This is a great read … essentially talking about the many different initiatives around the globe working on creating meat to eat, independent of animal.
Then there is this where The US Cattlemen’s Association are essentially proposing that
FSIS exclude from the statutory definitions of “meat” and “beef” those products that are not “derived from animals born, raised, and harvested in the traditional manner.”
Personally, I am with the Cattlemen - we should be clear about where our food comes from … count me in on the side of ‘clear GMO labelling’ for example. But then I am also on the side of those Cattlemen being clear about where their animals come from … how they are treated … etc etc but they do tend to fight that - because really they are also against this kind of publicity:
But that all said - I am also interested in defining terms. Is meat something that is defined by process …. i.e. all meat comes from an animal or content / structure …. i.e. all meat is meat if it cannot be distinguished by scientific analysis.
I also full expect ‘brand' to enter the debate … after-all - I can make ‘Champagne’ anywhere in the world - and you will not be able to chemically or structurally separate it from Champagne made in Champagne - but of course we all know that only Champagne made in Champagne can actually be called Champagne. In other words - there is a prior case in the food world that process does NOT define what you can call something - only the source defines it. ON that basis - the Cattlemen might win.