Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) recently signed Senate Bill 261, which will ban the manufacturing, processing, possession, distribution and sale of cell-cultured protein products for human consumption. The bill goes into effect on Sept. 1. Texas joins a list of states—Florida, Mississippi, Montana, Indiana and Nebraska—that each have similar measures prohibiting lab-grown meat sales.
Furthermore, there are currently 16 states that have already passed legislation creating a variety of requirements and labeling restrictions. There will be more states in the coming weeks that enact similar measures to ban similar products. The list has gotten bigger each week since Nebraska signed Legislative Bill 246 in late May.
The bipartisan bill passed easily through the state legislature and is considered a big win—not only for Texas—but for beef producers across the U.S. In a statement released by the Texas Cattle Raisers Association, President Carl Ray Polk Jr. said, “Ranchers across Texas work tirelessly to raise healthy cattle and produce high-quality beef. Our association is grateful for those legislators who voted in support of this legislation and understood the core of this bill, to protect our consumers, the beef industry and animal agriculture.”
The statement also claims victory in its explanation: “The bill prohibits the sale and offer of sale of cell-cultured proteins to prevent Texas consumers from being a science experiment as companies seek to profit from selling cell-cultured protein with no long-term health studies. This bill also pushes back on an agenda by certain radical groups and companies who seek to end traditional animal agriculture.”
The agenda-driven activists who seek to push lab-grown meats are using marketing terminology like “slaughter-free” and “no-kill” meat. The claim is that it is better for the environment and more humane. An article published by Chron, a Houston-based publication, claims, “Beef famously causes large amounts of emissions and contributes to deforestation, having a greater impact on the climate than most other foods.” The publication further claims that the only negative environmental impact from lab-grown meats is the technology and energy required to power facilities for storing and growing animal cells.
One example I often share in this column is the performance of certain stocks as they represent long-term viability in the marketplace. Currently, Beyond Meat is selling for under $4 a share. A recently released analysis driven by artificial intelligence claims the 12-month GAAP Operating Margin is -49.7% and says the reasons to avoid the stock are: falling unit sales over the past two years suggest it might have to lower prices to stimulate growth, cash-burning history makes us doubt the long-term viability of its business model, and depletion of cash reserves could lead to a fundraising event that triggers shareholder dilution. Companies in the same sector like Modern Meat ($0.06/share), Else Nutrition ($0.014/share), and Cult Food Science ($0.016/share) all have nearly identical stock value trends. They all have decreased in value by almost 50% in year-over-year values.
I use those points to illustrate consumer acceptance. If they can’t sell the product and the companies can’t operate efficiently, it paints a very clear picture about what the consumer message is saying. There are bigger factors at play. These products are being propped up by major investors, many of these being celebrities and business moguls like Jeff Bezos. As referenced in this column in the April 28 WLJ issue, Bezos funneled more than $60 million into this sector just last year alone.
There is a larger issue brewing in the background. It honestly makes me feel like it’s not about the meat, but rather to push a much larger narrative by pulling on the heart strings of the general population. I truly feel animal agriculture is under a new attack and it’s disguised as environmental harm. It’s a new way to recruit the next generation of activists to challenge what we do every day—humanely raising livestock and a wholesome protein source. Buzzwords like sustainability, methane emissions, rewilding, carbon footprinting, net zero and greenwashing are all efforts that do not support animal production. We have said it in WLJ several times in the last few years, calling for our industry groups to come together, and we are doing that again. Our industry needs to be united on this front on why livestock are good for the environment and how they are essential for long term population necessities from food, fiber and byproducts while being environmentally friendly.
Why else would these companies continue to sink money into a losing propositions like fake meat? The picture is becoming more and more clear—there is a huge business in activism, and we are seeing their narrative unfold. We had better get on the same page before that narrative runs us completely over and we have a much larger hill to climb. As President Dwight Eisenhower said, “Agriculture is the most healthful, most useful and most noble employment of man.” Somewhere along the line people have seem to have forgotten this. — LOGAN IPSEN
