufacturers and gov't regulators and schools.
Ignoring them might not be the best plan.
they are literally training school kids to buy into this crap.

[Gunny]

the piss drinkers aren't working with our federal or local water purification agencies though.

These Bug eaters and cannibal people are working with food manufacturers and gov't regulators and schools.
Ignoring them might not be the best plan.
they are literally training school kids to buy into this crap.That doesn't surprise me a bit. We live in a society that can't correctly marry it's genitalia to it's gender. Why wouldn't they eat bugs?

I hate to tell you this, and no, I'm not "for" anything, but you head West across the Pacific and you run into a lot of people that eat bugs. Among other things we won't normally eat. Got more to do with societal upbringing than actual nutrition.

Teenagers are running out of things to try and "shock the World" with. Guess this is the latest.

[revelarts]

FOOD & BEVERAGE
How entrepreneurs are persuading Americans to eat bug protein
PUBLISHED FRI, FEB 14 20201:42 PM EST
@JANEWELLS
A new report by Barclays cites the expanding market around the alternative protein source and predicts the edible bug industry could be worth $8 billion by 2030, up from a little under $1 billion last year.
The product is already found in experimental cuisines and boasts an eco-friendly reputation. But it has yet to go mainstream, despite the proven market for meat alternatives.
Edible bugs can be a hard sell, especially in the United States....

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/14/bug-protein-how-entrepreneurs-are-persuading-americans-to-eat-insects.html

I'm sure It's just about $$$ ... it's not a plan or anything.

[Black Diamond]

That doesn't surprise me a bit. We live in a society that can't correctly marry it's genitalia to it's gender. Why wouldn't they eat bugs?

I hate to tell you this, and no, I'm not "for" anything, but you head West across the Pacific and you run into a lot of people that eat bugs. Among other things we won't normally eat. Got more to do with societal upbringing than actual nutrition.

Teenagers are running out of things to try and "shock the World" with. Guess this is the latest.

I didn't think anything could trump tide pods.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

There are people that firmly believe in drinking their own piss too. I don't listen to them either :rolleyes:

Yes, when insanity rules such vermin flourish and reveal their dark, abhorrent and idiotic ideas..
Likely that a few of them re-eat thier on poop-since so much shhtttt spews out of their mouths..
And are so outrageously proud to be dems....Tyr

[fj1200]

This.


I'm sure It's just about $$$ ... it's not a plan or anything.

Once the sarcasm is stripped away. ;)

[Gunny]

FOOD & BEVERAGE
How entrepreneurs are persuading Americans to eat bug protein
PUBLISHED FRI, FEB 14 20201:42 PM EST
@JANEWELLS
A new report by Barclays cites the expanding market around the alternative protein source and predicts the edible bug industry could be worth $8 billion by 2030, up from a little under $1 billion last year.
The product is already found in experimental cuisines and boasts an eco-friendly reputation. But it has yet to go mainstream, despite the proven market for meat alternatives.
Edible bugs can be a hard sell, especially in the United States....

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/14/bug-protein-how-entrepreneurs-are-persuading-americans-to-eat-insects.html

I'm sure It's just about $$$ ... it's not a plan or anything.Isn't everything? That's all this green BS is about as well. Inventing a market then convincing people they need it.

My opinion on the matter is I got an exterminator comes round quarterly. Until the aforementioned have them doxed, anyway :rolleyes:

[BoogyMan]

Growing up there was a kid in our school who would eat ANYTHING for 1$. He ate a lot of bugs and kids took great joy in bringing whatever they could catch to this guy along with the dollar.

It was disgusting then and it is disgusting now. The bug protein people can kiss by happy backside because I won't be eating bugs unless there is no other choice and I have found that eating tree bark doesn't cut it. :laugh:


That doesn't surprise me a bit. We live in a society that can't correctly marry it's genitalia to it's gender. Why wouldn't they eat bugs?

I hate to tell you this, and no, I'm not "for" anything, but you head West across the Pacific and you run into a lot of people that eat bugs. Among other things we won't normally eat. Got more to do with societal upbringing than actual nutrition.

Teenagers are running out of things to try and "shock the World" with. Guess this is the latest.

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FosNvwLWcAAJKdv?format=jpg&name=small

[jimnyc]

"bug protein" LOL

I wouldn't eat any of this made up shit. Anything is edible if you're desperate. I'll become a dang crook or even just catch fish or whatever - but I ain't eatin no dang bugs. Chocolate covered or not!

[revelarts]

Breads Made of Powdered Crickets May Be Loaded with Bacterial Spores


https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z5Eu58FAeySvq4YkUmco3j-970-80.jpg.webp
Three breads produced with different blends of wheat four and, from left to right, 30 percent, 10 percent and zero percent cricket powder. The more cricket powder was used, the darker the color. (Image credit: A. Osimani et al.)


https://www.livescience.com/62878-cricket-bread-bacterial-spores.html

If bread made from powdered crickets isn't gross enough for you, this article won't help: A new study from Italy finds that breads made with powdered crickets may be loaded with potentially dangerous bacterial spores.

That's a setback for what is otherwise a highly nutritious bread, according to the researchers. [7 Insects You'll Be Eating in the Future]

For decades, scientists have known that edible insects can be highly nutritious. What's more, switching from eating livestock to eating insects is good for the environment, as it takes much less space and other resources to farm insects. (Previous research, for example, has found that livestock currently use about 70 percent of all available farmland worldwide.)

But it goes without saying that convincing non-insect-eating people to eat insects can be difficult. So, to make insects more appealing to potential diners, researchers have experimented with making food that contains insect-based ingredients but doesn't obviously appear to do so. (Think of it like tricking your kids into eating veggies by throwing them in a smoothie.)

To see what breads made with insects might be like, scientists in Italy baked experimental loaves using different blends of wheat flour, plus a special ingredient: a commercially available powder made from crickets.

"The main goal of the study was to mask the presence of insects in everyday foods by using powders instead of whole insects," said study senior author Lucia Aquilanti, a food microbiologist at Marche Polytechnic University in Ancona, Italy.

But masking the insects, even in powder form, was easier said than done. The researchers found that the more cricket powder there was in the experimental bread loaves, the less the dough rose and the more firm the bread was. This was likely because the more cricket powder there was in a loaf, the less wheat flour there was, thus reducing the amount of gluten that helps bread rise and makes bread chewy, they noted.

And, perhaps more important, the more cricket powder there was in a loaf, the less tasty people judged it. "The taste was not too pleasant — it seemed a bit like cat food," Aquilanti told Live Science.

There was another downside, too: the presence of bacterial spores — a dormant state of some types of bacteria — in the cricket-based breads. These spores raised potential safety concerns, the researchers said, as such germs might potentially spoil the breads, or even make people sick.

This doesn't mean we've reached the end of the road for breads made with cricket powders, though. There are a number of techniques, such as gamma irradiation, that may rid cricket and other insect powders of the potentially dangerous spores, Aquilanti said. (Gamma irradiation exposes items to gamma rays to sterilize them.)...

[Gunny]

Breads Made of Powdered Crickets May Be Loaded with Bacterial Spores


https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z5Eu58FAeySvq4YkUmco3j-970-80.jpg.webp
Three breads produced with different blends of wheat four and, from left to right, 30 percent, 10 percent and zero percent cricket powder. The more cricket powder was used, the darker the color. (Image credit: A. Osimani et al.)


https://www.livescience.com/62878-cricket-bread-bacterial-spores.html
If bread made from powdered crickets isn't gross enough for you, this article won't help: A new study from Italy finds that breads made with powdered crickets may be loaded with potentially dangerous bacterial spores.

That's a setback for what is otherwise a highly nutritious bread, according to the researchers. [7 Insects You'll Be Eating in the Future]

For decades, scientists have known that edible insects can be highly nutritious. What's more, switching from eating livestock to eating insects is good for the environment, as it takes much less space and other resources to farm insects. (Previous research, for example, has found that livestock currently use about 70 percent of all available farmland worldwide.)

But it goes without saying that convincing non-insect-eating people to eat insects can be difficult. So, to make insects more appealing to potential diners, researchers have experimented with making food that contains insect-based ingredients but doesn't obviously appear to do so. (Think of it like tricking your kids into eating veggies by throwing them in a smoothie.)

To see what breads made with insects might be like, scientists in Italy baked experimental loaves using different blends of wheat flour, plus a special ingredient: a commercially available powder made from crickets.

"The main goal of the study was to mask the presence of insects in everyday foods by using powders instead of whole insects," said study senior author Lucia Aquilanti, a food microbiologist at Marche Polytechnic University in Ancona, Italy.

But masking the insects, even in powder form, was easier said than done. The researchers found that the more cricket powder there was in the experimental bread loaves, the less the dough rose and the more firm the bread was. This was likely because the more cricket powder there was in a loaf, the less wheat flour there was, thus reducing the amount of gluten that helps bread rise and makes bread chewy, they noted.

And, perhaps more important, the more cricket powder there was in a loaf, the less tasty people judged it. "The taste was not too pleasant — it seemed a bit like cat food," Aquilanti told Live Science.

There was another downside, too: the presence of bacterial spores — a dormant state of some types of bacteria — in the cricket-based breads. These spores raised potential safety concerns, the researchers said, as such germs might potentially spoil the breads, or even make people sick.

This doesn't mean we've reached the end of the road for breads made with cricket powders, though. There are a number of techniques, such as gamma irradiation, that may rid cricket and other insect powders of the potentially dangerous spores, Aquilanti said. (Gamma irradiation exposes items to gamma rays to sterilize them.)...


Update time? I STILL ain't eating no Soylent Green.

[revelarts]

https://eu-images.contentstack.com/v3/assets/blt7a82e963f79cc4ec/bltbe2044ccab5fde7f/6509bbe006142a8df3436f98/lab-grown_meat.png?width=850&auto=webp&quality=95&format=jpg&disable=upscale

https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/market-trends-analysis/study-lab-grown-meat-s-environmental-impact-up-to-25x-greater-than-beef


At a Glance
•Lab-grown meat production is likely to be up to 25 times worse for the environment than conventional beef production.
•The study didn’t assess product losses, cold storage and transportation, so the actual environmental impact could be higher.
•More research is needed to develop more efficient and environmentally friendly lab-grown meat production methods.


A recent scientific study argues the environmental impact of current and near-term lab-cultivated meat production methods is likely to be “orders of magnitude” higher than conventional beef production—up to a whopping 25% higher compared to conventional retail beef.

To determine the environmental impact of lab-grown meat production, the researchers of the bioRxiv study conducted a life cycle assessment of the energy needed and greenhouse gases (GHG) emitted during the various stages of production.

They tapped previous findings from recent technoeconomic assessments (TEAs) of lab-cultivated meat, referred to as “animal cell-based meat (ACBM)” throughout the study, which provided the metabolic requirements the researchers used to complete the life cycle assessment.

Similarly, previous findings from a recent life cycle assessment of Essential 8, a growth medium designed for stem cell research, provided a purification factor that was used to account for growth medium component processing.

“Given the stringent medium component purity requirements for animal cell culture, the high purification scenarios with [Essential 8] as the growth medium are likely to represent the more accurate environmental impact of [animal cell-based meat] production,” they explained.

The researchers measured environmental impact as the carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) emitted for each kilogram of meat produced.

Of common conventional meats, beef has been shown to have the most impact on the environment. Another scientific study found the median reported GHG emissions for retail beef was about 60 kilograms CO2e per kilogram of fat- and bone-free meat, including edible organs.

In comparison, the life cycle assessment showed the emissions of lab-grown meat that used a purified growth medium ranged from 246-1,508 kg CO2e per kilogram.

That’s four to 25 times greater than the median emissions of retail beef, the authors reported.

“Our results indicate that [animal cell-based meat] is likely to be more resource intensive than most meat production systems according to this analysis,” they wrote. “In this evaluation, our primary focus has been on the resource-intensity of the growth mediums.”

They pointed, specifically, to the process of refining the cultivated meat’s growth medium to remove or reduce endotoxins, a component of certain bacteria that’s released when the cells are disrupted.

“Animal cell culture is traditionally done with growth medium components which have been refined to remove/reduce endotoxin,” the researchers wrote. “There are a multitude of methods employed for the separation of endotoxin from growth medium components … In turn, the use of these refinement methods contributes significantly to the economic and environmental costs … since they are both energy- and resource-intensive.”

The study authors added that the life cycle assessment does not include product losses, cold storage, transportation and other environmental impacts. Including the post-production stages of the product’s life cycle would further increase the environmental impact of lab-grown meats.
.....

I wonder how much worse it is for the human body? 25 times maybe? 100 times?

[Gunny]

https://eu-images.contentstack.com/v3/assets/blt7a82e963f79cc4ec/bltbe2044ccab5fde7f/6509bbe006142a8df3436f98/lab-grown_meat.png?width=850&auto=webp&quality=95&format=jpg&disable=upscale

https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/market-trends-analysis/study-lab-grown-meat-s-environmental-impact-up-to-25x-greater-than-beef

At a Glance
•Lab-grown meat production is likely to be up to 25 times worse for the environment than conventional beef production.
•The study didn’t assess product losses, cold storage and transportation, so the actual environmental impact could be higher.
•More research is needed to develop more efficient and environmentally friendly lab-grown meat production methods.


A recent scientific study argues the environmental impact of current and near-term lab-cultivated meat production methods is likely to be “orders of magnitude” higher than conventional beef production—up to a whopping 25% higher compared to conventional retail beef.

To determine the environmental impact of lab-grown meat production, the researchers of the bioRxiv study conducted a life cycle assessment of the energy needed and greenhouse gases (GHG) emitted during the various stages of production.

They tapped previous findings from recent technoeconomic assessments (TEAs) of lab-cultivated meat, referred to as “animal cell-based meat (ACBM)” throughout the study, which provided the metabolic requirements the researchers used to complete the life cycle assessment.

Similarly, previous findings from a recent life cycle assessment of Essential 8, a growth medium designed for stem cell research, provided a purification factor that was used to account for growth medium component processing.

“Given the stringent medium component purity requirements for animal cell culture, the high purification scenarios with [Essential 8] as the growth medium are likely to represent the more accurate environmental impact of [animal cell-based meat] production,” they explained.

The researchers measured environmental impact as the carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) emitted for each kilogram of meat produced.

Of common conventional meats, beef has been shown to have the most impact on the environment. Another scientific study found the median reported GHG emissions for retail beef was about 60 kilograms CO2e per kilogram of fat- and bone-free meat, including edible organs.

In comparison, the life cycle assessment showed the emissions of lab-grown meat that used a purified growth medium ranged from 246-1,508 kg CO2e per kilogram.

That’s four to 25 times greater than the median emissions of retail beef, the authors reported.

“Our results indicate that [animal cell-based meat] is likely to be more resource intensive than most meat production systems according to this analysis,” they wrote. “In this evaluation, our primary focus has been on the resource-intensity of the growth mediums.”

They pointed, specifically, to the process of refining the cultivated meat’s growth medium to remove or reduce endotoxins, a component of certain bacteria that’s released when the cells are disrupted.

“Animal cell culture is traditionally done with growth medium components which have been refined to remove/reduce endotoxin,” the researchers wrote. “There are a multitude of methods employed for the separation of endotoxin from growth medium components … In turn, the use of these refinement methods contributes significantly to the economic and environmental costs … since they are both energy- and resource-intensive.”

The study authors added that the life cycle assessment does not include product losses, cold storage, transportation and other environmental impacts. Including the post-production stages of the product’s life cycle would further increase the environmental impact of lab-grown meats.
.....

I wonder how much worse it is for the human body? 25 times maybe? 100 times?Pass. I've got only so much benefit of doubt to go around :)

[hjmick]

Unless it is cut from the carcass of a dead animal, it ain't meat.

[revelarts]

And Now Plastic is "food".

Now They Want You to EAT Wind Turbines Artificially Turned into Gummy Bears.

Wind turbine blades could be recycled into gummy bears for human consumption at the end of their lifespan, according to new research from scientists at Michigan State University.
The news (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/23/wind-turbine-blades-could-recycled-gummy-bears-scientists) comes amidst Democrats and their corporate allies (https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/27/biden-climate-officer-is-wef-alum/) including the World Economic Forum (https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/31/biden-supply-chain-director-is-hunter-biden-linked-wef-alum/) (WEF) pushing renewable energy as a solution to climate change and a viable alternative to traditional fuel. Wind power, which relies on turbines, is one of the most popular forms of renewable energy and counts staunch advocates (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/29/fact-sheet-biden-administration-jumpstarts-offshore-wind-energy-projects-to-create-jobs/) in the White House.
Amidst this renewable energy push, researchers at Michigan State University constructed a new form of composite resin for wind turbine blades.
It is comprised of a mixture of glass fibers with plant-derived and synthetic polymers. Once blades formed from this resin can no longer be used, the new material can be recycled into a variety of products – including gummy bears.
When dissolved in an alkaline solution, the newly formulated resin produces potassium lactate. The compound, researchers allege, can be purified and converted into sweets or sports drinks.
“We recovered food-grade potassium lactate and used it to make gummy bear candies, which I ate,” explained John Dorgan, one of the authors of the paper....
https://thenationalpulse.com/archive-post/wind-turbine-blades-could-be-turned-into-gummy-bears/

BTW
Microplastics found in human blood for first time
Exclusive: The discovery shows the particles can travel around the body and may lodge in organs...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/24/microplastics-found-in-human-blood-for-first-time

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F8ynVbSX0AAgOiy?format=jpg&name=small

[Gunny]

Update: I ain't eating no bugs.

So great. Can't get enough mileage out of "woke" anymore? Time to come up with something equally revolting:rolleyes:

We just move from one drama to the next. Purposefully designed to keep our minds in chaos and off what the string-pullers are doing. We're so inundated with the crap we just shut down rather than try and address the overwhelming amount of bullshit heaped on us.

[SassyLady]

I believe Italy is going to ban lab meat.

https://www.euronews.com/culture/2023/03/29/italy-moves-to-ban-lab-grown-meat-in-bid-to-protect-food-heritage

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBHqYMxXcAAVVKu?format=jpg&name=small

[Kathianne]

I would certainly watch this, but the headline you've chosen seems misleading at best:

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/tyson-foods-deal-with-protix-will-not-result-insects-human-food-2023-12-22/


An October 2023 press release announcing a partnership between meat processing company Tyson Foods and insect ingredients supplier Protix has been misrepresented online to falsely claim that it is evidence of insects being added to food for people. A Tyson Foods spokesperson said the deal would not impact any food products meant for human consumption.

In recent years, pet food manufacturers have turned to insects and larvae as a sustainable protein source to feed animals.


A post on Facebook (archived) shared a snippet of the press release with a caption suggesting the partnership may impact “chicken nuggets” for human consumption. Another post (archived) claimed that restaurants serving food “supplied by Tyson” would contain bugs.


However, the Tyson Foods press release did not mention the use of insects in food for people and screenshots shared online omit context about the products affected by the partnership.


The full press release, dated Oct. 17, 2023 (archived), states in the second paragraph that Tyson Foods and Protix have entered a joint venture to construct and operate “an insect ingredient facility” that will create “high-quality insect proteins and lipids which will primarily be used in the pet food, aquaculture, and livestock industries.”


A spokesperson for Tyson Foods said in a Dec. 21 email that the venture would manufacture products to be used as a “sustainable ingredient within premium pet food, and as sustainable protein alternatives for aquatic organisms such as salmon and shrimp,” adding that “these products are not being added to food intended for human consumption.”


The ingredients in Tyson Foods’ chicken nuggets are listed on the company’s website. It does not list insect derivatives.


(Updated on Dec. 22 to correct a formatting error in paragraph 2)


VERDICT


No evidence. The scope of Tyson Foods’ partnership with Protix is limited to the use of insect ingredients in animal feed, not in food meant for human consumption.

[revelarts]

I would certainly watch this, but the headline you've chosen seems misleading at best:

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/tyson-foods-deal-with-protix-will-not-result-insects-human-food-2023-12-22/
the headline for the thread includes everything in the thread, and it's not misleading at all really.

Also,I didn't post anything about "chicken nuggets" that your "fact check" mentions.

However, Protix's major focus does appear to be on feed for livestock like chicken and the like.
BTW the World Economic Forum seem to really appreciate their work. And they are OVERT advocates of Humans eating bug products.

Protixs own website talks about innovation and "food".

...From a lightbulb moment about the devastation caused by overfishing, Protix has now brought together the right combination of people, technology and commercial insights. We have the know-how to build up new facilities and commercial interactions and are on the verge of an exciting stage in bringing much-needed change to the global food and feed industry.
As well as leading the world in the technical aspects of insect production, the company has a strong track record in innovation and commercial market introductions. Protix has been awarded by the World Economic Forum with the Technology Pioneer award. In 2020 Protix was nominated as the fastest growing Dutch company with a social mission by the Erasmus Centre for Entrepreneurship. Protix was recognised as the most innovative Dutch company, and won the Dutch Innovation award 2020...
https://protix.eu/press_and_media/tf_and_protix/

MAYBE we should give Tyson and Protix the benny of the doubt.
But I'm not sure why.

[Kathianne]

You're glossing over Tyson. I agree with the rest. I'm no fan of Tyson, won't buy their products.

[Gunny]

You're glossing over Tyson. I agree with the rest. I'm no fan of Tyson, won't buy their products.Why? I'm not a fan of chicken at all :laugh: I generally get local from HEB when I do force myself to eat it. Grandkids however think chicken nuggets are a basic food group.

I vaguely recall hearing something negative about Tyson but don't recall.

[Kathianne]

Why? I'm not a fan of chicken at all :laugh: I generally get local from HEB when I do force myself to eat it. Grandkids however think chicken nuggets are a basic food group.

I vaguely recall hearing something negative about Tyson but don't recall.

It's several things, I don't go with 'boycotts,' but do avoid companies that seem unethical or just bad in general. (think of my opinions on Trump.)

Tyson was a big employer of illegals and paying them zippo-basically like Chinese treat their own people. Unsurprisingly they've been at ground zero at treating their pigs and chickens cruelly. Seems like there was more, but those two were enough for me. Mind you, I'm going back 15-20 years or so. Sometimes one just starts saying, 'no' to certain brands, regardless of price.

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GCd9kPOXUAABLWy?format=jpg&name=small

I need to check the details on this but it's in line with items i've read eslewhere

UPDATE:
Hundreds of Dutch farmers sign up to close their livestock farms under new scheme
The EU has approved a €1.5 billion scheme to buy out Dutch farmers and reduce nitrogen emissions.
Over 750 Dutch farmers have signed up for a government buy-out scheme, although it will take months before it's clear if the plan will be put into practice.
It is part of the Netherlands’ drive to drastically slash nitrogen emissions, a major source of which is livestock farms.
Farmers in the Netherlands have been staging protests over emissions reduction targets since October 2019.
Nearly €1.5 billion was earmarked earlier this year to compensate farmers who voluntarily close farms located near nature reserves. Some 3,000 farms are expected to be eligible....
https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/11/30/dutch-farmers-could-be-paid-to-close-their-livestock-farms-under-new-scheme



3D-printed steaks are now being served at restaurants across Europe
Israeli startup Redefine Meat, which 3D-prints plant-based steaks, expanded into Europe, with 30+ restaurants in London, Berlin, and Amsterdam. Fake steak is notoriously trickier to produce than imitation ground beef or sausage because it’s hard to nail the texture.

Redefine Meat aims to be in “thousands” of restaurants across Europe by the end of next year, and eventually to sell to grocery stores too. It’s raised at least $35 million since its 2018 founding.
Another Israeli startup, Aleph Farms, is also focused on 3D-printing synthetic steaks, albeit using lab-grown meat. It’s raised $131 million since its inception in 2017.
How it works: Redefine feeds an amalgam of soy and pea protein, chickpeas, beets, coconut fat, and nutritional yeast into its 3D printers, which use layering to replicate the fat and flesh of real meat. The 3D printer does this layering in accordance with the company’s proprietary software models of different cuts of steak...
https://www.emergingtechbrew.com/stories/2021/11/17/3d-printed-steaks-are-now-being-served-at-restaurants-across-europe
...
"Our product is meat, it has the same attributes, it is just manufactured in a different way," Co-founder and Chief Executive Eshchar Ben-Shitrit told Reuters, adding that production capacity would reach more than 15 tonnes a day this year.
"The fact that our products are now being sold by Giraudi Meats, the same people who sell high-quality meat, shows that they are not compromise vegan products," he said.
Ben-Shitrit said Redefine Meat was launching tenderloin and striploin steaks and their adoption by chefs in expensive restaurants proved their quality.
With Giraudi's help, it will launch its products at restaurants and butchers in France this month, then in Italy, Greece and Sweden later this year, and in dozens more countries next year.
Its New Meat is currently available in Israel, Britain, the Netherlands and Germany in almost 1,000 restaurants that are currently paying about $40 per kilo for Redefine Meat's steak cuts, Ben-Shitrit said. ....
https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/redefine-meat-strikes-partnership-boost-3d-printed-meat-sales-europe-2022-10-13/

[Gunny]

It's several things, I don't go with 'boycotts,' but do avoid companies that seem unethical or just bad in general. (think of my opinions on Trump.)

Tyson was a big employer of illegals and paying them zippo-basically like Chinese treat their own people. Unsurprisingly they've been at ground zero at treating their pigs and chickens cruelly. Seems like there was more, but those two were enough for me. Mind you, I'm going back 15-20 years or so. Sometimes one just starts saying, 'no' to certain brands, regardless of price.

I've had to modify my "boycott" stance. That must mean I lied and/or am a flip-flopper:rolleyes: Had to modify hard-line stances from "never" to "when and where practical". Whether or not it is PC, there are certain items that no matter how hard I try nor how much money I spend, I can't find a suitable replacement.

However, chicken for me is easy. The people next door to my grandparents raised chickens. They're mindless, nasty, noisy and destructive. They're birds and they have and presumably will always eat bugs. I'm sure the preceding goes a long way toward my distaste for eating bird.

Still not eating bugs outside a survival situation :)

[Kathianne]

I've had to modify my "boycott" stance. That must mean I lied and/or am a flip-flopper:rolleyes: Had to modify hard-line stances from "never" to "when and where practical". Whether or not it is PC, there are certain items that no matter how hard I try nor how much money I spend, I can't find a suitable replacement.

However, chicken for me is easy. The people next door to my grandparents raised chickens. They're mindless, nasty, noisy and destructive. They're birds and they have and presumably will always eat bugs. I'm sure the preceding goes a long way toward my distaste for eating bird.

Still not eating bugs outside a survival situation :)

There's few things I use that can't be traded for something else. My opinion on boycotts though is do what you like, buy what you wish. I'll do the same. I don't like getting on someone else's train unless it's going exactly where I want.

[SassyLady]

It's interesting how my personal boycotts have lasted over the years.

I said I was never buying another Nike product about 8 years ago and I haven't. In fact I don't miss having Nike around at all. I haven't missed shopping at Target or Walmart for last 5 years.

I do, however, still purchase Starbucks hot chocolate mix from Amazon no matter how mad I get at the company.

I don't buy Tysons chicken and don't remember ever buying it. I suppose I've eaten it if it's used at a restaurant. I wouldn't know.

I do believe in boycotts. The Disney boycott is effective and hopefully enlightening for some.

[Gunny]

There's few things I use that can't be traded for something else. My opinion on boycotts though is do what you like, buy what you wish. I'll do the same. I don't like getting on someone else's train unless it's going exactly where I want.Agreed. When I get around to pointing out something I am boycotting, I state what it is and why. There are plenty of things I think everyone should boycott. I may even state that I is what I think.

In the end it is an individual choice.

[RoccoR]

RE: Globalist want us to eat Bugs & Human flesh... seriously (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?76798-Globalist-want-us-to-eat-Bugs-amp-Human-flesh-seriously&p=1021948#post1021948)
SUBTOPIC:
※→ et al,

There is a QUESTION as to what the subject of the protest is... What are they saying?



I state what it is and why.

In the end it is an individual choice.
(COMMENT)

This was not just a surprise attack on the idea of "sovereignty" for which Article 51 of the UN Charter was written, but cry in support of a people that have done nothing to make a contribution to humanity. They are a parasite on civilization.

I am waiting for an International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the determination South Africa has made based on the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). South Africa has made the claim that Israel has the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, Namely the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) which is a designated terrorist group by the European Union (EU).

Interestingly enough that the ICJ made a judgement (Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 Council of the European Union v Hamas) would not make a ruling, but instead, set the case back to the General Court of the EU. And as recently as 2019, the EU has made it clear that the

Court rejects Hamas claims

However, the General Court ruled (http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=211363&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2345996)
(http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=211363&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2345996) that Hamas is not a sovereign state and could not rely on the principle of non-interference to annul the EU's decision. Furthermore, it ruled that Hamas had not shown that its political and armed wings are separate.In its ruling, the court cited several instances of Hamas carrying out terrorist attacks on Israelis and foreigners.
The decision can be appealed before the European Court of Justice.
In December, the General Court rejected a separate appeal (https://www.dw.com/en/eu-court-rejects-hamas-appeal-over-frozen-assets/a-46744979) by Hamas for the EU to unfreeze its assets.
Hamas advocates armed struggle and does not recognize Israel.
The court decision comes as the Gaza Strip suffers from a mounting humanitarian crisis, in part caused by three wars with Israel since 2008 and an Israeli-Egyptian blockade.





AS OF 6 MARCH 2019



THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber, Extended Composition)
hereby:


1. Dismisses the action;
2. Orders Hamas to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;
3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.


AS OF 3 FEB 2022. HAMAS remained on the updated Terrorist Listing>
In II. GROUPS AND ENTITIES: ‘Hamas’, including ‘Hamas-Izz al-Din al-Qassem’.

Let us remember that HAMAS is a terrorist Group, that yet again, initiated open hostilities with the State of Israel.


https://www.usmessageboard.com/attachments/1703033950022-png.875723/

Most Respectfully,
R

[Gunny]

RE: Globalist want us to eat Bugs & Human flesh... seriously (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?76798-Globalist-want-us-to-eat-Bugs-amp-Human-flesh-seriously&p=1021948#post1021948)
SUBTOPIC:
※→ et al,

There is a QUESTION as to what the subject of the protest is... What are they saying?


(COMMENT)

This was not just a surprise attack on the idea of "sovereignty" for which Article 51 of the UN Charter was written, but cry in support of a people that have done nothing to make a contribution to humanity. They are a parasite on civilization.

I am waiting for an International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the determination South Africa has made based on the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). South Africa has made the claim that Israel has the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, Namely the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) which is a designated terrorist group by the European Union (EU).

Interestingly enough that the ICJ made a judgement (Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 Council of the European Union v Hamas) would not make a ruling, but instead, set the case back to the General Court of the EU. And as recently as 2019, the EU has made it clear that the

Court rejects Hamas claims

However, the General Court ruled (http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=211363&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2345996)
(http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=211363&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2345996) that Hamas is not a sovereign state and could not rely on the principle of non-interference to annul the EU's decision. Furthermore, it ruled that Hamas had not shown that its political and armed wings are separate.In its ruling, the court cited several instances of Hamas carrying out terrorist attacks on Israelis and foreigners.
The decision can be appealed before the European Court of Justice.
In December, the General Court rejected a separate appeal (https://www.dw.com/en/eu-court-rejects-hamas-appeal-over-frozen-assets/a-46744979) by Hamas for the EU to unfreeze its assets.
Hamas advocates armed struggle and does not recognize Israel.
The court decision comes as the Gaza Strip suffers from a mounting humanitarian crisis, in part caused by three wars with Israel since 2008 and an Israeli-Egyptian blockade.



Let us remember that HAMAS is a terrorist Group, that yet again, initiated open hostilities with the State of Israel.


https://www.usmessageboard.com/attachments/1703033950022-png.875723/

Most Respectfully,
R

Cannot say I have a very high opinion of anything South Africa has to say. That logic and fact have nothing to do with whatever it is they yammer on about is an understatement. I had the misfortune of listening to South Africa talk for as long as I could bear it on the issue of Russia being the victim of Russia's unprovoked attack on the Ukraine. He talked in circles, using big words trying to appear educated, and provided nothing to support his statement.

I read South Africa's charges against Israel a couple of days ago. Each time I walk away amazed that such stupidity can manage to actually sustain itself. Not hard to figure out how current government turned a thriving economy into a poorhouse. Basis of most of its arguments are trying to stretch any and everything with very thin thread into a comparison to Apartheid. The be-all end-all of any discussion just as the US left silences critics with the accusation of racism.

Accusing Israel of genocide for its determination to erase a criminal organization is quite the imaginative use and stretch of the word genocide. The destruction of ISIS didn't appear to have many detractors by mostly the same crowd of chair-polishers. So when it suits the accuser, an organization can be misconstrued as a "people"/race/ethnicity.

The only difference is who the attacks were against. To make matters worse, the chair-polishing bureaucrats in these various World organizations that see themselves as someone do nothing but talk and punt the football. Afraid of the backlash for making determinations based on fact rather than public popularity.

Hamas should never have been recognized by anyone as anything more than it is or every was. A criminal terrorist organization of alleged religion zealots who in my opinion put the profits of war ahead of even their religion and couldn't hold jobs at McDonald's if there was peace.

[revelarts]

Lab-Grown Meat Has a Bigger Problem Than the Lab
Leading scientists agree that cultured meat products won’t give you cancer, but the industry doesn’t have the decades of data to prove it—so it’s trying to avoid the question instead.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-02-07/lab-grown-meat-has-bigger-challenges-than-the-fda


Study: Bill Gates’ Lab Grown Meat Causes Cancer in Humans

https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/study-bill-gates-lab-grown-meat-causes-cancer-in-humans/

https://rumble.com/v2aoot6-bill-gates-lab-grown-meat-causes-cancer-in-humans.html


"Study Reveals Bill Gates’ Fake Meat Causes ‘Turbo Cancers’ in Humans"
'Bill Gates’ lab-grown meat causes cancer in humans who consume it, according to a disturbing new study.'
"Synthetic meat has been heavily promoted by Bill Gates and the globalist elites at the WEF as the solution to so-called climate change. However, this fake food has now been shown to cause cancer via the immortalized cell lines used to manufacture it.

“Normal meat cells don’t just keep dividing forever. To get the cell cultures to grow at rates big enough to power a business, several companies … are quietly using what are called immortalized cells, something most people have never eaten intentionally,” Fassler wrote.

While immortalized cell lines “are a staple of medical research,” Fassler noted that these are technically pre-cancerous and can be fully cancerous at times.
“The problem is that the materials used to make the product – ‘immortalized cell lines’ – replicate forever, just like cancer. Which means, in effect, that they are cancer. Industry types are ‘confident’ that eating such products poses no risk. But it’s not difficult to see, even if the products are ‘proven’ safe, how people might be put off by the thought that they’re eating a glorified tumor.”
According to REN, the dangers of fake meat made using immortalized cell lines come from the fact that long-term safety data for its consumption are not yet available.

You shouldn’t be surprised. After all, it’s not the first time Gates has attempted to push an experimental product on the masses in order to generate enormous profits for himself and catastrophic results for the rest of humanity." Dmitry Baxter



Bill Gates-Promoted ‘Synthetic Meat’ Made from ‘Immortalized’ Cancer Cells
https://slaynews.com/news/bill-gates-promoted-synthetic-meat-made-immortalized-cancer-cells/


As globalist elites continue to push for the end of meat consumption as part of the “green agenda,” disturbing information has emerged about an “alternative” prompted by Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

Technocrats appear keen to preclude the masses from eating real meat.

While they claim that ending meat eating is about combatting the specter of climate change, there’s, conveniently, a lot of money to be made from the emerging industry that seeks to replace it.

While there is a significant push underway for people to surrender steaks, burgers, and hot dogs and instead eat bugs and algae, climate alarmists and elites alike are also hyping so-called synthetic “meat.”

This alternative may prove too much to swallow for many consumers in light of the present lack of health data about what such laboratory productions might do to consumers, as well as Bloomberg’s recent report underscoring how synthetic meat is, in many cases, cancer.

When peddling his book “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster” in 2021, Gates told the MIT Technology Review that “all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef.

“You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time.

“Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”

Although Gates contends that fewer methane emissions from livestock flatulence will help combat climate change, it won’t just be the planet that will allegedly benefit.

He seeks to turn a significant profit, having invested in various companies that create faux meat and plant-based meat substitutes.

In his discussion of cancerous lab meats, Igor Chudov noted on his Substack that the World Economic Forum has also championed the replacement of real meat.

The WEF ran an article in 2019 — the same year Israeli start-up Aleph Farms claimed to be the first company to produce a steak in a lab — entitled, “You will be eating replacement meats within 20 years. Here’s why,” which claimed lab meats could be created more efficiently and had “fewer product risks than conventional meat.”

Again, in 2020, it ran a piece claiming that lab meat was a “more sustainable solution” that would reverse deforestation and help limit global temperature rises.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said select lab-grown meats were safe for human consumption for the first time in November 2022, two years after Singapore became the first country to permit their sale.

Upside Foods, a California-based and Gates-backed company that makes so-called meat from chicken cells, was subsequently cleared to begin selling its product as soon as the U.S. Department of Agriculture inspected its facilities, reported CNN.

Reuters reported last month that Upside hopes to bring its doctored meat to restaurants as early as this year.

Another California-based lab-meat company, Good Meat, has an application pending with the FDA.

JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!
The Netherlands-based Mosa Meat and Israel-based Believer Meats reportedly are also in talks with the FDA to bring their vat-grown meat simulacrum to American tables.

In addition to surmounting regulatory hurdles, Reuters noted these companies will also have to lock down the supply chain for the “nutrient mix to feed cells and for the massive bioreactors required to produce large quantities of cultivated meat.”

A recent Bloomberg report noted that for decades, “companies such as Pfizer Inc. and Johnson & Johnson have cultured large volumes of cells to produce vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and other biotherapeutics.

“Now the idea is that we might as well eat these cells, too.”

While lab-grown meat advocates contend their product is, at least on the cellular level, no different from real meat, the report stressed that “normal meat cells don’t just keep dividing forever”; normal cells will only divide a few dozen times.

In order to get the cell cultures to multiply at the rates necessary to keep these doctored meat companies afloat, “several companies, including the Big Three, are quietly using what are called immortalized cells. …

“Immortalized cells are a staple of medical research, but they are, technically speaking, precancerous and can be, in some cases, fully cancerous.”

The first immortal cell line came from Henrietta Lacks, a black tobacco farmer from southern Virginia who had cervical cancer.