All Arguments for Banning Lab-Grown Meat — DEBUNKED

Get ready for some mind-boggling bullshit

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (red paint added by author)

Lab-grown meat has the potential to eliminate many problems associated with today’s meat production, including animal cruelty, antibiotic resistance, rainforest destruction, air pollution, water contamination, and excessive greenhouse gas emissions.

This is a big deal, given that animal agriculture is the world’s leading cause of deforestation, a major driver of world hunger and climate change, and generally the biggest source of suffering on this planet.

Yet, some backward politicians think it is a good idea to legally ban lab-grown meat — long before it could potentially hit supermarket shelves. Bans have already been passed in Florida, Alabama, Iowa, and Italy, and other states and countries are threatening to follow suit.

In this article, I will explain why such a ban is not a good idea at all. On closer inspection, there is not a single valid argument for banning lab-grown meat. Let’s see what proponents of a ban say, and then dismantle their bullshit.

You’re reading Vegan Horizon. I deliver straight talk on veganism — brave, disruptive, to the point. To receive weekly updates via email, make sure you subscribe if you haven’t! 👇

Remark: Nobody needs meat

Before we get into the lab-grown meat debate, let me get one thing straight: We don’t need meat at all. We are actually healthier without it. Science is clear: a balanced, plant-based diet is the best choice not only for our own health but also for animals, climate, human rights, and the environment.

But if people continue eating meat, lab-grown meat will soon be the far more sustainable option. Banning it makes no sense at all, as we will see below.

“[Banning lab-grown meat] appears to have been dreamed up by people sitting around trying to think of the most reprehensible and idiotic legislation that could possibly be introduced into law.”

— Nathan J. Robinson (2024)

The “arguments” used to justify a ban

Argument 1: Lab-grown meat is unnatural / not “made by God”

The argument:

Flordia state representatives have called lab-grown meat an “affront to nature and creation” and have stated that “cultured meat is made by man” while “real meat is made by God himself.”

My response:

This argument is deeply flawed for three reasons:

• There is nothing ‘natural’ about consuming animal products, either.
  Farmed animals are (1) forcefully and systematically bred into existence, often through torture breeding; (2) kept in industrial settings and under extreme confinement (99% of animals in the U.S. are factory farmed); and (3) routinely treated with antibiotics and fed in unnatural ways, such as with their own feces. Claiming that modern meat consumption is natural ignores these artificial interventions and the fact that our food systems are entirely human-made.

• People selectively use ‘natural’ as an excuse for killing animals but conveniently ignore it in other aspects of life.
  As brilliantly summarized by Carnism Debunked, “no one seems to be interested in ditching their smartphone, squatting over a hole in the ground to go to the toilet (as opposed to using unnatural man-made sewage systems), allowing their partner to abstain from showering and brushing their teeth, and so on.” But when it comes to rejecting crucial food system innovations, it suddenly matters that they aren’t ‘natural’? This argument has zero credibility.

• Lab-grown meat won’t harm but protect nature.
  According to the UN, the livestock sector is one of the “most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global[, including] land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.” Seeking alternatives to traditional meat consumption isn’t an affront to nature, but quite the opposite: it is about leveraging human ingenuity to solve critical global challenges and protect the environment.

Argument 2: Lab-grown meat is unsafe

The argument:

Opponents of lab-grown meat have claimed that the novel technology’s “unknowns are so great” and that they would never serve it to their kids.

My response:

As mentioned above, we don’t need meat at all. Thus, nobody will ever force you to eat lab-grown meat, let alone feed it to your kids. However, suggestions that lab-grown meat could pose a health risk greater than conventional meat are baseless scaremongering. Lab-grown meat has undergone extensive scrutiny and has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the US Department of Agriculture as safe to eat. These agencies enforce some of the most rigorous food safety standards in the world. By contrast, conventional meat often contains fecal and intestinal pathogens, chemicals, heavy metals, antibiotic residues, and is a prime source of food poisoning. If anything, the available evidence suggests that lab-grown meat will be the safer option.

Argument 3: Lab-grown meat is being pushed by a global elite to achieve authoritarian goals

The argument:

In justifying his decision to ban lab-grown meat, Gov. Ron DeSantis said: “Florida is fighting back against the global elite's plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish (…) to achieve their authoritarian goals.”

My response:

This claim is too absurd to merit serious discussion. It is nothing but blatant populism and empty conspiracy theory. If anything is authoritarian, it’s banning an entire industry and taking away people’s freedom of choice based on zero evidence. Also, it is astonishing how DeSantis, a powerful politician and millionaire, fails to recognize himself as part of the global elite. In reality, it’s much more elitist to insist on traditional meat consumption, which can largely be attributed to the world’s richest countries and social classes and heavily contributes to environmental degradation and global hunger. Looking for more efficient and sustainable alternatives will benefit everyone, including the world’s poor and starving.

Argument 4: Monopolistic control of food supply

The argument:

A lobbying group for American beef producers has stated that lab-grown meat “cannot be independently produced — the technology is shrouded in intellectual property protection and requires intensive capital resources,” which “could lead to the monopolistic control of America’s sovereign food supply”.

My response:

In stark contrast to the other arguments above, this concern does have some validity. However, the issue of monopolization is by no means unique to lab-grown meat. The conventional meat industry is dominated by a few powerful global players who wield significant influence over the market — and they do not shy way from abusing their power. For instance, the world’s biggest meatpacker spent almost $250m to bribe more than 1,000 politicians and even bribed police inspectors to allow the sale of rotten meat.

Just four companies control 85% of the US meat market. Thus, pretending that the issue of monopolization would be newly introduced by lab-grown meat is highly disingenuous. Protecting the conventional meat industry actually helps these existing market leaders to consolidate their power. Instead of rejecting innovative technology, we should focus on smart regulation to ensure fair competition and prevent monopolies.

What the ban is really about

Let's face it: the move to ban lab-grown meat is not about consumer safety, environmental concerns, or preventing monopolies. Instead, it serves these two goals:

Using ‘culture wars’ to get votes

Banning lab-grown meat is a calculated move to rile up conservative voters by tapping into deeply ingrained beliefs about masculinity and tradition. Sadly, many people still think there is something “manly” about killing and eating defenseless beings. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I’ve explained in my recent article “Eating Animals Is for Cowards”.

Protecting Big Ag profits

It is no secret that the push to ban lab-grown meat is driven by politicians who are blatantly protecting the profits of their wealthy backers in the animal industry. Just like Big Oil has spent billions to control the climate change conversation, the meat industry is interested in controlling the conversation on meat alternatives. Ron DeSantis’s ban on lab-grown meat is a clear attempt to shield Big Ag from competition, undermining market principles to favor established interests. Such actions reveal the hypocrisy of those who claim to champion the free market while actively sabotaging it to benefit the rich.

Conclusion

Banning lab-grown meat lacks any reasonable justification, stifles innovation, and limits consumer choice, thus contradicting proclaimed values of freedom and individual liberty. This policy not only hinders technological progress but also reeks of hypocrisy and state overreach, especially from a political faction that pretends to stand for consumer choice and free markets.

While other parts of the world will inevitably embrace advancements in food technology, states and countries that implement a ban on lab-grown meat will be left behind — technologically and economically — due to uninformed and misguided policymaking. Food safety and regulation should be the domain of experts, such as USDA and FDA, not state legislators who clearly lack the necessary expertise.

“[A ban on lab-grown meat] is designed to make sure animals are slaughtered unnecessarily, climate change continues, and inexpensive, cruelty-free meat products never become available to consumers. (…) There’s no argument presented for why the product should be prohibited outright, rather than just letting consumers decide what they want to eat, and whether they prefer murder-meat over non-murder-meat.”

— Nathan J. Robinson (2024)

The rationale behind this policy appears to be little more than, "I don’t like it, therefore I’m going to make it illegal," reflecting a disturbing disregard for evidence-based policymaking.

When Big Meat disinformation and corruption undermine societal progress, it hurts us all. Please share this article to help ensure that innovation, animal welfare, environmental protection, and consumer freedom are not sacrificed for the interests of a powerful few.

I’m charged up

Misleading narratives and anti-vegan disinformation are on the rise — sometimes caused by ignorance, but often actively pushed by the corrupt livestock industry. I’m ready to bust the lies and myths that people use to justify animal abuse. But I need YOUR help!

I have just started my blogging journey. With your support, I will be able to pour all my passion and energy into this project.

A massive THANK YOU to those who become supporting subscribers! You help me keep Vegan Horizon paywall-free and available to everyone.