ReportWire

Tag: meat substitutes

  • Chemical Safety, Cultivated Meat, and Our Health  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    More than 95 percent of human exposure to industrial pollutants like dioxins and PCBs comes from fish, other meat, and dairy.

    By cultivating muscle meat directly, without associated organs like intestines, the incidence of foodborne diseases “could be significantly reduced,” as could exposure to antibiotics, “pesticides, arsenic, dioxins, and hormones associated with conventional meat.” Currently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved seven hormone drugs to bulk up the production of milk and meat. “In the European Union, there exists a total ban on such use,” however. Even without injected hormones, though, animal products naturally have hormones because they come from animals. “Eggs, example given, contribute more to the dietary intake of estradiol [estrogens] than beef, whether the animal is legally treated with hormones or not.” After all, eggs come straight from a hen’s ovaries, so, of course, they’re swimming with hormones. But if you’re directly growing just muscle meat or egg white protein, you don’t need to include reproductive organs, adrenal glands, or any of the associated hormones.

    “Chemical safety is another concern for meat produced under current production systems.” There are chemical toxicants and industrial pollutants that build up in the food chain, such as pesticides, PCBs, heavy metals, and flame retardants, but there is no food chain with cultivated meat. We could produce all the tuna we wanted, with zero mercury.

    When the World Health Organization determined that processed meat was a known human carcinogen and unprocessed meat a probable human carcinogen, it wasn’t even talking about the carcinogenic environmental pollutants. When researchers tested retail meat for the presence of “33 chemicals with calculated carcinogenic potential,” like polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), organochlorine pesticides like DDT, and dioxin-like PCBs, they concluded that, in order to reduce the risk of cancer, we should limit beef, pork, or chicken consumption to a maximum of five servings a month.

    Why cultivate meat at all when you can just buy organic? Surprisingly, “consumption of organic meat does not diminish the carcinogenic potential associated with the intake of persistent organic pollutants (POPs).” A number of studies have recently compared the presence of environmental contaminants in organic meat versus conventional meat, and the researchers found, surprisingly, that organic meat was sometimes more contaminated. Not only organic beef either. Higher levels were also found in pork and poultry.

    If you look at the micropollutants and chemical residues in both organic and conventional meat, several environmental contaminants, including dioxins, PCBs, lead, and arsenic, were measured at significantly higher levels in the organic samples. As you can see below and at 2:56 in my video, The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Chemical Safety, the green is organic meat, and the blue is conventional. 

    Cooking helps to draw off some of the fat where the PCBs are concentrated, as shown here and at 3:01.

    Seafood seems to be an exception. Steaming, for example, generally increases contaminant levels, increasing contaminant exposure and concentrating mercury levels as much as 47 percent, as you can see here and at 3:15 in my video. Better not to have toxic buildup in the first place.

    More than 95 percent of human exposure to industrial pollutants like dioxins and PCBs comes from foods like meat, including fatty fish, and dairy, but the pollutants don’t appear magically. The only way the chicken, fish, and other meat lead to human exposure is because the animals themselves built up a lifetime of exposure in our polluted world, from incinerators, power plants, sewer sludge, and on and on, as you can see here and at 3:40 in my video.

    Unlike conventional meat production, a slaughter-free harvest would not only mean no more infected animals, but no more contaminated animals either. In terms of pollutants, it would be like taking a time machine back before the Industrial Revolution.

    Doctor’s Note:

    Cultivated meat means less contamination with fecal residues, toxic pollutants, antibiotics, and hormones; up to 99 percent less environmental impact; and zero pandemic risk. Cultivated meat allows people to have their meat and eat it, too, without affecting the rest of us.

    This is the final video in this cultivated meat series. If you missed the first two, check out the videos on Food Safety and Antibiotic Resistance.

    I previously did a video series on plant-based meats; see the related posts below.

    All videos in the plant-based meat series are also available in a digital download from a webinar I did. SeeThe Human Health Implications of Plant-Based and Cultivated Meat for Pandemic Prevention and Climate Mitigation.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Antibiotic Resistance, Cultivated Meat, and Our Health  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Medically important antibiotics are being squandered by animal agriculture to compensate for typical factory farming practices.

    Cultivating muscle meat directly from cells instead of raising and slaughtering animals would reduce the risk of foodborne illnesses “due to fecal contamination during slaughtering and evisceration of carcasses” because there would be no feces, no slaughter, and no carcasses to eviscerate. In addition, cultivating meat would also reduce the threat from antibiotic resistance.

    To compensate for overcrowded, stressful, and unhygienic conditions on factory farms, animals are typically dosed en masse with antibiotics. A lot of antibiotics. About 20 million pounds of medically important antibiotics a year, as you can see here and at 0:57 in my video, The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Antibiotic Resistance

    In the United States, for example, farm animals are given about 2 million pounds of penicillin drugs and 15 million pounds of tetracyclines annually. This is madness. 

    Antibiotic drugs important to human medicine go right into the feed and water of animals like cows, pigs, and chickens, by the ton and by the thousands of tons, as shown below and at 1:02 in my video. And that is all without a prescription.

    Ninety-seven percent of the tens of millions of pounds of antibiotics given to farm animals in the United States are bought over the counter—without a prescription or even an order from a veterinarian, as seen here and a 1:24. To get even a few milligrams of penicillin, we need a doctor’s prescription, because these are miracle wonder drugs that can’t be squandered. Meanwhile, farmers can just back their trucks up to the feedstore. 

    Now, half the Salmonella in retail meat—chicken, turkey, beef, and pork—is resistant to tetracycline, as shown below and at 1:50 in my video. About a quarter of the bugs are now resistant to three or more entire classes of antibiotics, including some resistant to “cephalosporins such as ceftriaxone [which] are critically important drugs we use to treat severe Salmonella infections, especially in children.” 

    Such agricultural applications for antimicrobials are now considered an “urgent threat to human health.” “The link between antibiotic use in animals and antibiotic resistance in humans is unequivocal.”

    As shown here and at 2:20 in my video, it all starts with the poop. 

    Antibiotic-resistant bugs are selected for and then can spread via meat or produce contaminated by poop or they can spread through the wind, the air, or the water, or be carried by insects. There are many pathways by which resistant superbugs can escape. So, even if you don’t eat meat, you can be “put at risk by the pathogens released from stressed, immunocompromised, contaminant-filled livestock” dosed with antibiotics. That’s one of the reasons the American Public Health Association called for a moratorium on factory farms, due in part to all the pollution from concentrated animal feed operations (CAFOs) to the surrounding communities. 

    Every year, more than five tons of animal manure are produced for every man, woman, and child in the United States. Again, it all starts with the poop. But cultivated meat means no guts, no poop, no fecal infections, and no antibiotics necessary. It also means no fecal or antibiotic residues left in “foodstuffs such as milk, egg, and meat” that can potentially cause a variety of side effects beyond just the transfer of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to humans.

    And, as you can see here and at 3:30 in my video, things are getting worse, not better. U.S. animal agriculture is using more antibiotics now than ever.

    This isn’t only because more animals are being raised for food, either. Antibiotic sales in the United States are outpacing meat production. Yes, meat production is going up, but there is a serious rise in antibiotic sales for meat production, as shown below and at 3:46.

    With the combined might of Big Ag and Big Pharma (who profit from selling all the drugs), it’s hard to imagine anything changing on the political side. The only hope may be a change in the production side.

    “The unstoppable rise of super-resistant strains of bacteria is a serious worldwide problem, resulting in 700 000 deaths every year,” and the projections for global antibiotic use in the production of farm animals are “ominous,” estimated to exceed 100,000 tons of antibiotics pumped into animals raised for food by 2030. Quite simply, we may be “on the path to untreatable infections” by using even some of our “last resort antibiotics,” like carbapenems, just to shave a few cents off a pound of meat.

    And it’s not just foodborne bacteria. Mad cow disease, swine flu, and bird flu have the potential to kill millions of people. Skeptical? I’ve got a book for you to read, whose author’s “superb storytelling ability makes every page of the book interesting and fascinating for both specialist and layperson.” (Thanks, Virology Journal, for the wonderful book review and calling my book “a must read.”)

    Given the threat of the chickens coming home to roost, an editorial in the American Journal of Public Health thought that “it is curious, therefore, that changing the way humans treat animals—most basically, ceasing to eat them or, at the very least, radically limiting the quantity of them that are eaten—is largely off the radar as a significant preventative measure. Such a change, if sufficiently adopted or imposed, could still reduce the chances of the much-feared influenza epidemic…Yet humanity does not consider this option.”

    That may be moot, though, because we could cultivate all the chicken we want, without guts or lungs.

    It’s hard to stress the importance of that American Journal of Public Health editorial. As devastating as COVID-19 has been, it may just be a dress rehearsal for an even greater threat waiting in the wings—the wings of chickens.

    According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the leading candidate for the next pandemic is a bird flu virus known as H7N9, which is a hundred times deadlier than COVID-19. Instead of 1 in 250 patients dying, H7N9 has killed 40 percent of the people it infects.

    The last time a bird flu virus jumped directly to humans and caused a pandemic, it triggered the deadliest plague in human history—the 1918 pandemic that killed 50 million people. That had a 2 percent death rate. What if we had a pandemic infecting billions where death was closer to a flip of a coin?

    The good news is that there is something we can do about it. Just as eliminating the exotic animal trade and live animal markets may go a long way toward preventing the next coronavirus pandemic, reforming the way we raise domestic animals for food may help forestall the next killer flu. The bottom line is that it’s not worth risking the lives of millions of people for the sake of cheaper chicken.

    If you missed the previous video, see The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Food Safety. Up next is The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Chemical Safety

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Food Safety and Cultivated Meat  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    What are the direct health implications of making clean meat—that is, meat without animals?

    In a 1932 article in Popular Mechanics entitled “Fifty Years Hence,” Winston Churchill predicted that we would one day “escape the absurdity of growing a whole chicken in order to eat the breast or wing, by growing these parts separately under a suitable medium.” Indeed, growing meat straight from muscle cells could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 96 percent, lower water usage by as much as 96 percent, and lower land usage by 99 percent.

    If we are to avoid dangerous climate change by the middle of the century, global meat consumption simply cannot continue to rise at the current rate. And there have certainly been initiatives like Meatless Mondays to try to get people to cut down, but so far, “they do not appear to be contributing in any significant way to the translation of the idea of eating less meat into the mainstream.” So, “in the light of people’s continued desire to eat meat, it seems the problems associated with consumption are unlikely to be fully resolved by attitude change. Instead, they must be addressed from an alternate perspective: changing the product.”

    From an environmental standpoint, it seems like a slam dunk. From an animal welfare standpoint, it could get rid of factory farms and slaughter plants for good, and I wouldn’t have to stumble across articles like this in the scientific literature: “Discerning Pig Screams in Production Environments.” I mean, what more do we need to know about modern animal agriculture than the fact that, “in recent years, a number of so-called…‘ag-gag’ laws have been proposed and passed…across the USA,” banning undercover photographing or videotaping inside such operations to keep us all in the dark.

    What about the human health implications of cultivated meat? I get the animal welfare, environment, and food security benefits, but what about “the potential for cultured meat to have health/safety benefits to individual consumers”? Nutritionally, the most important advantage is being able to swap out the type the fat. Right now, producers are growing straight muscle tissue, so it could be marbled with something less harmful than animal fat, though, of course, there’s still animal protein.

    When it comes to health, the biggest, clearest advantage is food safety, reducing the risk of foodborne pathogens. There has been a sixfold increase in food poisoning over the last few decades, with tens of millions “sickened annually by infected food in the United States alone,” including hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations and thousands of annual deaths. Contaminated meats and other animal products are the most common cause.

    When the cultivated meat industry calls its products clean meat, that’s not just a nod to clean energy. Food-poisoning pathogens like E. coli, Campylobacter, and Salmonella are fecal bacteria. They are a result of fecal contamination. They’re intestinal bugs, so we don’t have to worry about them if we’re making meat without the intestines.

    Yes, there are all sorts of “methods to remove visible fecal contamination” in slaughter plants these days and even experimental imaging technologies designed to detect more “diluted fecal contaminations,” but we are still left at the retail level with about 10 percent of chicken contaminated with Salmonella and 40 percent of retail chicken contaminated with Campylobacter. What’s more, most poultry and about half of retail ground beef and pork chops are contaminated with E. coli, an indicator of fecal residue, as shown here and at 3:47 in my video The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Food Safety. We don’t have to cook the crap out of cultivated meat, though, because there isn’t any crap to begin with.

    Doctor’s Note:

    This is the first in a three-video series on cultivated meat. Stay tuned for The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Antibiotic Resistance and The Human Health Effects of Cultivated Meat: Chemical Safety.

    I previously did a video series on plant-based meats. Check them in the related posts below.

    The videos are also all available in a digital download from a webinar I did: The Human Health Implications of Plant-Based and Cultivated Meat for Pandemic Prevention and Climate Mitigation.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Plant-Based Meats and Our Health | NutritionFacts.org

    Plant-Based Meats and Our Health | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    According to the United Nations, meat and dairy production would need to be doubled to meet the predicted demand for animal-based proteins in 2050, but the opposite is required to contain the ecological damage. As I discuss in my video The Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Meat Substitutes, if we have any chance of sustainably meeting future food needs, we must lower our meat consumption. The largest barrier to following a plant-based diet may simply be meat appreciation.

    Enter plant-based meats.

    Alt-Meat and Our Planet

    Before we dive into the health profile of plant-based meats, let’s look at their impact on the health of our environment. Both the Beyond Burger and the Impossible Burger have had environmental lifecycle assessments published by reputable groups, and, indeed, switching to either one of those meat-free meat alternatives results in 90 percent reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and water footprints. Similar analyses have been performed on more than 50 different plant-based meats, and they’ve all been found to be vastly more sustainable.

    Is Plant-Based Meat Healthy?

    We have to ask: Compared to what? Food is a zero sum game. Each time we eat, there’s an opportunity cost, a lost opportunity to put something even healthier in our mouth. For example, are eggs healthy? Yes, when compared to a breakfast sausage link, but not when compared to oatmeal.

    Plant-based meat alternatives are no match for unprocessed plant foods, such as beans or lentils, and a bean burrito or lentil soup could certainly fill the same culinary niche as a lunchtime burger. But, if you are going to have some kind of burger, it’s easy to argue that the plant-based versions are healthier.

    Is Beyond Meat Healthy? Is Impossible Meat Healthy?

    Four of the worst components of the food supply are cholesterol, trans fats, saturated fat, and sodium. As I discuss in my video Are Beyond Meat and the Impossible Burger Healthy?, plant-based meat wins hands down against animal-based meat when it comes to cholesterol and trans fat. Trans fat intake is a serious potential risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes, and has been linked to depression symptoms, lower testosterone in men, and dementia. Higher levels of trans fat in the blood are associated with up to a 50 percent higher risk of developing dementia, including Alzheimer’s. A major source of trans fats? Animal products.

    Plant-based meat is also free of hormones and antibiotics, which tips the scales even further in its favor, but it may have saturated fat from added coconut oil. Nevertheless, the largest study to date of the nutritional value of plant-based meats found that saturated fat levels of similar products only average about 2 grams per serving, which is much better than the animal-based equivalents. Sodium remains a problem throughout the sector, though, like nearly any other processed food out there.

    So, plant-based meat is healthy compared with animal-based meat, but not as healthy as eating unprocessed or minimally processed plant foods directly.

    Table showing nutrition comparison between  beef and other plant-based meat patties

    Animal Protein vs. Plant Protein

    Is there any advantage to eating protein from plants instead of animals? Studies have found intake of animal protein to be associated with a higher risk of mortality, particularly dying from cardiovascular disease, whereas higher consumption of plant protein is linked to lower all-cause mortality—a lower risk of dying from all causes put together. When it comes to living a longer life, plant protein sources beat out each and every animal protein source. Not just better than bacon and eggs, but better than burgers, chicken, turkey, fish, and dairy protein. What’s more, plant protein has also been linked to lower blood pressure, reduced LDL cholesterol, and improved insulin sensitivity.

    Is Pea Protein Isolate Good for You?

    The Beyond Burger is mostly comprised of pea protein isolate. Will we still get any benefits of the whole plant if the proteins have been isolated? Surprisingly, yes. As I discuss in my video Plant-Based Protein: Are Pea and Soy Protein Isolates Harmful?, researchers did not find a significant cholesterol-lowering difference between protein isolate products and whole food sources, “suggesting that the cholesterol-lowering effects are at least, in part, attributable to the plant protein itself rather than just the associated nutrients.”

    Is Soy Protein Isolate Bad for You?

    We’ve known about the beneficial effects of soy on cholesterol for 40 years or so, but what about its impact on the cancer-promoting growth hormone IGF-1? Soy protein is similar enough to animal protein that, at high enough doses, like eating two Impossible Burgers (mostly concentrated soy protein) a day, you may bump up your IGF-1 level. But the only reason we care about IGF-1 is cancer risk, and, if anything, higher soy intake is linked to decreased risk of cancer.

    For instance, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis found that consumption of soy protein is associated with a lower risk in breast cancer mortality—a 12 percent reduction in breast cancer death associated with each 5-gram increase of soy protein a day. More than 10 daily grams of soy protein has been associated with cutting breast cancer mortality risk nearly in half, and more than 16 grams a day with a whopping 62 percent lower risk of dying from breast cancer.

    Table showing reduction in risk of dying from breast cancer from soy protein consumption

    What About Mycoprotein?

    Mycoprotein is a meat alternative made from the mushroom kingdom. Quorn makes meat-free beef, chicken-free chicken, fish-free fish, and pig-free pork. As I discuss in my video The Health Effects of Mycoprotein (Quorn) Products vs. BCAAs in Meat, in terms of its environmental impact, Quorn beef’s carbon footprint is at least ten times smaller than that of beef and its chickenless chicken is at least four times better than chicken-chicken. Health-wise, mycoprotein is high in protein and fiber, low in fat, cholesterol, sodium, and sugar, and may help people control cholesterol, blood sugar, and insulin levels, and improve satiety. That isn’t a surprise, given that the fiber and the mycoprotein are fermentable by our good gut bugs, so they can also act as a prebiotic for our friendly flora.

    Graph comparing the effects of consuming chicken versus mycoprotein on insulin levels

    What About the Heme in Impossible Meat?

    As I discuss in my video What About the Heme in Impossible Burgers?, an issue specific to the Impossible Burger is the added heme, derived from soybean plants to enhance the product’s meaty flavor and appearance. Safety analyses have failed to find any toxicity risk specific to the soy heme churned out by yeast, and the Food and Drug Administration has agreed that it is safe—both for use as a flavor and color enhancer.

    Plants for the Win

    Plant-based foods, including meat-free meats, aren’t only healthier for our planet, but also for our bodies. But, as I discuss in my video Plant-Based Meat Substitutes Put to the Test, whole plant food sources of protein, such as beans, are even better. That’s why I consider plant-based meats to be more of a useful stepping stone towards a healthier diet, rather than the endgame ideal. The same amount of protein in a bean burrito would be better in nearly every way.



    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Plant-based meat is a simple solution to climate woes – if more people would eat it

    Plant-based meat is a simple solution to climate woes – if more people would eat it

    [ad_1]

    THORNTON, Colo. (AP) — Lars Obendorfer says he was “badly insulted” after he first began offering vegan sausage at his stands, dubbed “Best Worscht in Town.” He even found himself mediating between customers arguing on social media about what to him was just another menu item.

    “There was downright hostility between the meat eaters and the vegans,” he said. “And I just couldn’t understand it, and I said, ‘knock off the arguing.’”

    That was six years ago.

    Today, his vegan currywurst — a take on the classic German fast food consisting of pork sausage with ketchup and curry power — is no longer a novelty but a menu fixture at his 25 stands across Germany.

    Of the 200,000 sausages he sells every year, 15% are plant-based.

    “It actually tastes like a normal sausage,” customer Yasemin Dural said. “I even had doubts earlier that it might have been a meat sausage, but you really don’t notice it at all.”

    Eating more plants and fewer animals is among the simplest, cheapest and most readily available ways for people to reduce their impact on the environment, climate scientists have long said. According to one University of Michigan study, if half of U.S. animal-based food was replaced with plant-based substitutes by 2030, the reduction in emissions for that year would be the equivalent of taking 47.5 million vehicles off the road.

    “We are in a climate crisis, a climate emergency,” says Greg Keoleian, a professor of sustainable systems at the University of Michigan who co-authored the study. “We all need to play a role, and these products are one strategy to easily reduce your footprint.”

    An explosion of new types of plant-based “meat” — the burgers, nuggets, sausages and other cuts that closely resemble meat but are made from soybeans and other plants — is attracting customers all over the world. Even in Germany, where cities like Hamburg and Frankfurt have given their names to iconic meat dishes, plant-based meat is becoming more popular.

    This latest innovation in meat substitutes has already made meaningful strides. Between 2018 and 2022, global retail sales of plant-based meat and seafood more than doubled to $6 billion, according to Euromonitor, a market research firm.

    Still, that’s dwarfed by global retail sales of packaged animal meat and seafood, which grew 29% in the same period to $302 billion. Plant-based meat and seafood makes up just 2% of the world’s global protein consumption. And sales have been uneven. While demand for plant-based meat is growing rapidly in some countries like Germany and Australia, sales have flattened in the U.S.

    ___

    EDITORS’ NOTE. This story is part of The Protein Problem, an AP series that examines the question: Can we feed this growing world without starving the planet?

    ___

    NEW RECIPES TO THE RESCUE?

    Plant-based meat has been around for decades. Morningstar Farms, a division of Kellogg Co., introduced soy-based breakfast sausage in 1975. But the current boom began about 10 years ago, when startups like Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat began selling burgers that more closely resembled meat and were aimed at carnivores, not just vegetarians and vegans. Beyond Meat’s burgers, made with pea protein, even “bleed” with the help of beet juice.

    Those products quickly took hold in Germany, a country where meat-heavy dishes like schnitzel and bratwurst are a mainstay of diets but where widespread concern about climate and animal welfare have been driving big changes. Last year, Germans’ annual meat consumption fell to a 33-year low of 52 kilograms (114 pounds) per person. At the same time, plant-based meat sales rose 22%, according to Euromonitor, and they have tripled since 2018.

    In Australia — where the average person ate around 120 kilograms (264 pounds) of animal meat in 2020, according to the United Nations, putting the country just behind the U.S. in terms of meat consumption — retail sales of plant-based meat have been growing, up 32% between 2020 and 2022.

    Sam Lawrence, the vice president of policy for the Asia division of the Good Food Institute, a plant-based advocacy group, said Australia was initially behind Europe and the U.S. in the adoption of plant-based meat. But that’s changing fast, in part because of health concerns. In 2018, the country had only around eight plant-based meat companies, he said. Now there are more than 40, many with their sights on the vast Asian market.

    But it is the U.S. that represents one of the biggest hopes for a solution: It is the largest market for meat substitutes. It is also one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gases from animal agriculture, weighing in as the second-largest consumer of meat per capita behind Hong Kong, according to 2020 data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Reversing that trend would have a significant impact on global meat consumption, and Tyler Huggins knows it.

    Huggins is the co-founder and CEO of the plant-based food company Meati. He comes from a family of bison ranchers, and he still eats meat occasionally. But after studying damage to rangeland ecology with the U.S. Forest Service, he earned a Ph.D. in environmental engineering with a focus on developing new kinds of plant-based meat.

    Huggins says it’s imperative to wean Americans from their meat-heavy diet because the country is already using most of its arable land.

    “How are you going to continue to feed a growing population and an increased demand in meat?” Huggins said. “We have to get more efficient in the way we produce things.”

    Colorado-based Meati makes chewy, fibrous steak filets and chicken cutlets from mushroom roots and a handful of other ingredients, like chickpea flour. Its chicken cutlet has fewer calories, less cholesterol and nearly as much protein as animal chicken.

    Meati collects spores from mushroom roots, feeds them sugar and ferments them in stainless steel tanks full of water. Every 22 hours, the fermented mixture — which resembles applesauce — is drained from a 25,000-liter tank, formed into cutlets and cooked. In four days, a single microscopic spore can produce the equivalent of a whole cow’s worth of meat.

    Eventually, the company expects to produce more than 40 million pounds of meat annually at its 100,000-square-foot Mega Ranch in Thornton, Colorado. That’s about 160 million four-ounce servings, or half the amount of beef served each year at Chipotle, one of Meati’s biggest investors.

    A MATTER OF TASTE

    Meati came onto the plant-based meat scene in 2017, around the same time that dozens of others were trying their hand in the space. At least 55 plant-based companies and brands — including entries from big meat producers like Tyson Foods — launched in the U.S. during 2017 and 2020, according to the Good Food Institute. Meanwhile, plant-based meat sales more than doubled in that same period, to $1.6 billion.

    But then sales plateaued, inching up just 2% between 2020 and 2022, according to Euromonitor. At the same time, U.S. animal meat and seafood sales rose 12.7%.

    Some contend that the high price of meat alternatives is limiting their appeal. As of April, U.S. plant-based meat and seafood prices were an average of 27% higher than animal meat and seafood in the U.S., according to Euromonitor. That was larger than the 20% gap in Germany.

    For Peter McGuinness, the CEO of pioneering plant-based burger maker Impossible Foods, taste — not price — is the biggest issue.

    “I think the category is not good enough,” McGuinness said. “What is the number one thing people want in food? Taste. If I don’t have the taste, they don’t care about the cholesterol and the saturated fat.”

    A recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research of U.S. consumers found that about 8 in 10 U.S. adults said taste was an extremely or very important factor when buying food, with its cost and nutritional value following close behind. Americans are much less likely to prioritize the food’s effect on the environment (34%) or its effect on animal welfare (30%).

    Lisa Feria, the CEO of Stray Dog Capital, which invests in plant-based meat companies, said that even though the initial exuberance in the U.S. market is now thinning out, new brands that emerge from this period will be stronger and better-funded, which will help the plant-based meat market grow at a more sustainable pace.

    “We deserve these products that are better for us, for the environment, definitely for animals, that we could eat for generations to come no matter how many people are on the planet,” Feria said.

    But it will take some convincing. An hour north of Meati’s Mega Ranch is the U.S. headquarters of JBS, one of the world’s largest meat producers. JBS launched Planterra Foods, a U.S. plant-based brand, in 2020 but closed it two years later. JBS, which still makes plant-based meat in Europe and Brazil, didn’t respond to a request for comment.

    FOR THE SAKE OF THE PLANET

    The meat industry has sown its own doubts about its plant-based rival. The Center for Consumer Freedom — which says it’s funded by restaurants and food companies but won’t say which ones — has run Super Bowl and newspaper ads criticizing plant-based meat, saying it has “chemicals and ultra-processed ingredients that you can’t pronounce.”

    Indeed, questions about the healthiness of plant-based meat have weighed on sales. Plant-based foods have some benefits over meat; they have no cholesterol, for example, and may have less fat and more fiber. But plant-based foods can also be higher in sodium, to better mimic meat’s flavor, and they don’t always have as much protein.

    Beyond Meat, another pioneer in the market, is focused on improving the health of its products. The company notes that its Beyond Steak beef tips were recently certified as a heart-healthy food by the American Heart Association.

    But Beyond Meat’s founder and CEO Ethan Brown says that in places like Germany — unlike in the U.S. — concerns about health are outweighed by concerns about the environment.

    “In the European Union, there’s clearly a desire to do something meaningful about climate,” Brown said. “Here in the United States, it’s unfortunately become politicized.”

    For Adrienne Stevson, it’s all about the environment. A graphic designer from Johnson, Vermont, Stevson was a heavy meat-eater for most of her life. She has a family cookbook filled with meaty recipes, and she even worked for a time as a prep cook preparing meat.

    So when her partner became a vegan, she was skeptical. But the more she learned about the benefits to the climate, the more she warmed to plant-based meat.

    Stevson still uses her family cookbook, but she swaps out the meat for Beyond Meat ground beef, Impossible sausage and other products, like tofu. In an ideal world, she says, she wouldn’t have to do that.

    “I think in an ideal world we could live with eating dairy products and meat products,” Stevson says. “But there’s way too many people on the earth and we haven’

    ___

    McHugh is based in Frankfurt.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link