Tom Renz, an American lawyer and commentator, has published an article highlighting concerns about the safety of lab-grown meat, or mutated cancer meat, arguing that there is no real science to suggest that it is safe to eat, especially in the long term, and that consumers have the right to know exactly what they are eating.
The issue of lab-grown meat is not just about science, but also about the role of big corporations and government in promoting these products, and the potential for cronyism and profit to trump truth and public safety.In an article published yesterday, Tom Renz gave an overview of the legal and scientific of lab-grown “meat.”
The concept of lab-grown meat, also known as “cultivated” or “cell-based” meat, is being marketed as a solution to various issues, including climate change and factory farming, but it is actually more similar to a science experiment than a food product, Renz said.
His article “breaks down the science and the law around this disgusting product and [ ] suggests that [we] should think twice before joining Bill Gates in celebrating this fake meat.”
Lab-grown meat is created using immortalised cell lines, which are cells that have been genetically modified to divide indefinitely, similar to cancer cells, by switching on the enzyme telomerase, which allows them to dodge ageing and grow endlessly.
These immortalised cells share certain traits with cancer cells, including non-stop growth, genetic chaos and energy overdrive, which raises concerns about the safety of consuming these cells, as they can become unstable and pile up weird changes that make them unpredictable.
The issue of lab-grown meat is not just a scientific one, but also a legal and regulatory one.
The legal status of lab-grown meat is also uncertain, as it does not meet the definition of “meat” under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, which defines meat as coming from the muscles of animals. And the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requires food to be safe and labelled correctly.
Companies such as those backed by Bill Gates and regulatory bodies such as the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) must consider the potential risks and consequences of producing and consuming these products.
The labelling of lab-grown “meat” is a problem. The FDA and USDA have approved lab-grown chicken but this has not clarified the legal issues. US law also bans food labels that mislead people and courts have ruled that labels must be clear and can’t just be technically true but they have to make sense to regular people, which could lead to lawsuits and legal troubles for companies producing lab-grown meat.
The FDA has approved lab-grown “meat” based on short-term safety checks, such as bacteria tests, but has not conducted long-term studies on the effects of consuming immortalised cells, which are cells that can grow indefinitely, similar to cancer cells. The FDA’s approval of lab-grown “meat” is based on incomplete data and the agency is taking a gamble with public health by allowing the sale of these products without proper safety testing.
The use of immortalised cells in lab-grown “meat” raises health concerns, including the potential for these cells to produce toxic proteins or to interfere with the body’s functions, and these risks are not fully understood due to the lack of long-term studies.
The entire logic of lab grown meat is both illogical and potentially nefarious. First, there is no need for lab grown meat as nature provides the same product. Second, the potential for nefarious added chemicals or biological weaponized product becomes more of a probability. Third, it opens up the door for legislation that eliminates the individual’s ability to produce their own food and transfers that to large corporations. Fourth, it opens the door to a Soylent Green scenario where human tissue is the cancerous product used to manufacture the meat. These proponents of this technology probably took a lesson from that movie and decided, hey we can do that! Using the same story line of replacing greenhouse affect with climate change.
ReplyDelete