Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday May 16 2019, @04:53AM   Printer-friendly
from the how-abot-a-nice-pupae-puree? dept.

Phys.org:

Consuming insects is already an everyday practice for two billion people worldwide, largely in the global east and south. Rearing them uses less land, energy, water and produces fewer greenhouse gases than traditional meats like chicken and beef, and more of their body is digestible (80-100 percent, compared to only 40 percent for beef).

They are also better for us: they are rich in protein, fat, and energy and can be a significant source of vitamins and minerals. But the Western world has still not embraced this wonder food.

Researchers think they know why: the 'disgust' factor. Insects are gross. The more interesting question is: given the enormous benefits, how can we convince people to get over the grossness?

The article argues that eating sushi and lobster was once considered disgusting, too.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @05:49AM (11 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @05:49AM (#844140)

    properly mashed, since there is an ick-factor. but otherwise i see no reason to turn it down, once it's certified as safe.
    it's obvious from the latest report https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48169783 [bbc.com] that either we learn to live sustainably or we're left without enough resources.

    so the researcher is right: either we eat insects, or we die in global war over farmland.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 16 2019, @06:00AM (8 children)

    by hemocyanin (186) on Thursday May 16 2019, @06:00AM (#844144) Journal

    The issue is population. Eating bugs just delays dealing with the issue, it does not solve it.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @07:01AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @07:01AM (#844165)

      actually if you educate everyone and raise their standard of leaving the population problem is more or less solved because they have less kids.
      eating bugs could push back the lack-of-food problems long enough for population growth to reach 0.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @03:08PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @03:08PM (#844293)

        how the hell is this a troll?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @04:00PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @04:00PM (#844317)

          Because some cockbite decided to bite your cock.

          Look, people, THIS is a troll post!!!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @07:33PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @07:33PM (#844425)

        People say "education", but it is not directly education, but rather the 2 following consequences:

        1/ More years of schooling before "entering the adult world"
        2/ Ability to get a job and earn decent money on her own

        Both have the effect of delaying when a woman marries to start a family.
        In Western societies, women may wait so long that they are borderline infertile when they decide to marry. Certainly they are old enough that there are less fertile years. Plus it is hard to be a careerwoman and
        mother. It can be done, sure, but it's not easy. This will limit the number of children the woman wants (or feels able) to have.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @11:46AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @11:46AM (#844234)

      Eating bugs solves the knife issue though. Once everyone is subsisting on insects there will be no excuse for anyone to own a knife... then we can finally ban the godawful things.

      • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday May 16 2019, @09:50PM (1 child)

        by meustrus (4961) on Thursday May 16 2019, @09:50PM (#844481)

        Because nobody needs to chop onions, tomatoes, potatoes, celery, carrots, turnips, or any other vegetable before cooking?

        --
        If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday May 17 2019, @12:01AM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 17 2019, @12:01AM (#844527) Journal

          Because nobody needs to chop onions, tomatoes, potatoes, celery, carrots, turnips, or any other vegetable before cooking?

          Indeed. You can buy those things precut. There's no excuse to own a knife.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Immerman on Thursday May 16 2019, @02:31PM

      by Immerman (3985) on Thursday May 16 2019, @02:31PM (#844280)

      Not quite - ethics and environmental impact are also major considerations. Insects are generally accepted to be far less aware and feeling (sentient) than mammals, poultry, or even fish, and so the ethical concerns of farming and eating them are far lower.

      More practically, they're far more efficient at converting human-useless plant biomass into protein - at about 90% as compared to 10% for a cow or 30% for a pig (IIRC). There's also a lot less waste - only about 50% of a farm animal is actually edible, the rest being skin, bones, and offal, and they produce a prodigious stream of waste while alive, including a huge amount of greenhouse gasses. Insects can also be grown far more densely, and without antibiotics or hormones and their contingent health risks. And their metabolisms are sufficiently alien to our own that it's all but impossible for diseases to jump to our species - and farm animals living in close proximity to humans is the source of a huge percentage of new disease strains - the annual new species of influenza probably being the most well-known.

      Even feeding the exact same population, if we can drastically reduce land usage while eliminating the dangers of heavy antibiotic usage, farm runoff, greenhouse gasses, inter-species disease hybridization, etc. that's a huge win for everyone.

      The only potential down side is aesthetics - and that's a cultural thing. It wasn't that long ago that larger "bugs" such as shrimp, crabs, and lobster were considered unfit to eat in the Western world, now they've become delicacies. In cultures where eating insects is commonplace, many insects are similarly considered delicacies to be sought out, even when they're more expensive than beef or pork.

  • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday May 16 2019, @02:43PM

    by Immerman (3985) on Thursday May 16 2019, @02:43PM (#844286)

    As I recall there's actually a company out there already producing insect sausage, meatballs, etc. from insects. I think it was a couple years ago, so maybe they've gone under, or maybe they were actually an environmental PR firm with a proof-of-concept product - or maybe they just haven't gained enough traction to make it into the supermarkets yet.

    At any rate, if you dig around you may actually be able to order yourself some insect sausages today.

  • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday May 16 2019, @09:07PM

    by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Thursday May 16 2019, @09:07PM (#844465)

    You are already eating insects, and worse, you just don't realize it.

    http://mentalfloss.com/article/29133/what-defects-fda-allows-11-types-food [mentalfloss.com]

    I've tried crickets, the ranch flavoring on them was enough that if they had been added to a "party mix" I wouldn't have even noticed. Even plain they had a neutral flavor that most people probably wouldn't notice with the right spice mix.

    --
    "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."