The Future of Beef, Netherlands

Project name: The Future of Beef

Project location: Netherlands

Website: https://culturedbeef.org/professor-mark-post-md-phd

Project description:

Some evidence shows that our pre-human ancestors were regularly consuming meat as early as 1.5 million years ago, which is associated with a more elaborate brain, social organization, and geographic movements of human populations. Today, 90% of humans eat meat, a number that will only increase as people in developing nations have more money to spend on food that characterizes the diet of developed nations. Beef consumption in China, for instance, has increased 19,000% in the last decade.

In 1931, Winston Churchill’s Thoughts and Adventures envisioned a world where humans could grow specific cuts of meat, thus providing a far more efficient and ethical backbone to a historically and biologically important staple of the human diet. While cell and tissue engineering was non-existent in Churchill’s time, the last three decades have been marked by successful growth of human tissue and, more recently, animal tissue. Dr. Mark Post and a team of scientists at Maastricht University and Mosa Meats, Dr. Post’s startup, have been at the forefront of “cellular agriculture” since 2008. In 2013 they created the first edible example of “cultured meat,” which was in the form of a beef burger and was tested by a panel of food critics on live TV.
Creating “cultured beef” is, in theory, a very simple and transparent technology. The current process is the following: retrieving a cow’s satellite cells from a muscle biopsy; expanding satellite cells over 7-8 weeks with conventional culturing methods; dividing cells in portions of 1.5 million cells, suspending them in a gel with anchor points, and differentiating them to create cross-striated muscle fibers over 3 weeks; and harvesting the cells and assembling them into a patty together with separately grown fat tissue. Dr. Post’s cultured beef is near to mimicking the taste, appearance, texture, and nutritional value of the livestock-derived product, which is key to reducing beef consumption. Since cultured beef originates from the same cells that produce the livestock product, it is possible to create a product that replicates all of meat’s features to a tee. To achieve this, the team is currently focusing on complementing the muscle tissue with fat tissue and enhancing protein production. Dr. Post believes that Mosa Meats will have its cultured beef on the market within five years at a price that rivals that of grass-fed beef and provides the consumer with an ethical, environmentally sustainable, and healthy alternative to the status quo.

Goal and purpose of the project:

The goal of the project is to reduce the harmful impacts of beef consumption by creating a widely available, environmentally sustainable, ethical, and healthy alternative to beef that is taste and cost identical to beef. As the human population grows to 9.5 billion by 2050, traditional food production, especially livestock production, will no longer suffice to feed the world. Food security is already an issue for some populations and current food production methods will not be able to keep pace with the growing population--a population whose demand for meat is expected to double by 2050. Cultured meat has the potential to satiate this increasing demand without livestock’s plethora of negative environmental impacts. Livestock production already occupies 70% of the earth’s arable land and makes up 18% of global GHGs--9% 40%, and 65% of the world’s carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions respectively. Increasing arable land will only lead to further deforestation, climate change, and economic instability. Dr. Post has decided to tackle cultured beef first as cows are the most resource intensive livestock to produce: 1500 gallons of water go into one pound of beef and 10 times more grain is required to produce the same number of calories through beef as through direct human consumption of grain. Luckily, early estimates that compare cultured and conventional beef show that cultured beef emits up to 96% less GHG emissions, requires 99% less land, and uses 96% less water.
While some evidence suggests a correlation between eating meat and cardiovascular disease and colon cancer, the WHO considers the livestock industry to be one of the biggest threats to global health for a different reason--antibiotics. Factory farms use large amounts of antibiotics in sub-therapeutic doses to promote tissue growth and prevent disease from squalor living conditions. In the US, 72% of antibiotics are used on livestock. Excessive antibiotic has and will increasingly lead to the emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria. As a result, injuries and operations now regarded as simple to treat could become dangerous because of untreatable infections. However, because cultured meat can theoretically be grown in sterile labs, antibiotic resistance and emerging diseases, such as avian flu and swine flu, which are also associated with factory farming, will significantly decrease.

Motivation of the applicant / applicant team:

Dr. Post and his team is motivated to address the aforementioned consequences of livestock production in a way that does not require people to drastically change their lifestyle. Most people do not eat meat because of the way it is produced, but despite the way it is produced. Factory farming industries in the US and other parts of the world spend millions of dollars each year to pass laws making it illegal to see what happens at their facilities. It is for these reasons that Dr. Post has been excited to livestream his team’s cultured meat production to the public, while providing information about its array of benefits. Transparency throughout this process is of utmost importance because cultured meat is a new technology that consumers may meet with skepticism. Upon seeing the production and learning about the benefits of cultured meat, the hope is that people will be excited to eat a product that makes their tastebuds, moral compass, and wallet feel good.
Preventing hunger and malnourishment is another reason why the team is motivated to produce cultured beef. In the past few decades, biofuels have been a point of contention because they take up 17% of global grain production, resources that could otherwise be allocated to humans in need of food. However, up to 35% of global grain and 75% of global soy production is used as livestock feed. As beef is the most inefficient source of meat and it is widely consumed, it is the logical meat to produce.
Dr. Post and his team are eager to apply their tissue engineering expertise to cellular agriculture because they see it as an opportunity to use technology as a force for good. They are committed to putting people and planet before profit and they are resolved to avoid spiraling into profit maximization, which can lead to public distrust, a phenomenon that has recently hampered genetically modified food companies.
Furthermore, the indicators that cultured meat will succeed in the market are there: consumers are increasingly aware of the impact of their consumption; the price to create one pound of cultured beef has dropped from $1.2 million to $44; and according to one research firm, the meat alternative market, which are currently valued at $500 million, will have a market value of $70 billion by 2054. Thus, creating cultured meat is a win for society, a win for the environment, a win for Dr. Post’s team, and a win for others who join the alternative meat movement.

Use of prize money:

Turning cultured beef into a product that is readily available to consumers will require additional funds to conduct consumer acceptance and policy research. The money from this source would fund consumer acceptance and policy research, as gauging the support and resistance of consumers, government agencies, and interest groups is of utmost importance to successfully introducing cultured beef to markets throughout the world. Mark and his team have conducted consumer acceptance research in the Netherlands, where they found that, out of 7700 respondents, 63% supported the development of cultured beef, and when questioned if they would buy cultured beef when commercially available, 23% answered “certainly,” 29% “probably,” 23% “not sure,” 13% “probably not,” and 12% “certainly not.” While this suggests that a considerable amount of people in the Netherlands support and would consume cultured beef, consumer preferences differ throughout the world. Thus, a large portion of these funds will go to conducting consumer acceptance research in other nations, which, like the Netherlands, could prove to be characterized by support and interest from consumers. Such nations include France, Germany, the UK, Canada, and the USA. This research will help Mark and his team better understand the various cognitive and emotional methods that can be used to facilitate the development of targeted information narratives to increase consumer acceptance of cultured beef.
A smaller portion of the funds would be allocated to policy research in France, Germany, the UK, Canada, and the USA. This research will help identify the most transparent and rigorous way to certify cultured beef as market-ready with food-certifying government agencies in these countries. By having conversations with regulators from these agencies, it will be possible to understand how to move forward in a way that satisfies consumers and governments. Another aspect of this research will entail contacting beef interest groups in these countries to better understand how they may respond to the introduction of cultured meat into the market. By having this information, Mark and his team will be able to prepare themselves for possible legal and informational battles surrounding the name, safety of consumption, and environmental benefits of cultured beef. Through careful consumer and policy research, the probability that cultured beef enters market across the world in a manner that is trusted and excites consumers and governments will significantly increase.