That’s a popular discussion among vegans. Strictly speaking, it isn’t vegan, since it’s still sourced from an animal without its consent. The vast, vast majority of vegans agree, though, that even if they wouldn’t personally partake in it (and some of them would), it would be a wonderful thing for omnivores to be able to eat meat without furthering animal exploitation and suffering.
Has there been a consensus on how many samples would be needed to sustain the production? I had heard that, theoretically, a single sample would suffice, but I’ve heard of other sources claiming that a handful of animals would be needed to meet the demand.
That’s an interesting question. There are ways to gather DNA from animals without violating their rights–if a llama spits on you, it decided to give you that spit. If a dog bites you, same deal.
But then, exploiting that DNA for profit. Is that vegan? My inner pirate says it’s fine, copying isn’t theft
That’s a popular discussion among vegans. Strictly speaking, it isn’t vegan, since it’s still sourced from an animal without its consent. The vast, vast majority of vegans agree, though, that even if they wouldn’t personally partake in it (and some of them would), it would be a wonderful thing for omnivores to be able to eat meat without furthering animal exploitation and suffering.
Has there been a consensus on how many samples would be needed to sustain the production? I had heard that, theoretically, a single sample would suffice, but I’ve heard of other sources claiming that a handful of animals would be needed to meet the demand.
If a llama spits on me and its spit contains DNA has it given me permission to use that spit, and therefore that DNA?
That’s an interesting question. There are ways to gather DNA from animals without violating their rights–if a llama spits on you, it decided to give you that spit. If a dog bites you, same deal.
But then, exploiting that DNA for profit. Is that vegan? My inner pirate says it’s fine, copying isn’t theft
deleted by creator