No mystery in meat labeling

“If a new method of production or processing alters the biological, chemical, nutritional, or organoleptic [e.g. sensory] properties of meat or poultry to the extent that the resulting product no longer aligns with consumers’ expectations, FSIS establishes new label requirements to ensure consumers’ expectations are met.” 

Establishment interests weigh in

1. In February 2018, the United States Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) filed a petition with FSIS stating its position that the definition of “beef” should be limited to products “derived from cattle born, raised, and harvested in the traditional manner,” which would exclude foods comprised of or containing cultured animal cells. FSIS says that this petition received over 6,000 comments, mostly in opposition. But, as stated in the Federal Register, “nearly all [commenters] generally agreed that cultured meat and beef should be labeled in a manner that indicates how it was produced and differentiates it from slaughtered meat products.”
2. In June 2020, the Harvard Law School Animal Law & Policy Clinic (ALPC) sent FSIS a petition requesting that the agency develop a labeling approach for “cell-based” meat and poultry products that respects First Amendment commercial speech protections. In its letter, ALPC asserts that “overly restrictive labeling requirements for cell-based meat products will likely drive innovation abroad and put the US at risk of losing its leadership status in the cellular agriculture field.” In keeping with ALPC’s position that cell-based meat labels are commercial speech protected by the First Amendment, the group’s policy recommendation is, in short, to assign labels on a case-by-case basis in line with food safety considerations. ALPC also recommended delaying implementation of new labeling requirements until more cell-cultured animal protein products hit the market, such that FSIS could better assess the actual need for such distinctions.
3. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) stated in April 2020 that federal regulators lacked certain information about cellular agriculture technology, eventual commercial production methods, and the composition of final products. In other words, the GAO suggests that it is likely too early to make such long-lasting decisions about product labeling and that FSIS and related regulatory agencies need more information to make such policies. 

The public talks turkey about meat labeling

• “I feel this should not be labeled as meat. As almond and soy are beverages not milk, this should be labeled as lab grown protein, meat like product or lab (chicken, turkey, etc) protein. It should be clear that it was lab developed not slaughtered,” said Tammy Lesniak.

• “Lab created meat should not be considered meat. There should be a separate category created and used for this type of product,” stated Cheryl Perry.

• “No NO NO NO FAKE MEAT PARTIALLY FAKE MEAT !!! We can’t trust big business with our lives and health! We have no idea what they could add or use !! They already add a lot of animal parts are added that shouldn’t be now !!!” exclaimed Sandra Russell.

• “I think calling it Cultured meat would work. I would avoid any names that could cause people to politicize it like eco/clean. Calling it labgrown kinda makes it sound too technical and doesnt sound appetizing,” said an anonymous commenter.

• “I suggest cultivated meat to be labeled as Me-eat. Even if any name will be OK with me, I think USDA should look for an enticing name instead of going for a chase away name. We need that cultivated meat in the market, please help make it happen,” suggested Marina Sagardua.

• “We must have transparency in our American food systems and supply to ensure know what we are putting into our bodies and therefore can ascertain what may or may not be impacting our health. Please ensure labeling meat and poultry products indicate use of culture cells derived from animals. Thank you,” said Dana Page.

• “I think lab grown meat should be classified the same as farm-grown meat, and labeling should not be required to be different between the two,” noted Chris Gilardi.

• “Lab grown meat from animal cells is real meat. Cruelty and slaughter free,” asserted Michael Interbartolo.

• “I believe lab-grown meat should simply be classified as meat The only difference is cultural. At the cellular level, it is the same. When it cooks, it will be the same,” said Cameron Hranac.

What’s the “beef”?

• Question 1: “Should the product name of a meat or poultry product comprised of or containing cultured animal cells differentiate the product from slaughtered meat or poultry by informing consumers the product was made using animal cell culture technology? If yes, what criteria should the agency consider or use to differentiate the products? If no, why not?”

• Question 2: “What term(s), if any, should be in the product name of a food comprised of or containing cultured animal cells to convey the nature or source of the food to consumers? (e.g., ‘‘cell cultured’’ or ‘‘cell cultivated.’’)”

• Question 3: “If a meat or poultry product were comprised of both slaughtered meat or poultry and cultured animal cells, what unique labeling requirements, if any, should be required for such products?”

• Question 4: “What term(s), if used in the product name of a food comprised of or containing cultured animal cells, would be potentially false or misleading to consumers? For each term, please provide your reasoning.”

• Question 5: “What term(s), if used in the product name of a food comprised of or containing cultured animal cells, would potentially have a negative impact on industry or consumers? For each term, please provide your reasoning.”