this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
58 points (100.0% liked)

Vegan

1200 readers
97 users here now

A community to discuss anything related to veganism.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 0 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (4 children)

To make their product, the food company’s scientists collect living cells from Pacific salmon

And how can the salmon give free, prior, informed consent for this? This is still exploitation. This is not vegan.

EDIT: This could be done ethically if the company collected still-living cells from the bodies of recently deceased salmon in spawning season or if they collected genetic material from male gametes that did not end up fertilising an egg, but I've not found anything to suggest that this company does it this way.

[–] RibbitRabbit@slrpnk.net 0 points 5 hours ago

The fact that youre not joking is insane lol

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Oh come on, cut the nonsense

No animal can give consent. Hell, no human could give consent if they didn't speak the same language as you.

Given the option to be killed or getting a scratch to take a sample of cells, you don't think any animal would chose the latter? That is, of course, if animals could understand that concept even.

Look, there is doing the right thing and there is just pretending to do so. This, of applicable to all animals, would be a huge leap forward. Factory farming without the abuse of sentient beings is enormous for animal rights and treatment. We could stop pulling the seas empty, no more tortuous slaughter houses...

But here you are "but the animals didn't consent to a needle prick, it's bad!"

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net -1 points 16 hours ago

Found the consequentialist.

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Consent-wise, would a side-to-side tail-waggle count as a Yes or a No?

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net -2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I can't tell if this is a serious question, but I don't know enough about salmon to answer it, or even whether there would be a conclusive answer.

EDIT: And that was kind of the point. I don't know whether it would even be possible for a salmon to consent to this sort of thing.

[–] Beastimus@slrpnk.net 3 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

Are you serious about this? If so that standard seems pretty insane to me.

Like, we essentially can't do anything with animals with that...

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 12 hours ago

Did you look at what community you're commenting on? Why are you so determined to use other animals?

[–] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Like, we essentially can't do anything with animals with that...

Yes. That's the point. Animals are sapient beings with rights, not objects to "do things with".

That being said, I recognize how far out of the Overton Window that attitude is.

Positive thought: if cultured meat goes mainstream, I expect there will be demand for "ethically sourced" cell lines - or some ad campaign will use it as a selling point - and shift the idea of not exploiting animals just a tiny bit closer to the mainstream :)

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 1 points 19 hours ago

It's the same standard that I use for young children. If doing the thing is not clearly in their best interest, I don't touch them without their consent.

So yes, just leave other animals alone. Pretty simple.