>>21518490 (OP)
>cost effective
Nope. Insects are dependent on outer temperature. Outside from countries close to the equator you have to additionally heat the houses. They are also ALL BUT producing little waste. That is a classic ruse when talking about them: ONE insect produces less waste than a cow, for a mass of insects THE WEIGHT OF A COW however, that looks completely different.
>protein dense
Nope, aside from maybe meal worms and other larvae. They get up to like 20% protein. Imagos not so much.
>nutrient efficient
Nope.
LOTS and LOTS of useless chitin exoskeletons, wings, feelers and legs. A cow or a pig is used basically completely, including bones.
Insects don't grow from air and light, you have to feed them too. A cow eats grass or silage, for insects you have to provide either specific plants or grains, only to get like 50+% waste when y feeding a pig instead you'd get like nearly 100% efficiency and delicious muscle meat our body is made for.
The aversion towards hygienic pests is a thing we are born with. It is extremely useful.
Add to that a significant allergenic potential.
Adding some of the NATURALLY occurring insects to your table - fine. But GROWING them is a complete waste of energy and resources when a mammal produces its own heat, is isolated by fur, can be fed with basically waste products (as pigs in the old days basically were) and provide to us as mammals as well highly nutritious and digestible food. Plus milk and eggs and other animal products.
