Can cultivated meat truly end slaughter?

Cultivated meat, lab-grown meat, cell-based meat – whatever you call it, this emerging technology has been making headlines as a potential gamechanger for food production.

Promoted as a way to reduce the environmental impact of animal agriculture, prevent the suffering of our animal kin, and create a more sustainable future, cultivated meat has been backed by investors, governments, and even some of the biggest global companies currently selling animal flesh.

But is cultivated meat the solution we need? Or is it a distraction from achieving deeper, more systemic changes?

In this blog, we’ll explore what cultivated meat actually is, how it’s made, the ethical and environmental considerations, consumer attitudes, and whether it’s really the best path forward for a compassionate future.

What is cultivated meat and how does it differ from other alternatives?

Cultivated meat (also known as lab-grown or cell-based meat) is flesh grown from animal cells without the need to slaughter our animal kin. It can include flesh from fish and shellfish, as well as organ meat.

Instead of coming from a living, breathing individual, it is created in a bioreactor using a nutrient-rich growth medium that allows the cells to multiply and develop into tissue that mimics conventional meat.

It differs from:

• Fermentation-based proteins, such as Quorn, which use fungi or bacteria to create protein.
• Plant-based meat alternatives, like those from Beyond Meat or Moving Mountains, which use plant-derived ingredients to replicate the taste and texture of animal flesh.
• Alternative proteins, which is a broader category that includes cultivated meat, fermentation-based proteins, and plant-based meat alternatives. While cultivated meat relies on animal cells, alternative proteins can also include fully plant-derived or microbial-based products.

As cultivated meat begins with cells originally harvested from an animal, it raises ethical questions about its role in a truly animal-free food system.

The process: How is cultivated meat made?

The idea of growing meat in a lab sounds futuristic, but it is very much a present technology and even available to the public in some countries (more about this in a moment!)

The basic process of producing cultivated meat is comparatively straightforward and entails:

1. Cell extraction: A small sample of muscle or stem cells is taken from a live animal (in some cases, this still involves invasive procedures). Stems cells are cells that can develop into other specialised types of cells found in the body, for example, blood, liver, or muscle cells.
2. Cell growth: These cells are placed in a bioreactor filled with a nutrient-rich solution that emulates the conditions in which cells would grow in a living body. This encourages them to multiply.

The cell culture media is a water-based liquid enriched with vitamins, amino acids and other nutrients that provide cells with the conditions they need to survive. Some manufacturers use animal-derived ingredients in this media, while others use a vegan solution.

1. Tissue structuring: To achieve a meat-like texture, the cells are grown on an edible scaffold or structured to resemble muscle tissue. The scaffold helps the cells grow into the desired shape and texture, e.g. mince, steak, etc.
2. Harvesting and processing: The final product is processed into something resembling familiar meat products, such as burgers or nuggets.

Is cultivated meat ethical?

At first glance, cultivated meat appears to reduce suffering by removing slaughter from the equation. Indeed, it’s often referred to as “slaughter-free meat”.

But the reality is not quite as rosy. Currently, most cultivated meat production still relies on stem cells obtained from a live animal, and in many cases, the process is invasive. In addition, the most widely used cell culture medium contains foetal bovine serum (FBS), which is derived from foetal blood collected from unborn calves when their mothers are murdered in a slaughterhouse.

Yes, there are companies working to replace FBS with plant-based alternatives, but given that cells are taken from living, sentient beings, can cultivated meat truly be called cruelty-free?

There are other questions to ask here, too:

·         Can one cell line sustain the entire industry?

In theory, a single biopsy from a live animal could generate billions of cells, making it possible to sustain production for a long time. However, cell lines degrade over time, meaning that fresh samples (again, from a living animal) might be needed periodically.

Some companies are developing immortalised cell lines, which can divide indefinitely, reducing the need for fresh stem cell extractions.

·         Could immortalised cell lines pose a health risk?

Some videos on social media have claimed that immortalised cells are grown directly from cancer cells. This is untrue.

Immortalised cell lines share some similarities with cancer cells in that they don’t follow a normal cell cycle but instead continue to divide. Crucially, they are not the same as malignant cancer and are not believed to pose a known risk when consumed.

These cell lines have been used in food production and medicine before, so they are not a new or untested technology.

Cooking and digestion break down cell structures, making it unlikely they would behave in a harmful way inside the human body.

That being said, Singapore and the US are the only countries where there are companies licensed to sell cultivated meat to consumers (specifically, cultured chicken). In Europe, the European Safety Authority is likely to take several years to review whether cultivated meat, including that grown from immortalised cell lines, is safe to eat.

·         How often would new cell samples be required?

Some scientists believe that a few hundred animals worldwide could provide enough cells for global cultivated meat production. For example, research in 2020 suggested that biopsies taken from live cows could “reduce the required number of cattle held globally from over 1 billion to less than 100”.

Others argue that regular replenishment would be necessary, meaning a continuous population of donor animals would be required to ensure genetic diversity and meet various production needs.

Ethically, many would say that suffering of 100 of our animal kin is still 100 too many.

·         Could non-harmful biopsy methods be used?

Companies claim that biopsies are minimally invasive. However, they would still involve keeping some of our fellow animals in captivity within the food industry. Plus, if foetal bovine serum (FBS) continues to be used, pregnant cows would still be slaughtered, making cultivated meat far from slaughter-free.

·         Would cultivated meat mean an end to factory farming?

If cultivated meat became mainstream, mass breeding and slaughter could be significantly reduced, but a small number of donor animals would likely still be kept under human control.

This raises ethical concerns:

• Would these animals live in factory-farm-like conditions?
• Would they be bred purely for cell extraction?
• Would their lives be truly free from exploitation?

The answers to these questions are currently unclear, but it seems unlikely that lab-grown meat will be truly 100% cruelty free.

Potential health benefits and concerns

In November 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ruled that lab-grown meat is safe to eat. It is nutritionally similar to the flesh from a slaughtered animal but is also free from growth hormones (depending on the product), antibiotics, and zoonotic diseases. As it’s grown in a high controlled environment, it is also clear of intestinal, illness-causing pathogens such as E. coli, Salmonella, and Campylobacter.

Scientists state that cultivated “designer” meat can be adjusted to contain less fat and more vitamins and minerals than animal flesh would usually contain. It is even possible to replace unhealthy fats with healthy and essential fats such as omega-3 acids.

While these benefits are significant, the fact remains that the public health consequences of cultivated meat are still relatively unknown.

There are concerns that some cultivated meat relies on growth hormones and other additives that may have a long-term effect on human health. In addition, the product may lack some of the nutrients found in conventional animal flesh, which could be a problem for people who do not want to follow a plant-based diet.

Another concern is that there could be risk of bioreactor contamination. Just like conventional meat processing, cultivated meat could be vulnerable to bacteria, fungi, or other contaminants if proper safety controls aren’t in place.

These issues will no doubt be the focus of various investigations and research projects in the coming decades.

Are consumers ready for cultivated meat?

Consumer opinions on cultivated meat are mixed. A 2021 survey by the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) found that only 30% believed it was safe, compared to 77% who trusted plant-based proteins.

Two in five (42%) said that nothing could encourage them to try lab-grown meat, but over a quarter (27%) could be persuaded if they knew it was safe to eat and 23% if they could trust that it was properly regulated.

One survey by ProVeg International found that just two percent of consumers have an accurate understanding of the term “cultured meat”, suggesting that education may shape future acceptance. Around 57% of people have never heard of it.

Younger Gen Z consumers (especially men aged 18 to 24) are the most open to trying cultivated meat, while older consumers remain more hesitant to embrace it.

A 2024 survey in the UK found that 26% of Brits would be willing to try lab-grown meat because of their concerns about the ethical and environmental impact of killing animals for their flesh.

Understandably, vegetarians and vegans show the least interest in lab-grown meat, with 82% saying they would be unwilling to try it.

Right now, people are more willing to consider feeding cultivated meat to their domestic animal companions than eating it themselves. Forty-seven percent of people support the “animal welfare credentials” of cultivated meat and 43% acknowledge its environmental potential.

However, many consumers still have strong misgivings about the price, taste, and safety of lab-grown meat products.

Retailers and restaurants are waiting for regulatory approval before making any commitments, and there are fears that cultivated meat may face a similar backlash to genetically modified (GM) foods.

It’s likely that how cultivated meat is described in marketing campaigns will have a huge impact on consumer attitudes. People tend to be wary of terms such as “lab grown” or “cell-based”, preferring descriptions such as “clean”, “cultured” or “cultivated”.

The environmental impact of the cultivated meat market

It’s becoming increasingly clear, even to people who aren’t concerned about the industrial-scale suffering of our fellow animals within the food industry, that animal agriculture is not sustainable, particularly in terms of its environmental impact.

Could cultivated meat offer a solution?

Currently, the “beef” industry, for example, emits 25 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (kgCO₂eq) per 100 grams of meat. Some studies suggest cultivated meat could reduce emissions by 92%, but this depends on renewable energy use.

Livestock farming currently uses 77% of agricultural land but provides only 18% of global calories. Cultivated meat eliminates the need for grazing land, but it still requires industrial facilities and high energy use to power the bioreactors. If this power comes from fossil fuels, then the emissions savings may not be as dramatic as hoped.

As we can see, the challenge is ensuring cultivated meat is produced sustainably, rather than simply replacing one unsustainable system with another (you can read more about this complex issue here).

A key point to note is that studies suggest plant-based meat alternatives remain the most efficient in terms of land, water, and energy use.

Corporate control, interest, and accessibility

According to Eufic, there are currently around 60 start-ups aiming to produce and sell cultivated meat, including beef, chicken, duck, seafood, foie gras, kangaroo, and more.

Worldwide, the Good Food Institute says that the number of publicly announced cultivated meat companies sat at 156 by the end of 2022. The market for cultured meat size was estimated at 1.64 million USD in 2021 and is forecasted to reach 206.6 million USD and 2.79 billion USD by 2025 and 2030, respectively.

These numbers inevitably mean that the sector is attracting interest from investors (although there have been some recent dips in growth).

But as the cultivated meat market grows, there’s the vital question of who will own this technology?

Many of the leading companies in the cultivated meat sector are funded by venture capitalists, billionaires, and even major meat corporations (such as JBS and Tyson). If cultivated meat is controlled by these industries, will it be used to shift us away from animal exploitation – or to sustain an industry built on it?

For a truly just food system, investment in independent, ethically driven solutions – such as plant-based and community-led food initiatives – must not be sidelined.

The role of the meat industry and lobbying efforts

In 2023, Italy banned the production or marketing of cultivated meat, citing a threat to traditional food systems and agricultural jobs. Farming groups strongly supported the bill, but many may not have been fully informed about potential opportunities cultivated meat could offer them.

In other countries, meat industry lobbying has:

• Advocated for stricter regulations to slow down cultivated meat approvals
• Campaigned to prohibit terms like “meat” for cell-based products
• Pressured governments to shape funding and policy in favour of conventional animal agriculture

What will happen in the UK remains to be seen.

The Royal Agricultural University report – Culture Clash? – explores the potential impacts of cultivated meats on farmers in the UK and highlights the complexities of the conversation. The report notes (page 34) that with some cultivated meat companies pledging to “end animal agriculture,” farmers may feel they are being positioned as adversaries. Yet, the research suggests that synergies between the two industries could create opportunities for collaboration rather than conflict.

One warning in the report is that “There are growing attempts in the US to bring cultured meat into wider culture wars, thereby further promoting polarisation of policy, regulation and market development”. This polarisation may unfold in the UK too.

As cultivated meat nears mainstream approval, the meat industry’s response will determine whether it truly reduces animal suffering – or merely becomes another tool for corporate dominance in food production.

The role of the UK government and private investors

The UK has been slow to approve cultivated meat compared to countries like the US and Singapore.

In 2024, two UK government funding bodies announced a £15 million investment into The National Alternative Protein Innovation Centre (NAPIC). Hosted at the University of Leeds, NAPIC has also been promised over £23 million investment from various public and private sector partners. Some of NAPIC’s work will focus on cultivated meat, but it is also concerned with fermentation-based and plant-based proteins.

At this stage, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has yet to approve cultivated meat for sale.

Some market projections say that cultivated meat, plant-based alternatives, and fermentation-based proteins have the potential to “completely disrupt animal agriculture”.

In 2019, a report from RethinkX stated that “By 2030, demand for cow products will have fallen by 70%. Before we reach this point, the U.S. cattle industry will be effectively bankrupt. By 2035, demand for cow products will have shrunk by 80% to 90%. Other livestock markets such as chicken, pig, and fish will follow a similar trajectory.”

More cautiously, AT Kearny predicted that, by 2040, “only 40% of global meat consumption will still come from conventional meat sources”. The report predicts that cultivated meat will be the key driver change, probably because it’s the protein source that requires consumers to make the least change in their habits.

Given these and other predictions, it’s no surprise that private investors are stepping in to get a slice of the cultivated meat market. This includes:

• Agronomics (a UK-based firm led by Jim Mellon) is heavily investing in cultivated meat.

• Uncommon (formerly Higher Steaks) is developing cultivated bacon and pork.

• Hoxton Farms is working on cultivated animal fat to improve plant-based meat texture.

Despite investment, regulatory delays could mean the UK falls behind in commercialising cultivated meat.

Right now, the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) and similar agencies worldwide are carefully reviewing cultivated meat to ensure it meets safety standards before reaching consumers. Long-term studies will be crucial in confirming its safety and nutritional value.

The bigger picture: Is cultivated meat the best solution?

While cultivated meat might reduce animal suffering and lower emissions, it remains a high-tech, corporate-driven approach that doesn’t address the root of the problem: our reliance on exploiting our animal kin.

Alternatives like whole-food plant-based diets, plant-based meats, and regenerative agriculture could provide simpler, more accessible, and more sustainable solutions.

Cultivated meat may be an exciting development, but it isn’t a silver bullet. While it may help reduce some of the harms inflicted on our animal kin by industrial agriculture, it remains part of a system that normalises the consumption of their flesh and secretions.

As we move forward, we must ask: is our goal to make a slightly better version of the same system, or to truly free our fellow animals?

Real change won’t come from replicating the same exploitative systems – it will come from creating an entirely new way of nourishing ourselves, one rooted in justice, sustainability, and true compassion.

Would you try cultivated meat? Or do you believe plant-based alternatives are the better path forward?