Could vegetarians eat a 'test tube' burger?

Beef, burger, hamburger

The world could get its first lab-grown burger this year, with scientists using stem cells to create strips of beef. But could vegetarians eat it?

Scientists in the Netherlands hoping to create a more efficient alternative to rearing animals have grown small pieces of beef muscle in a laboratory.

These strips will be mixed with blood and artificially grown fat to produce a hamburger by the autumn.

The stem cells in this particular experiment were harvested from by-products of slaughtered animals but in the future, scientists say, they could be taken from a live animal through biopsy.

One usually assumes the main motivation for vegetarianism - aside from those who practise for religious reasons - is about the welfare of animals. The typical vegetarian forswears meat because animals are killed to get it.

So if the meat does not come from dead animals would there be an ethical problem in eating it if it one day lands on supermarket shelves?

It's not as simple an equation as that, says Prof Andrew Linzey, director of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics. He says the burger as currently envisaged isn't an acceptable substitute for vegetarians, but is still a step forward.

Start Quote

People who are vegetarian for moral reasons - the environment, the treatment of animals - have a moral obligation to eat this meat”

End Quote Prof Julian Savulescu Director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Ethics

"Synthetic meat could be a great moral advance. It won't be suitable for vegetarians because it still originates in meat by-products, but bearing in mind that millions of animals are slaughtered for food every day, it is a step forward to a less violent world."

According to the Vegetarian Society, a vegetarian does not eat "any meat, poultry, game, fish, shellfish or crustacea, or the by-products of slaughter".

The lab-grown meat created so far has been grown from stem cells taken from foetal calf serum. This is usually a by-product of slaughter, although stem cells could be harvested in smaller volumes without killing animals.

Prof Julian Savulescu, the director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Ethics, says it doesn't matter how the product is made and "the fact that the meat is made from animal by-products is morally irrelevant".

"People who are vegetarian for moral reasons - the environment, the treatment of animals - have a moral obligation to eat this meat.

"They need to do this because it will contribute to an ethical alternative to conventional meat."

For many vegetarians though, the issue is a complicated one.

"Some are waiting with bated breath, keen to experience the taste and texture of meat without actually harming an animal, while others find the whole idea utterly repulsive," says Su Taylor from the Vegetarian Society.

Beef Beef stem cells are being grown to make the first laboratory burger

The UK Food Standards Agency's Public Attitudes to Food survey of 3,219 adults in 2009 found 3% of respondents were "completely vegetarian" and an additional 5% "partly vegetarian (don't eat some types of fish or meat)".

Just because the meat has been grown artificially doesn't mean it is vegetarian, says Vegetarians International Voices for Animals (Viva). But Viva insists vegetarianism and veganism aren't religions so individuals should make up their own minds.

"Certainly, with over 950 million land animals slaughtered in the UK each year," says Viva spokesman and campaign manager Justin Kerswell, "and the vast majority of them factory farmed in awful conditions, anything that saves animals from suffering is to be welcomed."

There's already been discussion about whether meat eaters could be persuaded to eat the artificial meat, but at the moment the price tag is likely to be prohibitive. The first lab-grown burger is likely to cost in the region of £200,000 to produce.

Savulescu says most people won't give up meat, but if there was a palatable alternative, conventional meat eaters might move to it.

"Moral vegetarians need to promote, use and consume this test tube meat," Savulescu said. "Then it will become cheaper."

Start Quote

A vegetarian does not eat any meat, poultry, game, fish, shellfish or crustacea, or the by-products of slaughter”

End Quote Vegetarian Society definition

The research on artificial meat has been prompted by concerns that current methods of meat production are unsustainable in the long term.

But to Kerswell, the research seems unnecessary, particularly as many vegetarians believe a diet excluding meat is more healthy.

"Why grow it in a Petri dish or eat the meat from a slaughtered animal when plant sources of protein and meat replacements are ever more commonly available and are better for our health?"

Of course, there are plenty of nutritionists who speak of the value of eating some meat. Dr Elizabeth Weichselbaum, a nutrition scientist at the British Nutrition Foundation, says meat is an important source of a number of nutrients in our diet, including high quality protein, iron, zinc, selenium, vitamin D and some B vitamins.

"It can make an important contribution to a healthy and balanced diet. Meat and other protein sources, including eggs, beans and nuts, should be eaten in moderate amounts."

So could vegetarian chefs be persuaded? Denis Cotter, who runs a vegetarian restaurant in Cork, Ireland, says "after an instinctive shudder of revulsion" he can see the benefits of the burger, but it won't be making its way on to any of his menus.

"Personally, I don't like synthetic food, and avoid all that soy-based fake meat stuff aimed at vegetarians. So, no, I wouldn't be interested in using it, either as a restaurant product or on my plate at home. But I would back it as a better way to produce meat than burning down rainforests and gobbling up useful farmland."


More on This Story

In today's Magazine

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 702.

    A detter way of putting it would de that "b" and "d" are similar anb therefore the same so it bosen't matter if I interchange every "d" with a "b". Dut of course we can see this is adsurb, right?

  • rate this

    Comment number 701.


    Pretty much, yes, although they share some similarities, this does not mean they are essentially the same thing. For example: A male and female are almost identical in every respect therfore using reasoning, the logical conclusion would be that males and females are the same thing. You see the flaw in this thinking now?

  • rate this

    Comment number 700.


    I'm not saying it is cannabalism, but i thought i'd share:

    -human meat is almost identical in flavour and texture to pork,
    -pig parts are perfect substitues for human in medical & forensic procedures,
    -and the average pig has the intelligence of a 3yr old child

    Is it really so far away from cannibalism?

  • rate this

    Comment number 699.



    Not really, Firstly "Cannablism" is usually defined as one who regularly eats members of its own speices, not "distant cousins". Secondly meat can't compare in flavour to fruits, nuts, seeds etc. and trying to make any sort of comparison is pointless, this does not imply any sort of value judgement, they're different and some prefer the taste of meat and some don't.

  • rate this

    Comment number 698.

    When will the cannibals understand that veges eat veges not the dead flesh of our distant cousins. We like the flavour, the texture, the digestibility, the colours, the scent, of fresh food. How can a piece of meat compare to the colour and flavour of a mango, a melon, the range of nuts and dried fruits, the meat diet is just boring and it is dead food, fruit and grain are living foods. OK?

  • rate this

    Comment number 697.

    I don't eat meat for a variety of reasons and the prospect of eating manufactured meat produced from stem cells from live animals is equally off putting.
    A question, would meat eaters be happy to eat Meat produced from Human Stem Cells gathered from live unharmed donors or would this still be cannibalism?

  • rate this

    Comment number 696.

    667.Laurie Knight

    "You're playing pointless semantic games in an attempt to make yourself look clever because you know a big word."

    And you're just resorting to accusations of "playing the semantics game" becuase you've got nothing better to say.

    "That some individual humans eat mostly meat does not negate the fact that as a species we are omnivorous."

    I never said it does.

  • rate this

    Comment number 695.

    "One usually assumes the main motivation for vegetarianism - aside from those who practise for religious reasons - is about the welfare of animals. The typical vegetarian forswears meat because animals are killed to get it"

    One assumes wrongly. There are other reasons too, like the fact that animal products are very unhealthy. Presumably this fake meat would be identical in this regard.

  • rate this

    Comment number 694.

    I love how this is being promoted to "ethical vegetarians" wouldn't ethical meat-eaters be a better market?

    Where does the blood come from - will they be bleeding live animals for this - yikes! This doesn't sound very "ethical" to me.

    Years ago when this technology first came out there was already a problem with black market (cheap) 'lab meat' in US restaurants, there was also a meat-tree..

  • rate this

    Comment number 693.

    "So many people adore their pets and studies have shown that farm animals are not "stupid"."

    These studies have obviously never looked at Sheep.

  • rate this

    Comment number 692.

    I would no more eat this lab burger than I would Clarissa Dickson Wright's plimsoll. Vegetarians who like the taste and texture of meat have a pretty good selection of meatfree alternatives here in the UK. Much better than any other country I have visited. Aunt Bessy does a very tasty veg toad in the whole for about £2.50.

  • rate this

    Comment number 691.


    In that comment, I was actually thinking of the general public. Farmers have to make a living, but their reliance on animal farming is due to the high demand for meat. And I think there are a lot of people who, if they really saw what happened to the animal, would find that difficult to take. So many people adore their pets and studies have shown that farm animals are not "stupid".

  • rate this

    Comment number 690.

    Re: 686. If this was commercialised to bring costs below those for producing meat from animals there would not be any sheep, cattle, pigs etc. to cull. They are only there because they are bred for meat - with the possible exception of sheep for wool.

  • rate this

    Comment number 689.

    I like meat, but have no interest in Prof Savulescu's opinons on ethics (mine or other). I'm vegetarian because I choose not to kill anything that might be remotely self-aware (and set the bar on that test VERY low) - and because I won't kill by proxy either. Until the culture cells for this process are from animals unharmed by the process, I have no interest. If they ever are, I'll consider it.

  • rate this

    Comment number 688.

    Someone a few pages back was claiming that plants 'want' their fruit and vegetables eaten.

    Ummm fruit yes to some extent, vegetables no that was patently wrong.

    e.g. Rhubarb when raw contains high levels of Oxalic acid. This is to stop herbivores from eating it.

    We cook it to remove the acid and prevent poisoning.

    Should vegetarians honour Rhubarb's wish not to be eaten?

  • rate this

    Comment number 687.

    Many vegetarians are concerned about the environmental impact of meat production. Cows emit a lot of carbon dioxide and waste a lot of food, but what is the environmental impact of generating a burger in a laboratory? With the current material cost of more than £100,000 per burger, obviously a lot. If this can be reduced to a level equivalent to an arable crop, then GREAT!

  • rate this

    Comment number 686.

    producing synthetic meat isn't necessarily going to stop animals being killed, we all know what happens to animal populations that have no natural predators. Sheep, cattle, pigs etc. would need to be culled to maintain a balance in the rural environment otherwise these animals would have detrimental effected. Predation is natural even if the way we do it isn't its unlikely we could just stop

  • rate this

    Comment number 685.

    This could streamline the Halal food market assuming the original slaughtered animal was inline with Halal food. Then from that one animal you could feed Muslims Halal meat with confidence.

  • rate this

    Comment number 684.

    Why would a vegetarian what a meat substitute?
    There will always be a demand for meat and personal I do not think a lab grown alternative will be acceptable to anyone. I suspect the real drive is cheaper meat, as many people seem to be unwilling to pay more for meat from animals kept in better conditions.

  • rate this

    Comment number 683.


    "I challenge anyone to spend one afternoon with a farmyard animal, who would then still allow it to go to the slaughterhouse at the end of the day."

    Um... quite a lot of people would. Like... er... most livestock farmers for example...


Page 1 of 36



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.