The rise of alternatives to animal products has sparked a reaction in the lower house of the Congress of the United States, specifically of two of its members. These have presented a Royal Meat Bill you want to force label as imitation meat to all that from plant and cell culture. In this way, the packaging of these products must include this distinction to make it clear to the consumer what they are purchasing. The National Beef Cattle Association the country has welcomed the idea, while other organizations see it unnecessary and even favorable for the meat sector. We tell you more about this controversial law here
Is the Real Meat Law Really Helpful?
Anthony Joseph Brindisi and Roger Marshall have been the two architects of this Royal Meat Bill. Establishes the need to include the distinctive labeling in products that are 'fake' meats. That way, you want to establish a statement that clearly indicates where your content comes from. The fact that there are more and more alternatives to traditional meat can be a deception to the consumer, as they believe from the National Beef Cattle Association (ncba, for its acronym in English). Therefore, they see in this proposal a way to protect the public from deceptive sales practices.
Thus, livestock producers can compete on equal terms with the rest of the manufacturers of the vegetable. But of course, this Royal Meat Law it has not sat well at all on the other side of the playing field, where the alternative food industry is. Or, for example, the entity Good Food Institute (GFI). This organization works with various professionals for the development of environmentally friendly food projects and believes the opposite. Alleges that there is no evidence of these supposed doubts when buying plant products. It even goes further to consider that it benefits the meat industry.
With regards to 'meat' produced by cells, it should be remembered that it is not yet being marketed, but since the GFI they think this should not affect you Real Meat Law. They argue that it is farm or laboratory, the difference is only in the production method, but it is meat as well. In addition to this, vegan alternatives already specify their non-animal origin on your labeling. There have been no consumer complaints in this regard either. With everything on the table, is this law really necessary? Who is right? Will a similar one arrive here in Europe or Spain?
