Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Can Lab Meat Fix Our Factory Farm Problem?
Can Lab Meat Fix Our Factory Farm Problem?
NOVEMBER 2019
FOODANDWATERWATCH.ORG
Can Lab Meat Fix Our Factory Farm Problem?
which confine thousands of animals in one place, rely on than conducting any independent testing. The agency
the irresponsible use of antibiotics and can carry patho- has also treated the vast majority of GMO products in the
gens like Salmonella and E. coli. However, such claims market as “substantially equivalent” to non-GMO ingre-
may be misleading. These technologies may still require dients, meaning that they do not go through rigorous
antibiotics to ensure a sterile growing environment in the safety assessments or evaluations as a new type of food.
manufacturing environment. And growth mediums like Moreover, no federal agency monitors these products
fetal calf serum can possibly carry communicable dis- once they come to market in order to screen for potential
eases.4 adverse health effects. Controversy over this inadequate
These technologies are being developed by private federal approval process has erupted following the ag-
companies whose processes and additives are often gressive marketing of some plant-based meat alterna-
not transparent, meaning that the risks have not been tives, like the Impossible Burger. Meanwhile, the FDA’s
clearly identified or studied. For example, inducing cells failure to conduct sufficient testing to rule out possible
to proliferate makes them behave in a manner similar to allergic reactions has been challenged by advocacy
cancer cells, and we do not know whether they are safe groups.9
to consume.5 We similarly do not know the risks of con- We need to fix our broken regulatory system and to
suming the numerous additives and processing aids used engage appropriate federal agencies before companies
to make these products, and whether they will induce make any claims about the safety of these next-genera-
allergic reactions. Some processing aids may not even be tion meat alternatives or put them on the market.
required to show up on food labels.6
It is not even clear which government agencies will Sustainable? Not Necessarily….
regulate these novel foods. The new technologies trig- We know that we need to dramatically change the way
gered a turf war between different branches of the we produce food, especially food animals, in order to
federal government, and a complicated deal between the avoid catastrophic climate change. Claims that lab-
U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug grown meat and GMO protein products are better for the
Administration (FDA) gives some responsibility to both climate are speculative at this point because we do not
agencies.7 One of the many questions that remain to be know the full impact of scaling up production in terms of
answered is whether companies making cell-cultured energy use and other inputs.10 Even so, the companies
products will need to first register with federal regulators, behind these products make bold claims that their prod-
or can just begin manufacturing. ucts are essential in the fight against climate change.11
But no matter which agency is in charge, our regula- However, these meat alternative products are created
tory system is ill-equipped to ensure the safety of these in highly industrialized settings and require substantial
next-generation meat replacement products, relying on amounts of energy — perhaps even more than livestock
outdated tools that predate the first wave of GMO foods.8 farming.12 In fact, in one life-cycle analysis of various
The FDA, for instance, commonly relies on industry- meat and meat alternatives (lab-grown beef, traditional
submitted safety studies of novel food ingredients rather chicken, plant-based meat substitutes and insects,
among others), lab-grown meat scored the highest in
each impact area excluding land use and ecotoxicity;
it also had the highest overall impacts and the greatest
contribution to climate change.13 While more life-cycle
analyses are needed to better understand the environ-
mental impacts of next-generation meat alternatives, it
is clear that it is too early to make sweeping claims that
they are more sustainable than existing protein sources.
Instead of placing our bets on novel technologies that
may be years from realization,14 we need to act now to
reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. This includes
enacting policies to ban factory farms and to support a
PHOTO CC-BY © WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM / COMMONS.WIKIMEDIA.ORG transition to more sustainable forms of agriculture.
2 FOODANDWATERWATCH.ORG
Can Lab Meat Fix Our Factory Farm Problem?
Endnotes
1 Zaraska, Marta. “Lab-grown beef taste test: ‘Almost’ like a burger.” Washing- 11 Mezo, Ingrid. “Cell-cultured food could help solve climate problem, experts
ton Post. August 5, 2013. say.” IEG Policy. September 24, 2018.
2 Kadim, Isam et al. “Cultured meat from muscle stem cells: A review of 12 Mattick, C. S. et al. “Anticipatory life cycle analysis of in vitro biomass cul-
challenges and prospects.” Journal of Integrative Agriculture. Vol. 14, No. 2. tivation for cultured meat production in the United States.” Environmental
February 2015 at 223 and 227. Science & Technology. Vol. 49, No. 19. 2015 at 11945.
3 Stephens, Neil et al. “Bringing cultured meat to market: Technical, socio- 13 Smetana, Sergiy et al. “Meat alternatives: Life cycle assessment of most
political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture.” Trends in Food known meat substitutes.” The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.
Science & Technology. Vol. 78. 2018 at 157; Perls, Dana. Friends of the Earth. Vol. 20, Iss. 9. September 2015 at 5, 9 and 16.
“From Lab to Fork: Critical Questions on Laboratory-Created Animal Prod- 14 Mezo, Ingrid. “Cell-based meat entrepreneurs talk opportunities, challeng-
uct Alternatives.” June 2018 at 3. es facing the industry.” IEG Policy. September 25, 2018.
4 Woll, Silvia and Inge Böhm. “In-vitro meat: A solution for problems of meat 15 Nielsen. Global Health and Wellness Report. “We Are What We Eat: Healthy
production and meat consumption?” Ernaehrungs Umschau International. Eating Trends Around the World.” January 2015 at 4 and 7.
January 2018 at 17. 16 Bunge, Jacob. “2.5 billion pounds of meat piles up in U.S. as production
5 Stephens et al. (2018) at 156 and 163. grows, exports slow.” Wall Street Journal. July 22, 2018.
6 Perls (2018) at 3. 17 Perls (2018) at 3.
7 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Press release]. “USDA and FDA an- 18 Niggli, U. et al. “Low Greenhouse Gas Agriculture: Mitigation and Adap-
nounce a formal agreement to regulate cell-cultured food products from tation Potential of Sustainable Farming Systems.” Food and Agriculture
cell lines of livestock and poultry.” March 7, 2019. Organization of the United Nations. 2009 at 1 to 3.
8 Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. “Guide to U.S. Regulation of 19 Teague, W. R. et al. “The role of ruminants in reducing agriculture’s carbon
Genetically Modified Food and Agricultural Biotechnology Products.” Sep- footprint in North America.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. Vol. 71,
tember 2001 at 2. No. 2. March/April 2016 at 157 to 160; Stanley, Paige L. et al. “Impacts of soil
9 Center for Food Safety. “Grocery Stores Selling Adulterated Uncooked Im- carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern
possible Burgers in Violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.” USA beef cattle finishing systems.” Agricultural Systems. Vol. 162. 2018 at
October 21, 2019. 250 and 256 to 257.
10 Hocquette, Jean-François. “Is in vitro meat the solution for the future?”
Meat Science. Vol. 120. October 2016 at 6.
FOODANDWATERWATCH.ORG
info@fwwatch.org
202.683.2500 (DC) • facebook.com/FoodandWaterWatch
Copyright © November 2019 Food & Water Watch