Not exact matches
If cultured meat weren't able to become cost - competitive with
conventional meats, then it may have a very limited impact on the demand for
conventional meats and so a very limited impact on decreasing the vast number of animals subject to industrial
agriculture.
If the human safety of farming with bugs and flowers versus deadly chemicals seems clear, why do you think growers maintain
conventional agriculture?
Supplements are called for especially
if all ingredients are not organically certified, because the soils of
conventional agriculture are nutrient deficient, and almost toxic with synthetic agrichemical fertilizers and pesticides which also contaminate crops.
If we want to grow X amount of food
conventional farming practices will require less land (thanks to higher yields) than we would need using organic
agriculture.
If on the other hand the moderately impacted land used in organic
agriculture made it a suitable habitat for several important native species of wildlife that are threatened by
conventional agriculture, then perhaps it would be ok to use a little more land for
agriculture.
However the smaller parcel of land needed to grow X amount of food using
conventional agriculture, as well as the surrounding landscape, will be much more heavily impacted than the larger parcel of land needed
if we opt for organic
agriculture instead.