Kate posted a link to this great Guardian article on The Race to Fake Meat. It's a nice in-depth look at a handful of the strongest competitors attempting to synthesize meat. Quotes like this make you stop and re-consider what you think you know about food production:

Eating meat is bad for the environment, of that there is no doubt. And the moral arguments against killing animals are compelling. Humans currently slaughter about 1,600 mammals and birds every second for food – that is half a trillion lives a year, plus trillions more fish, crustaceans and molluscs. The total biomass of all the world's livestock is almost exactly twice that of humanity itself. And while crops that feed people cover just 4% of the Earth's usable surface (land that is not covered by ice or water, or is bare rock), animal pastureland accounts for a full 30%. Our meat, in other words, weighs twice as much as we do and takes seven times as much land to grow.

With a massively rising population that number will only increase. Being smarter about food production will be essential, not to mention more humane. It's a complex subject to discuss - as Generated Meat will surely rouse a great deal of doubters but, at this point, isn't the meat the majority of US customers consume so injected with additional hormones and additives that it's a null issue? Maybe. Maybe not.

It's probably not going to be a battle that's fought on the frontline of the media but, let's hope, it's not one that gets squashed by the trillion dollar existing food industry. When dealing with a behemoth like that, change is never going to be welcome.