Remix.run Logo
mapt 3 days ago

> To make their product, the food company’s scientists collect living cells from Pacific salmon and grow them in cell cultivators that mimic the inside of a wild fish—controlling factors like temperature, pH and nutrients, per their website. After harvesting them, the team incorporates plant-based ingredients to make the hunk of cells taste, feel and look like salmon fillets.

So... Like a wild fish, but with NO IMMUNE SYSTEM WHATSOEVER, which requires your sterilization protocols to be effectively perfect.

NASA has tried and failed to get their sterilization protocols to perfection levels for Mars landers, and consistently failed despite using basically zero organic materials.

We're going to cook this stuff, yes, sure (aren't we?)... but the squick is rational. And the problem gets inherently worse at larger scale production.

MostlyStable 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

The lack of an immune system is not a health and safety risk, it's a business risk. An infected batch won't get served to humans it will just die/fail and need to be thrown out. Fighting infection is one of the reasons that lab-grown meats are so expensive. I have seen reasonably convincing technical analyses which claim that it would require pretty massive technological innovations (that are not anywhere on the horizon so far) to make any lab-grown meats economically viable. That's very likely the reason for the fact that (as pointed out in another comment), this is not pure salmon, it's salmon mixed with vegetable product. That was almost definitely a cost-saving measure.

My personal guess is that the first actually economically viable lab-grown meats will be of endangered/extinct animals that the extremely wealthy will be willing to pay the exorbitant costs that it takes to create them for the novelty factor.

mapt 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

There are very likely degrees of infection which are not obviously spoiled, but which have health consequences if consumed. The locus at which the antibiotic/etc protocols are mostly but not entirely effective.

If they're actively pushing into the market, that means they're selling _something_ at maybe $30-$100/kg. Would you trust that something, knowing what you know of animal tissue bioreactors? Would you trust a restaurant serving thousands of meals of that something?

Relevant - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZGPjvFkLzUW

3 days ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
themafia 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> An infected batch won't get served to humans

https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/recalls-public-health-...

"Produced without inspection" and "processing deviations" account for a lot of recalls.

arrosenberg 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Can you explain why this situation is any different than regular meat? I.e. Fish immune systems don’t stop parasites from being present in the meat, flash freezing is what kills the parasites.

mapt 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Parasitic worms are huge, complex multicellular animals that co-evolved to sometimes survive the immune system response to their presence; Freezing kills them because they are huge and the scale of ice crystals severs important body parts. Living bacteria, living fungi, spores from these, viruses, and importantly heat-resistant toxins produced by these, are what I'm worried about.

One of modern humanity's oldest activities is fermenting carbohydrates in large bioreactors into alcohol, yogurt, and pickles, but there are a lot of things that turned out not to work in that history.

When we try to fabricate, say, monoclonal antibodies using large cultures of multicellular tissues for pharmaceutical work, the price ends up coming out to millions of dollars a kilogram.

I am implicitly skeptical of the protocols of a protein tissue culture that has to be produced at the ~$30/kg price level.

Could you eat it and not die? I'm sure!

But could you feed people with a billion meals worth of batches and have nobody die? I'm less sure! My understanding is that tissue culture failures are frequently the bane of a biologist's research program.

goda90 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This obviously varies by animal, but some meats are safe to eat raw or undercooked if the animal was healthy because the meat doesn't have lots of pathogens inside it. Flash freezing won't kill bacteria or viruses that the immune system of an animal might.

LeifCarrotson 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Fish immune systems sole reason for being is to stop parasites from being present in the meat while the fish is alive. They're literally swimming through a soup of arthropods, plankton, algae, bacteria, and viruses that would love nothing more to turn their meat into more of themselves. There's always a bigger fish that is trying to eat them, yes, but the smaller critters want to eat as well!

Freezing doesn't kill the parasites, it slows the clock that started ticking when the fish was killed. It's not pasteurization, like what's done to canned tuna. It just slows the clock when you refrigerate or freeze the fish, but does not reset it to zero. And of course, if you're eating fresh fish that was healthy when it was killed, there's no need for an intermediate freezing or pasteurizing step.

This situation is different because the "clock" starts when the cell cultures are removed from the donor salmon. The whole blob/tank/plate/catalyzing surface (I'm not sure what the design is, I wish they had more documentation) on which the product grows for the whole time that the product is growing is vulnerable to a single bacterium that would grow out of control, like an immunocompromised human might be killed by an ordinary illness that most people would shrug off in 24 hours.

dekhn 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Freezing (properly) is widely considered (by scientific establishment) to kill most parasites, not just slow them down.

mapt 3 days ago | parent [-]

When biologists talk about parasites, they're talking about numerous organisms from multiple kingdoms in one of the widest ecological niches.

When the FDA talks about freezing killing parasites in fish, they're talking specifically about anisakis worms - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisakis

cyberax 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Fish immune systems sole reason for being is to stop parasites from being present in the meat while the fish is alive.

Ah, good news for you then! Fish immune system most definitely does NOT stop parasites. Every (and I mean it, every) salmon you've ever eaten had some parts of parasites in them.

That's also why you absolutely should NOT eat fresh-caught salmon without thoroughly cooking it. Industrially-caught salmon is always frozen, and it kills parasites.

mapt 3 days ago | parent [-]

These fish grew large enough for humans to eye as food, because parasites were effectively limited by the immune system from devouring the entire fish. It's not perfectly effective, but it doesn't need to be.

mvdtnz 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's certainly not marketed as though it's going to be cooked,

> Our saku is sushi-grade and is perfect for dishes like sushi, crudo, and ceviche

https://www.wildtypefoods.com/our-salmon

bangaladore 3 days ago | parent [-]

Because from a quick search this isn't what people refer to when they think of lab-grown meat/fish. This is some mix of stuff that includes some amount of material that is lab-grown. It won't behave like you expect Salmon to.

Spivak 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You're describing the sterilization process that's necessary for cheese production, it's crazy intense, but it's also a known quantity that we've been successfully doing for years and years and years. Listeria is no joke. I wouldn't worry about this any more than you worry about our other food you find at the grocery store.

zzzoom 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Don't worry, if you catch any disease you can use any antibiotic that still works after spraying farmed salmon willy-nilly for years.

mapt 3 days ago | parent [-]

Antibiotics only work on live bacteria, and only sometimes. "Any disease" is a much broader category.

zzzoom 3 days ago | parent [-]

Any disease you'd catch from lab-grown meat...

throwaway889900 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Their advertising of it being like a sushi cut then makes this possibly dangerous marketing then, no?

margalabargala 3 days ago | parent [-]

No, not really, because the parent comment is freaking out about a problem that doesn't exist.

It's not going to be possible to grow a thing that looks like a piece of salmon but is secretly riddled with viruses and bacteria.

Either the lab gets their sterile technique right and they wind up with something that looks like salmon, or they get it wrong and you wind up with bacteria slop. Things that look like salmon can only become so if no bacteria and viruses are present.

dekhn 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

In the real world I don't think you'll find salmon that don't have bacteria and viruses (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-43345-x shows both "good" and "bad" bacteria and certainly many salmon are infected with a range of viruses (not sure if there are any "good" viral infections, but some are not fatal).

Don't forget that salmon and most other deep sea fish are immediately frozen when caught, which not only helps preserve flavor, but eliminates parasites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diseases_and_parasites_in_salm...)

mapt 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

A fair point, but wouldn't it only become unrecognizable at levels that mean you're effectively eating pus instead of salmon? My understanding is that the effective innoculation needed to give botulism to a human baby (who has an immune system, just less of one than we do) is <100 spores, which is picograms.

There's just such a gulf between the prices at which this is feasible for food use, and the prices at which existing large bioreactors can culture animal tissue.

If we can't even get plant slop ("algal biodiesel") culture consistent and cheap enough to burn in an engine, or get plant slop ("tilapia feedstock algae") cheap enough to industrialize to outcompete chickens... I don't know that I'm comfortable eating bioreactor meat that can only survive in the FDA danger zone.

XorNot 3 days ago | parent [-]

Living animals with immune systems are the only types of organisms which can effectively host pathogens such that they can be communicated. Even your example belies the problem: pus is produced by the immune system destroying bacteria, it isn't a bacterial colony itself.

In an a bioreactor where no immune system exists, there can't be a latent infection: there's no immune system! If it can infect and destroy what's growing, then it'll infect and destroy all of it. It isn't going to look like tuna meat after that.

Intralexical 3 days ago | parent [-]

Isn't it possible for the pathogen to be limited by accumulation of its own waste products or depletion of specific nutrients before it destroys the whole sample, or for the meat to be harvested before the pathogen has finished propagating?

fastball 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What? The requirements for this are nothing like what is required for sterilization of a Mars rover. NASA's goal is to not have a single iota of foreign organic material on rovers, which is obviously not even close to what is required here. The only thing you need to worry about with this stuff is whether there are any dangerous bacterium in it (e.g. salmonella), which can be readily monitored and avoided without herculean effort. And unlike real salmon, parasites and viruses won't have much opportunity to gain a foothold.