The Instigator
benshine7
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
BigIvan
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points

Insects can be our next primary food in the future .

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
benshine7
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/11/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 588 times Debate No: 76445
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

benshine7

Con

I don't think that insects can replaces our primary food such as beef,poultry,and seafood in the future. Although i admit it the fact that insects are good sources of protein but Scientist must be do research to know further about the hygienic and healthy aspec of consuming insects. How if they carries some viruses or bacteries?
BigIvan

Pro

Hello fool get ready to lose
Debate Round No. 1
benshine7

Con

Any ideas please? Seems you are the 'fool' one because you'd claimed that you are pro but you didn't give your pro-argument on this debate. Please be grow up to show your maturity. Give a smart argument as a pro. Show me why you are disagree that "Insects can be our next primary food in the future". I'm waiting for your "smart" argument. Thank you.

-benshine7-
BigIvan

Pro

While I would love to prove to you that Insects can be our next primary food in the future I want to share something special and personal. Shrek is love my friend, Shrek is life. Why do we waste our time in these petty arguments when we can be spreading the Ogrelord's word.
Debate Round No. 2
benshine7

Con

"While I would love to prove to you that Insects can be our next primary food in the future.."

Walk The Talk,Sir!

Insects cannot be promising as our future foods (even U.N. campaigned for this). For example, crickets often trumpeted as our future foods. But the fact is not, according to a new study published in the journal PLOS ONE. When researchers raised crickets on several different diets and tried to see how much protein they could squeeze out of them, they got some disappointing results: just not a whole lot of protein.

In the experiment, researchers raised crickets on one of five different diets. They replicated each diet three time and harvested the crickets after two weeks. One group ate corn-, soy- and grain-based feed, while others survived on food waste or crop residue. The researchers measured how big the crickets grew and how much edible protein they produced.

Diet made a huge difference, the study authors found. Those that ate a diet of processed food waste had a feed and protein conversion rates no more efficient than that of chickens. Nearly all those fed straight food waste died before they could be harvested. And the most successful crickets were those that ate a grain-based diet similar to what most poultry eat. They had a 35% protein conversion rate, which is only slightly better than chickens.

We have Algae also as an alternative future foods. Scientists at Sheffield Hallam University used seaweed granules to replace salt in bread and processed foods. The granules provide a strong flavour but were low in salt, which is blamed for high blood pressure, strokes and early deaths. They believe the granules could be used to replace salt in supermarket ready meals, sausages and even cheese.

Beside that, Lab-Grown Meat can be also our primary option. The scientist proved that growing meat in a lab rather than slaughtering animals would significantly reduce greenhouse gases, along with energy and water use. Production also requires a fraction of the land needed to raise cattle. In addition it could be customised to cut the fat content and add nutrients.

Sources:
http://time.com...
http://www.bbc.com...

-benshine7-
BigIvan

Pro

BigIvan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by masterdrave 1 year ago
masterdrave
BigIvan is clearly going to win. After all our resources on this planet have been burned through, insects are the next logical course of action. Con you are a coward and a fool.
Posted by benshine7 1 year ago
benshine7
Dear hldemi,

This debate is openly for user from 17-25 years old and openly for all rank.Thank you.

-benshine7-
Posted by benshine7 1 year ago
benshine7
Dear mfigurski80,

First,i appreciate about your comment for my argument.But...

There are alternate views, such as: we will become bionic robots with prosthetic hands and feet, possibly a torso, and our main diet will have to become electricity and oil.

It really depends on which way humanity is going.

It's not the one that i'm looking for.That argument seems far away from my argument and my topic.I need some reasons or comment that related about "Are u pro or con if Insects can be our next primary food in the future? "
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
Where can i see this criteria for age and rank ?
Posted by mfigurski80 1 year ago
mfigurski80
There are alternate views, such as: we will become bionic robots with prosthetic hands and feet, possibly a torso, and our main diet will have to become electricity and oil.

It really depends on which way humanity is going.
Posted by Henceforth_Truth 1 year ago
Henceforth_Truth
I would also be interested in debating this topic. Although @MiaBiaPia23 did ask first, so has the right to accept instead of me.
Posted by MiaBiaPia23 1 year ago
MiaBiaPia23
I think it is an interesting, intriguing topic that would be very 'fun' for lack of a better words to debate about. It's unique and I think the points that both the affirmative and negative have the chance to bring forward pose a challenge and a fun debate :)
Posted by benshine7 1 year ago
benshine7
why you would love to accep it, Mia?
Posted by MiaBiaPia23 1 year ago
MiaBiaPia23
Would love to accept but I do not match the age and/or rank critera .-.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by cathaystewie 1 year ago
cathaystewie
benshine7BigIvanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has provided no actual arguments or points to uphold his stance, and instead has resorted to calling people names and comical references like Shrek. Pro also forfeited the last round. Therefore, Pro loses on conduct and convincing arguments. Con did have noticeably more grammatical and spelling errors than Pro, so I will award that to spelling and grammar to Pro. Pro was the only one to provide the interesting argument that insects are insufficient in sustaining our nutritional needs and providing alternative solutions such as artificial meat and algae, and also cited sources and studies.