Meat without slaughter is a response to our cruel and broken food system

Meat without slaughterhouse is coming soon. The San Francisco-based company – which already produces a range of mayonnaise without equal and interference without equality – announces its intention to publish a chicken product at the end of 2018. And the second company in the industry, Memphis Meats, which produces meatballs and chicken strips without slaughter, is waiting for first sales in upscale restaurants in 2019.

These companies make meat by taking cells, such as those from a chicken feather, and replicating the process that occurs in the body of an animal by feeding the cells nutrients, sugar and growth factors for create meat without having to kill an animal.

People love meat, but they are less and less comfortable with the welfare of animals, the environment (avoid meat and dairy products may be the most effective way of getting the meat off the beaten track). mitigate their environmental impact) and health problems of conventional meat production. Producing animal-free meat could help consumers align their values ​​with their behavior. But will they want to eat it?

The first thing in the minds of consumers is probably what they actually eat. This generated an intense debate about the framing and the choice of words used.

A common name given to this type of meat is "laboratory grown", which seems strange and unnatural and could reduce the consumer's interest. "Labor made" suggests the use of large laboratories to make food, even though most foods are processed in large facilities.

A survey of the Good Food Institute asked people to rate the attractiveness of different names for this type of meat on a scale ranging from 1 ("not at all attractive") to 5 ("extremely attractive") . "Laboratory developed" scored a lean average of 1.74, only slightly better than "in vitro" at 1.71 and "test tube" at 1.60.

Another popular term is "cell-based" meat, but since all meat is made of cells, the term "cell-based" does not differentiate the product. And the less frequently used "cultured meat" looks like something that is served at the Metropolitan Opera House.

Advocates and the industry are desperately seeking more attractive terms. But none is perfect. "Clean meat" came first Three consumer investigations as a positive term that focuses on ethical benefits and food security. But "clean meat" – which has a similar meaning to "clean energy" – tells the consumer nothing about how it is produced. None of the terms used so far seems to fit, and we do not know what name will stay.

After the name, first impressions are critical. A luxury product launch could make meat without slaughter a meat of high quality and desirable in the public opinion. This approach makes financial sense because the lowest estimate of meat costs without slaughter to date is $ 2,400 per pound. It's $ 600 for a hamburger.

Foie gras is a good candidate for the first wave of products because liver cells are easy to grow, their texture is homogeneous and consumers are used to high prices. It's also one of the most hated animal products because of animal suffering associated with its production.

There are four main reasons why people eat meat – the four N. It is normal, natural (our ancestors had eaten it), necessary (key element of human nutrition) and pleasant (good taste). Of these, normality is the most important. As more and more people consume meat without slaughter, it becomes more normal, resulting in greater consumption, which leads to more standardization. The most difficult thing is to create the momentum and ensure the smooth launch of the first product launches. The next decade is crucial.

A positive sign is the ongoing popularization of herbal meat, such as "bleeding" vegetable burgers from Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods. This will probably be one of the most important factors in the adoption by consumers. These foods make it normal for people to find that meat and the proteins at the center of the plate should not come from breeding.

The last big challenge will be the perception of the industry as a whole. And in particular, whether it is ethics – as is the case with the industry leaders I interviewed – or profits. This is a big part of That's what did not go well with genetically modified foods, which made their debut in the 1990s as a dangerous technology imposed on people by big opaque mega-corporations like Monsanto. This brutal take-off led to a violent reaction from environmental and health activists, as well as the general public.

In the case of meat without slaughter, activists such as vegans and environmentalists have up to now been the biggest proponents of technology. But that might not last. It may be that the same type of large corporations grab them, which will lead to negative public reactions.

Giants of meat like Tyson and Cargill have already invested in meat companies without slaughter. While this may be perceived as a negative step in terms of public perception, this could also be a positive sign, as it suggests that meat processors – at least those engaged in processing and selling of meat – could put this industry in incubation.

The meat industry has long been trying to influence the eating habits of consumers. Consider the marketing power of what Quartz called "The 40-year crusade of the US meat industry to maintain its grip on the US diet" has influenced the USDA's dietary guidelines to reject herbal recommendations formulated by scientists and critics. health advocates. These public relations strategies could be opposed to the nascent meat industry, without slaughter, by canceling the products even before they are marketed.

The fight for our plates could result from the political climate and signals sent to consumers by governments and businesses. Are companies willing to invest in meat without slaughter and are governments willing to legislate against animal production?

Jacy Reese is the author of "The end of breeding: how do scientists, entrepreneurs and activists build a food system without animals? published in November 2018.

For more content and to become part of the "This New World" community, follow our Facebook page.

HuffPost's "This New World" series is funded by Partners for a New Economy and the Kendeda Fund. All content is editorially independent, without the influence or contribution of foundations. If you have an idea or tip for the editorial series, send an e-mail to [email protected].