EU approves synthetic foods ...
... while the FAO warns against possible harmful effects on health
These are synthetic by-products that could affect human metabolism in ways that are still unknown, some doctors warn.
Moreover, studies show that they have an environmental impact between 10 and 50 times greater than that of conventional livestock farming.
Investment in the "cultured meat" industry, a synthetic product made from animal cells, is declining due to growing contradictions regarding its benefits, according to Realidad Ganadera and European Livestock Voice. However, its derivatives are currently being approved and patented in Europe and are poised to invade the food industry.
Although the WHO and the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) have published reports outlining the health risks and environmental impact of their production, both organizations and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), headed by the European Commission, continue to authorize their development.
Furthermore, some studies show that the production of these synthetic foods requires more energy and water than conventional livestock farming. They should therefore not be considered "green" alternatives to intensive livestock farming, the main reason why they have begun to be considered as an alternative to natural meat.
Reports indicate that to obtain the specific compounds needed to grow these cell cultures, such as proteins, hormones, fats, collagen, vitamins, and minerals, one of the techniques used is the process of "precision fermentation," formerly known in the production of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This biotechnology uses bacteria, yeasts, or fungi to produce the required substances at an accelerated rate.
All of these products are incorporated into bioreactors so that the "cultured" cells can grow and multiply.
Production involves culturing isolated animal cells "to develop various end products, such as muscle tissue and fat from cattle, pigs, poultry, fish, crustaceans, quail, or even kangaroos," the FAO explained in 2023. Other products have been added to this list.
Dutch company Mosa Meat, known for creating the world's first lab-grown hamburger in 2013, has filed its first Novel Foods application with the European Commission for its cultured beef fat. This is Mosa Meat's first application for marketing authorization in the European Union and the first submission to the EU for cultured beef, according to Realidad Ganadera.
But in 2024, the European Union granted the patent for egg protein produced using the "precision fermentation" technique to Every, adding to its other patents in the United States, Finland, Germany, Denmark, and the United Kingdom, according to the trade media Intrepia in February 2025, announcing that "the industry is booming." In 2024, the company secured 60% additional investment, generating significant profits.
The "precisely fermented bioidentical egg protein is produced from a strain of the Trichoderma reesei fungus." Other products include casein proteins from the German company Formo, for cheeses, and "dairy" proteins from Standing Ovation, which will be incorporated into many products prepared by the food industry.
EFSA has approved patents for synthetic proteins and fats incorporated into pastries, baked goods, and products such as tortillas. For example, the company Standing Ovation has reportedly entered into a partnership with Palacios, a leading Spanish manufacturer of pizzas, pastries, and other prepared foods, to introduce some of these synthetic products.
"The precision fermentation industry is growing thanks to progress in obtaining new patents and approvals in Europe and the United States, as well as a slight improvement in simplifying and streamlining the regulatory framework and approval processes in the EU, issues that are stimulating the introduction of new ingredient lines," explained Intrepia.
The FAO and WHO stated in their 2023 report that "cell-based foods are not futuristic foods." The organizations reported "100 companies/startups already developing cell-based food products, ready for commercialization and awaiting approval."
Environmental impact 10 to 50 times higher than that of natural meat
Promoters of synthetic meat try to associate it with a more environmentally friendly product than conventional meat, a claim contradicted by the livestock industry.
Animal precursor cells, usually obtained from a muscle biopsy, are placed in a bioreactor where they divide and are fed. Their growth is stimulated, and they transform into something resembling muscle tissue. These bioreactors require large amounts of energy to maintain the conditions necessary for cell growth, and the process can generate greenhouse gas emissions, putting it at a disadvantage compared to natural meat, according to Realidad Ganadera.
Furthermore, precision fermentation techniques require intensive water consumption.
"The environmental footprint of lab-grown products could exceed that of traditional livestock farming, with impacts 10 to 50 times greater than those of natural meat, mainly due to the energy-intensive nature of the bioreactors used to cultivate the cells," adds Realidad Ganadera, citing studies.
Realidad Ganadera also points out that the FAO has estimated that real global meat consumption will increase by 14% by 2030. This additional demand, if replaced by synthetic meat and people agreed to eat it, would require the commissioning of approximately 150,000 bioreactors, whose environmental impact would be more than twice that required to meet demand through conventional livestock farming.
Added to this is the fact that this production of cultured cells does not contribute to improving land use.
Hormones, Antibiotics, and Molecules Potentially Altering Metabolism
In April 2023, the FAO and WHO published a report identifying 53 potential health risks associated with these synthetic foods, but nevertheless left the door open to these products. Since then, they have published new reports.
"Cell-based foods are not futuristic foods. More than 100 companies/startups are already developing cell-based food products, ready for commercialization and awaiting approval," the FAO stated at the time.
The document emphasizes that the typical media used for cell culture are complex mixtures of salts, sugars (glucose), vitamins, amino acids, organic acids, growth factors, and hormones. It also lists numerous enzymes or chemical substances, including biologically active molecules that could interfere with the metabolism of the person consuming them and are associated with the development of certain types of cancer.
Another study cited by Realidad Ganadera confirms that the production of cultures from meat cells uses bioreactors, where cell multiplication is stimulated by various anabolic agents such as growth hormones (GH) and insulin-like growth factor (IGF), as well as hypertrophic growth factors such as androgens, particularly testosterone, which increase muscle mass in vitro.
This contradicts the hype surrounding "cultured meat."
For example, abnormal cell growth of muscle biomass is accelerated, particularly the cell proliferation mechanism, which is causing great concern among experts due to the increased risk of uncontrolled mutations.
The documents also indicate a "real concern that these bioactive molecules could interfere with human metabolism and potentially trigger the development of cancer," according to Realidad Ganadera.
Essentially, they are promoting a food whose "behavior of certain by-products in the human body is unknown," asserts Realidad Ganadera.
Conventional livestock farming, on the other hand, has banned the use of hormones for forty years, which are currently used in laboratories to produce cultured cells.
Regarding the use of antibiotics, "it has decreased by more than half in livestock farming over the last decade," but "it prevails in the production of synthetic meat, often combined with antifungals. These practices raise more questions about the safety and sustainability of lab-grown meat."
Even though "cultured meat" disappoints producers due to unsatisfactory results, as it lacks the micronutrients and flavors of conventional meat, the industry is far from stopping the production of its derivative products, as it has found the doors open at the European Commission.
Immunological problems are unknown.
Dr. Antonio Gasbarrini, a digestive system expert and professor at the Catholic University of Rome, explained last year how the normal human digestive system works and the importance of preserving one's microbiota to defend against all kinds of diseases. A properly functioning digestive system is essential for the immune system to function properly.
Indeed, 80% of immunity is located in the intestine, from where it is called upon by the brain and then distributed throughout the body in case of a problem, he emphasized.
"When I read 'cultured meat,' I consider it a huge scientific error. It's not cultured meat. It's cells isolated from a muscle biopsy that are placed in a culture medium and grown there. But it's not meat. Meat is a much more complex structure composed of cells, but also fat, minerals, cartilaginous structures, and more." »
The doctor explains that, unlike animal meat, the cultured cells are all absorbed in the duodenum, without allowing the colon to receive the leftovers that serve to maintain its microbiota, essential to human immune processes.
"The colonic microbiota receives practically nothing, because everything has already been absorbed. However, since the microbiota, depending on what we eat, sends central neurotransmitters," this will influence, among other metabolic effects, the number of calories the person will absorb at the next meal.
"Who can guarantee that these foods are safe if we don't know how they affect the microbiota, the immune system, and the gut-brain axis?" he emphasizes. "Toxicity, genotoxic risks, cancer risk, all of this is assessed over the long term. How many years will it take before we can truly assess these risks?"
The doctor raises a question: if you tell a patient that you don't know if the medication they've taken is safe, "who would take it"?
"under official Russian military doctrine, any such conventional strike against the country’s nuclear arsenal could fully justify a nuclear response." Ron Unz