A Few Reflections on Cultivated Meat

Maurizio Ferri

We can imagine a gleaming future of a world just beyond the present, where meat is abundant and affordable, with almost no cost to the environment, and without the existential worry of killing animals. At the heart of this vision are high-tech mega-structures, housing steel tanks (bioreactors or fermenters) as tall as apartment buildings, containing thousands of liters of cell culture media and capable of producing millions of pounds of meat a day, enough to feed an entire country. It’s a vision of hedonism - but altruism too, is an escape from humanity's excesses because it can save water, free up land, protect vulnerable species and biodiversity, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions responsible for global warming. We are talking about cultivated meat or cell-based meat, terms related to the biological origin of the cells and the method of production, improperly called synthetic meat, imprecise terms that can have a negative connotation for consumers. The semantic aspect of the terminology used for new foods produced with new technologies - more easily understandable by the general public - is relevant to overcoming the potential neophobia and the possible reluctance towards new food choices. There are several definitions of cultivated meat. The one I prefer is the following: cultivated meat is genuine animal meat that can replicate the sensory and nutritional profiles of conventionally produced meat because it's comprised of the same cell types arranged in the same three-dimensional structure of animal muscle tissue. Simply put, cultivated meat is grown from real animal cells; for instance, from cells taken from a cow, a chicken, a pig, or a fish. The only difference is the product is still animal cell-based, but we don't have to raise and slaughter animals.

Although of recent interest, the original idea of cultivated meat has ancient roots. In 1923, JBS Haldane in the book ‘Daedalus of Science and the Future’ proposed the idea of synthetic or laboratory-grown food. Winston Churchill in 1931, critical of production methods, introduced the topic of cultivated meat. But the first research into cultivated meat dates back to 2002 when NASA published a study on turkey muscle cells and goldfish fillet cultures. Then in 2013 Mark Post, a Dutch scientist presented the prototype of meat based on bovine skeletal muscle cells, in the form of a hamburger, costing around 290 thousand euros for 142 grams. But the true pioneer of cultured meat is the Dutchman Willem van Eelen, who in the 80s laid the foundations for this new technology. Today, Willem van Eelen’s baton has been passed to his daughter Ira van Eelen, co-founder of RespectFarm, a pilot project that, as an alternative to large-scale plants, proposes the decentralization of cultivated meat production by repurposing existing farm infrastructures into cultured meat facilities, ensuring the transition of farmers' livelihoods through a more sustainable business model. RespectFarm is part of the FEASTS collaborative research program for cultured meat and fish, funded by European Structural and Investment Funds, and proposes the integration of traditional agriculture with cellular agriculture, with a future role in the transition to sustainability.

Over the past decade, the concept of cellular agriculture, in particular the cultivation of meat and seafood from animal cells, has therefore moved from science fiction to the real world, albeit with a niche market, in some countries. But how is cultivated meat produced? In short, animal cells (mostly stem cells because of their extensive regenerative capacity) are taken from an animal through a biopsy and inserted into a bioreactor (or cultivator), which reproduces the same growth conditions the cells would encounter within an animal’s body, including the controlled temperature and the presence of oxygen, nutrients (e.g. sugars, amino acids, vitamins, minerals, and salts), and factors needed for growth and differentiation. The cells are then moved through a series of vessels of increasing size or quantity to continue their growth. This gradual progression is essential because as the cells multiply, they need more space and resources to continue growing healthily.

As an alternative to the biopsy that requires continuous sampling, does not guarantee their uniformity, and has limits due to the division threshold of the primary cells (Hayflick limit), more homogeneous and high-performance cell lines can be used and stored in bio-banks. Cultivated meat therefore represents a fusion of biology and technology, it pertains to cellular agriculture that combines the technology of cell cultures and stem cell biology (borrowed from the biopharmaceutical sector) with tissue-cellular engineering from the regenerative human medicine sector.

Against this backdrop of technological innovation, a recurring question is this: is it natural? A reflection that stems from a broader social myth according to which natural equals better, healthier, and safer. We are accustomed to romanticizing nature and this preference comes from deep-rooted prejudices linked to psychological comfort: naturalness seems familiar and safe, even when science suggests otherwise. And there is a strong influence of marketing on this. Labels such as organic or natural are designed to reassure us, but they can obscure the environmental and ethical costs of production. It is a first impression that clashes with a much more complex reality. We know that natural or conventionally produced foods are often unpredictable. Take for example traditional meat produced in environments (farms and slaughter and processing plants) in which pathogens such as E. coli, Salmonella, and Campylobacter circulate and are transmitted to humans, for which the risk is never zero and can persist even with rigorous inspections.

Unlike manual procedures, the automation technology of the cultivated meat production process, inside bioreactors equipped with sophisticated monitoring systems allows to catch via physical-chemical sensors, any unfavorable conditions in the cultivation tanks swiftly, including pathogenic bacteria, but also hormone and antibiotic residues. Unlike most food producers who randomly test batches, this system offers greater guarantees as it tests every single batch, reduces the risk of contamination, and increases the control, safety, and traceability of the processes. In practice, the risk can be easily monitored using tests for the quantification of veterinary drugs on the cell line and on the finished product, but above all by retrieving the health data of the donor animals. The use of modeling then offers substantial advantages in terms of reproducibility, scalability, and sustainability, minimizing raw materials, waste, handling, and operator dependence leading to greater efficiency of the bio-processes. The process is therefore designed to meet rigorous regulatory standards that guarantee quality and safety. For large-scale production, automated bioreactors operate with high energy intensity and require large quantities of water. However, from a sustainability perspective, the costs can be reduced by using renewable energy sources and introducing water recycling and reuse practices. In addition to safety, there are environmental advantages over traditional agriculture and livestock farming, which without proper regulation and planning, promote deforestation, and are responsible for a third of global greenhouse gas emissions from the food production sector (potentially 92% less emissions from cultured meat) and consume vast resources. The data tells us that we are in the midst of a slow-motion global catastrophe, with each passing year the destructive force of climate change becomes more destabilizing and human harm to animals more extreme.

Back to the above question, we can ask ourselves: can natural agriculture achieve the precision of cultivated meat? And aren't sustainability and compassion (reducing industrial slaughter) a better definition of natural? Science is now challenging these perceptions, demonstrating that the best can be created through innovation. Cultivated meat may not be entirely natural, but it is safer, more sustainable, and ethically aligned with modern values. Furthermore, among the advantages, cultivated meat can meet the dietary needs of new, more attentive consumers, and there is the possibility of optimizing it from a nutritional point of view. Meat is rich in saturated fatty acids, such as stearic, palmitic, and lauric acid, the latter two responsible for the increase in blood cholesterol concentrations, but poor in polyunsaturated fatty acids (e.g. omega 3 and 6) which instead, reduce cholesterol levels and the risk of suffering cardiovascular disease. These healthier substances could allow the creation of a more functional and beneficial protein product for the consumer.

Today, some products that include cultured cells have been approved for sale in Singapore, Hong Kong, the United States (on hold?), and Israel, but not yet in the countries of the European Union. Uma Valeti, founder anld?), and Israel, but not yet in the countries of the European Union. Uma Valeti, founder and CEO of Upside Foods, one of the first companies to receive regulatory approval to sell cultivated chicken in the United States, said in 2016 that ‘humanity is on the brink of the second domestication’:said in said in 2016 that ‘humanity is on the brink of the second domestication’: instead of domesticating animals to produce meat, we domesticate cells to grow it directly, a dietary shift as important as the shift from hunting and gathering to growing crops and raising livestock. Looking ahead, regulatory frameworks for novel foods will surely address concerns about the safety and transparency of production methods and potential long-term impacts. To improve the effectiveness of communication with non-experts (e.g. customers, consumers, voters) and stakeholders (e.g. farmers, regulators, and politicians) and develop a unified and multidisciplinary framework, it will be necessary to overcome the fragmented and siloed approach of cellular agriculture research in different sectors (e.g. economic, food, health, biotechnology and environmental), promote collaboration between industry, research groups, academia, and regulators and share scientific databases. Accurate models are needed. To have them we need better data on cells, biomass composition, nutrient kinetics and consumption, and energy efficiency.

Against the backdrop of an electrifying global rush to invest in the sector in the billions of dollars by venture capital and sovereign wealth funds (SoftBank, Temasek, Qatar Investment Authority) and major meat producers like Tyson, Cargill, and JBS, and startups like East Just and Upside Foods, which, before having overcome the most fundamental technological challenges, pushed for US government approval, some statements underline how the broad revolution of cultured meat does not correspond to a real prospect, certainly not in the few years we have left to avoid climate catastrophe. Interviews with investors and industry insiders, including many who have served on the leadership teams of companies in the sector, reveal a litany of squandered resources, broken promises, expensive structures, significant technological hurdles, and invalidated science. These are predictable setbacks illustrated in Gartner’s hype cycle for innovation and development of transformative technologies, which history has shown do not follow a straight line. For cellular agriculture to reach the “plateau of productivity,” it must not only overcome biotechnological and engineering obstacles but also address social and political issues. Far from being considered a replacement for conventional meat from a long-term scalability perspective, cultivated meat is a futuristic idea that represents a valuable opportunity alongside plant-based and protein alternatives to achieve a sustainable and environmentally friendly protein transition. The disastrous consequences of climate change are a wake-up call for us to reinvent our economies, rethink consumption, and redesign our relationships with nature and each other.

Likewise, the time has come to rethink the narrative of food, trying to overcome the simplistic dichotomy between nature and scientific and technological innovation that fails to capture the evolution of modern production processes and promote public acceptance of apparently unnatural solutions such as cultivated meat.