The Blue Page

Leave a comment

Living off the… Lab. What should we think about engineered meat?

What can’t you get from a test tube these days? Organs, diseases and cures, animals – and even human offspring are popping out of labs like DIY creation ovens.

Now, the figure in a white coat serving up your freshly cooked steak may not be a friendly chef – but another lab technician. Welcome to a new generation of meat sourced not a New Zealand pasture, Yorkshire dales or a questionable third world slaughterhouse – but a standard, clinical petridish.

So, what is cultured meat? Known otherwise as synthetic meat, cell-cultured meat, engineered meat, vitro meat or ‘clean meat’, it is a cell-cultured product grown in a lab rather than barn or pasture. It is, for all intends and purposes, the same steaming slab of animal muscle cells as traditional meat without, as every animal rights activist will tell you, the antibiotics, the climate change impact, the transportation, or the slaughter.

One of the first to forecast the invention of engineered meat was the ever-precocious British national treasure, Winston Churchill.  In 1931, he already suggested “We shall escape the absurdity of growing a whole chicken in order to eat the breast or wing, by growing these parts separately under a suitable medium…The new foods will from the outset be practically indistinguishable from the natural products, and any changes will be so gradual as to escape observation.” (Read more on from the great man here).

As early as 1971, muscle fibers have been cultivated in vitrio by Russell Ross who observed the ability of cells of guinea pig aorta to synthesize. The research progressed with NASA, who in 2001 produced meat from turkey cells and goldfish which could, in principle, be cooked and consumed to feed astronauts on long-distance space missions.

The first patents for engineered meat for human consumption were filed by American Jon F. Vein in 1998 (US) and a Dutch dermatologist, doctor and businessman triumvirate in 2001 (worldwide). In 2008, PETA offered $1m to the first company to bring lab meat to consumers and, from then on, corporate and governmental interest in engineered meat production has only gathered pace, with Time magazine declaring it one of the top 50 breakthrough ideas for the future in 2009.

Today, tissue engineering for consumption is rapidly developing along other, less appetizing biotechnology topics such as tissue regeneration, organ transplants and regenerative medicine. The recipe starts with stems cells, developed muscle cells, myosatellite cells or myoblasts. In a world of consumers growing wary of unrecognizable  alien ingredients, the hard sell for lab meat starts here.

The starter cells are then coated in protein, placed in a bio reactor and stretched on a scaffold that is periodically moved to simulate natural tissue growth. In ideal conditions, this type of meat fabrication is claimed to yield up to 50,000 tons of pork meat from 10 pork muscle cells in just two months (Read all about it).

Although this material is biochemically identical to ‘real meat’, many stomachs may automatically churn at the thought of dinner having relating to the insalubrious topic of molecular cell extraction. However, given that the essential building materials of the product are one and the same – minus the antibiotics, hormones and other foreign bodies used to treat live animals – is our aversion to lab meat anything other than cosmetic?

The engineered meat industry currently suffers from the disadvantages of high costs and lack of commercial capacity. However, if it is ever to go to market with success, its main problem may be something much more difficult to overcome than money or manufacturing. Its main problem may be a basic question of perception and demand. What do you do to turn engineered tissue into a succulent dinner option? What would it take to normalize lab meat?

Oddly enough, without realizing it or not, today’s consumer is absolutely comfortable with a healthy serving of the artificial, including plenty in our food. Sweeteners, chemical substitutes, additives, colorants, preservatives, E numbers, flavourings and flavour enhancers and well-known nasties like MSG are all a permanent feature in our diet. Depending on hunger (or alcohol…) levels and stage of on/off flirtation with the vegan plan diet, concern over what we are putting in our mouth tends to waver and change. However, no one is panicking about their gum having something in common with petroleum. As long as our food isn’t of a living, beating heart with eyes variety, we don’t mind the chemical levels here any more than we question any other substance we clean, moisturise or treat ourselves with.

So, is our problem with the ‘artificial’ bit of artificial meat?

It could be argued that the lab meat industry suffers from one problem the livestock industry tends not to have – transparency. We know how just how engineered meat is sourced, grown and treated. On the other hand, few abattoirs are throwing open their doors to the general public to witness the culling and treatment of carcasses. Packets of bargain chicken are put into trolley baskets without much thought of how a bird can be hatched, reared, slaughtered, transported and prepped for less than the price of a shop coffee. Free range eggs may be a modern badge of virtue, but not many know that, free range or caged, live male chicks at egg farms are gassed in the UK within a day of hatching for their lack of capacity to lay further eggs. In other countries, they are thrown alive into a meat grinder. It doesn’t automatically make buying eggs wrong. It is just a fact about eggs.

Raise an issue of this type with company at a dinner party and conversation is extinguished faster than a tea light candle at high seas. It is hard to say anything about the meat industry without automatically being perceived as a lunatic of the henna-ed hair and bad hemp trousers variety. An innocuous comment in normal, conversational tones tends to be perceiving as a preachy, guilt-inducing, emotional, hair-tearing dig at a human being’s god-given right to a juicy rack of lamb. Many of the facts of the meat industry are upsetting and, given that the world is upsetting enough, most people just don’t want to invite an unsettling conversation that leads to the conclusion that something about them or their life choices is wrong.

Ultimately, real animals in the meat production cycle are no different to their artificial meat counterparts. They are a product for consumption. The opinions on what is real and natural can quickly become blurred with a little research.

In short, engineered meat is set to rattle a lot of convention beyond our simple idea that meat comes from a moving, conscious creature that is born and dies. On the surface, it may get the thumbs up for reducing the environmental impact of livestock rearing, avoiding growth hormones, eliminating animal meat borne diseases and avoiding GM animal feed. However, given that some animal cells are used, is the product really vegetarian? Can fiddling about with the cells of living beings really count as ‘ethical’? Are scientists playing God again? With no fat or bone, is it a true meat substitute? Is it kosher? Is it halal?

Millions may already dig into meat substitute like Quorn, but whilst we know that Quorn is a fermented fungal microprotein that we have grown comfortable with, maybe engineered meat is actually too close to the real thing for comfort. Yes, maybe s*** just got too real.

So, Frankenmeat or green meat? There is a long way to go until lab meat is being stocked into the supermarket. Until then, there is plenty of time to think.

Further Reading:

The Future Will Be Full of Lab Grown Meat

Artificial chicken grown from cells gets a taste test – but who will regulate it?

Should I be nervous about lab grown meat?

Lab-grown meat gives food for thought

Make your own meat with open source cells – no animals necessary


Leave a comment

VOCs: what you need to know

VOCs (volatile organic compounds) have been getting a lot of attention lately.

At the local home center, you may have noticed a lot more low or no VOC proclamations. It seems that the seal on VOCs has officially be broken, and the discussion on what they are, where they are used and why we should avoid them is now on.

VOCs often get emitted into the air as the paint (or varnish, or adhesive, or cleaning product etc.) dries and are at their most potent during and shortly after application. Essentially, VOCs are gases that are emitted from certain liquids and solids and can be harmful to health to varying degrees.

In fact, hundreds – if not thousands – of products emit VOCs. Common cleaning, decorating, disinfecting, cosmetic and hobby products can all be counted among the culprits, explaining why the concentration of VOCs is up to ten times higher indoors than out. During certain activities, such as paint stripping, the indoor levels may be up to 1000x outdoor background levels.

Paints, paint stripped and other solvents may have got a lot of attention for VOC release lately, but other products to be aware of include items as diverse as nail varnish, hair dye, aerosol sprays, wood preservatives, glue, permanent marker, office printers and copiers, carpet, flooring and dry cleaned clothing. Even common air freshers release high amounts of VOCs.

Should we be panicking about VOCs?

It is hard to imagine sleeping in a freshly painted room with the windows closed without suffering at least some degree of malaise.

The immediate health effects of limited VOC exposure may include skin, eye or throat irritation, nausea, headache, dizziness and fatigue, visual disorders and skin reaction. Effects of more severe and/or prolonged exposure include damage to liver, kidneys and central nervous system,allergies, respiratory problems and, possibly, cancer.

As with all polluting substances, there are a number of factors affecting risk levels. Considerations such as age and length and intensity of exposure greatly affect the degree of impact. Painting interiors is, for example, frequently not recommended if living with newborns or young infants, due to increased risk of respiratory problems.

Limiting the risk

  • Ventilate the room when using products containing VOCs.
  • If possible, vacate the house when renovating expensively with paint, varnish etc. to allow the chemicals to settle for 2-3 days, when exposure would be the greatest.
  • Gases can leak even from closed containers. Dispose of half-full or empty containers or unnecessary chemicals in accordance with local toxic household waste procedures.
  • Store spare chemicals in a well-ventilated space and away from any possibility of contact with children.
  • Wear a fume mask when doing household renovating work.
  • Don’t expose skin when taking on household repairs. Wear long pants and sleeved tops, use gloves and, if necessary, wear a hair cover.
  • Where possible, go chemical-free. Ask yourself if VOC exposure is necessary or if you are happy to go with alternatives – e.g. fitting a VOC cocktail of plywood, underlay and carpet flooring versus simple natural hardwood flooring.
  • Use water-based, low or no VOC paints and decorating materials.
  • Avoid using synthetic air fresheners in the car or home.
  • Clean green.
  • Read warning and hazard labels. If a product comes with a toxicity warning to marine life, for example, are you sure you want it in your home?

Further Reading:

Indoor Air Pollution: An Introduction for Health Professionals

Volatile Organic Compounds’ Impact on Indoor Air Quality

Tox Town: Volatile Organic Compounds

Greenguard Air Quality

Envirovent: What are VOCs?