Who is afraid of lab-grown meat?

Want to try out lab-grown chicken sandwiches? Don't satisfy your cravings in Mississippi, which moved earlier this week to ban so-called cultivated or cell-derived meat.

The proposed ban was passed unanimously in the House of Representatives and will result in a $500 fine and a $500 fine in prison for up to three months.

The bill expected to be signed by Republican Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves is the latest in a series of legal manipulations by states seeking to constrain the emerging cell cultured meat industry despite the fact that such products are currently unavailable to US consumers.

In contrast to alternative meat products like Impossible Burger, which are made entirely from plants, lab-grown meat starts as cells harvested from animals. By nourishing them with a cocktail of nutrients, scientists can absorb these cells and develop into the basic components of the animal's muscles, connective tissue, or fat, or meat.

Advocates say cultivated meat can deal with the environmental impact of farmed livestock and provide meat eaters with protein that does not require slaughter Animals.

Last year, Florida and Alabama were the first states to ban the cultivation and sale of laboratory-grown meat, with many other states considering similar measures, including Nebraska and Georgia.

The ban is unconstitutional, proponents say, and some have not overcome the court's challenges and are already ongoing. “This is a huge number of political theatres,” said Susannagerber, executive director of the Meat, Poultry and Seafood Innovation Association, a trade group.

Opposition to cultivated meat is largely established in the red states, but this trend ignores a simple classification. Trade groups like the National Beef Beef Association and the Meat Institute are opposed to restrictive measures, with Republican lawmakers in Wyoming and South Dakota canceling similar bills.

“If we let the government decide what food we eat and what medicines we are taking, our bodies will soon become as state as the souls living under tyranny,” Wyoming Sen. Bob Ide said just before he voted against his actions in the state.

For now, this measure is unlikely to affect many real worlds. The outlook for mass-produced laboratory-raised meat spurred a breathtaking headline and attracted billions of investments, but its commercial viability remains unproven.

Currently, only two companies are permitted: rising food and good meat, which are permitted to sell cultured meat in the US. The companies temporarily sold limited quantities to several restaurants, but none of them were in states that passed the ban.

Earlier this month, the Food and Drug Administration granted regulatory clearance to its third company, Mission Barns, for its laboratory-grown pork fat products. In addition to being under FDA surveillance, cultivated meat products are regulated by the Department of Agriculture.

Some opponents of false cultivated meat traffic about the health risks of cultivated meat are, like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who embrace the opportunity to protect domestic livestock producers.

However, the cultured meat was also wiped out by the national cultural war. This is because proponents often describe laboratory-farmed meat as a humanitarian “non-killing” alternative to farmed animal products. Many also see it as a way to reduce the environmental impact of raising millions of cattle, pigs and chickens.

“We've seen a lot of effort into making these a great opportunity to help people get started,” said David Kaplan, a cellular agriculture expert at Tufts University. “Additional options are required.”

Such feelings inflamed with politicians who seem unfriendly to vegetarians and environmentalists, and the consumption of juicy T-bone steaks is an act of patriotism.

When he announced his decision to sign the state's ban last May, Gov. DeSantis tried to cast his stance as a blow to the Liberal Party. “Today, Florida is fighting the global elite plan to force the world to force petri dishes and insect-grown meat to achieve their authoritarian goals,” he said at a press conference.

The environmental benefits of cultivated meat remain theoretical, and studies suggest that certain production methods may be energy intensive, especially when implemented on a large scale.

Cultivated meat starts with small samples of animal cells. This can be collected from biopsies of fertile eggs or live animals. Cells are nutrients fed and grow rapidly in large tanks called bioreactors. There are a number of technical hurdles remaining. It is much easier to create ground meat products than intact cuts of meat, and the production of cultured meat is expensive and only done on a very small scale. Experts say that for these products to actually compete with traditional meat, companies need to significantly increase production and reduce costs.

Americans seem ready to try on grown meat. In a 2024 survey by Purdue University, two-thirds of respondents said they could eat chicken and beef grown in restaurants.

According to Joseph Baragtus, director of the School's Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability, which conducted the survey, consumers consistently report that taste and price are the biggest factors affecting food decisions. Ultimately, he predicted that the fate of cultivated meat would depend on whether the company could clear these two bars. “If it tastes good and is reasonably priced, consumers will eat it,” he said.

Last year, Good Meat began selling chicken grown in butchers in Singapore, the first country to approve lab-grown meat. Josh Tetrick, founder and chief executive of Good Meat's parent company, Eat Just, said he has sold under £100 in the past six months.

“Companies like us can understand how to manufacture this on a large scale. This is defined as tens of millions of pounds. He asked, “That's the big problem.”

For now, industry executives are trying to block state restrictions.

Upside Foods filed a federal lawsuit last August, challenging Florida law as unconstitutional. The Good Food Institute, an alternative meat advocacy group that provides legal support to higher goods, argues that the ban violates the commercial provisions of the Constitution. Experts say the law also violates so-called preemptive doctrines.

“These laws are violating both, and are pretty badly,” said Madeline Cohen, the Institute's Deputy Director of Regulation Affairs.

Supporters of the Mississippi bill have not publicly explained their resentment towards cultivated meat. State lawmakers had no hearings or comments before voting unanimously for the ban. The two Republicans who introduced the law, representatives Bill Piggott and Leicester Carpenter, did not respond to requests for comment. Mississippi Governor Reeves, like state agriculture commissioner Andy Gipson, declined to comment.

Still, Gipson was not embarrassed to criticize cultivated proteins as hostile to farmers. “I would like the steak to come from farm-farmed beef, not from lab Petri dishes,” he wrote on his website last year.

Advocates of cultivated meat describe the dichotomy as a false one, and many livestock farmers agree, saying that cell-derived products do not pose a threat to livelihoods. “We know that Americans love our products and continue to buy them,” said Sigrid Johannes, a spokesman for the National Beef Beef Association.

Doug Grant, a native of Mississippi, who is seeking to produce Black Sea bass in its lab by seafood startup Atlantic Fish. He said he would not compete with local producers if approved by regulatory authorities, noting that overfishing would lead to a decline in the Black Sea bass population, making it difficult to raise species with aquaculture pens.

“Mississippi grows a lot of catfish, but no one talks about making cultivated catfish,” Grant said. “We understand that people are scared of new things, but no one is forcing consumers to buy these products. If you don't like them, you don't need to eat them.”