The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, on April 10, submitted comments to the USDA outlining the organization’s key principles for regulating fake meat products.
The comments were filed in response to Petition Number 18-01, which was submitted in February by the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association to the USDA, Food Service Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) asking for the establishment of beef and meat labeling requirements and to exclude products not directly derived from animals as being defined as “beef” or “meat.”
In a press release announcing the filing of official comments to USDA-FSIS on the petition, NCBA said it is encouraging USDA to look beyond modifying “standards of identity” in order to provide adequate protection for beef producers and consumers. Its regulatory principles are designed to effectively address both plant-based and lab-grown imitation beef products.
Kevin Kester, president of NCBA, said, “It is critical that the federal government step up to the plate and enforce fair and accurate labeling for fake meat. As long as we have a level playing field, our product will continue to be a leading protein choice for families in the United States and around the world.”
Ed Frank, NCBA’s senior director of policy communication, explained that the comments are more of a statement of what the organization is in favor of rather than what it is against. He explained that this is a new policy priority for NCBA with two main areas of focus. “There are really two main topics that are addressed in the comments. One is how to label existing plant-based products that are out there in the marketplace—how they can refer to themselves basically; and two is who should have jurisdiction within the government over these new lab-made products that are going to be hitting the marketplace within the next few years?”
Daniel Beck, NCBA’s director of government affairs, explained that her organization doesn’t believe a new definition is enough based on what has happened with the dairy industry. She noted, “If you look at what has happened with the dairy industry, any product that is regulated under the FDA has a whole host of rules that are separate to what happens at USDA, and FDA has turned a blind eye to improperly labeled imitation products for quite some time now.”
The example given was the effort that began almost 17 years ago when the dairy industry began asking FDA to intervene on products like soy milk and almond milk—those products remain on the market labeled as “milk.”
“We are asking USDA to engage and intervene on our behalf because USDA has always been a longstanding champion of agriculture and we believe that they are in the best position to influence FDA in an appropriate manner,” Beck said.
Frank and Beck discussed labeling of imitation products and noted that products like a black bean burger are not so much a concern because it is clearly defined as containing beans, and not likely to be confused with a meat product. The concern is the alternatives that bill themselves as product that “bleeds” or “sizzles” with a label identifying it as “meat.”
Additionally, NCBA wants to see USDA have jurisdiction over the products instead of FDA to help ensure food safety. Beck discussed meat products derived from animals in the traditional harvest and processing are USDA-inspected before reaching consumers, but products billed as “clean meat” may not be required to meet those same requirements.
Frank noted, “The irony of this is, if the FDA has jurisdiction over so-called “clean meat”—and that’s the nomenclature they want to use—while real meat, real beef is inspected by an FSIS inspector all across the country before it gets out to consumers. Really, so called “clean meat” could actually be less safe, less hygienic than actual meat. So, that’s the ultimate irony in this whole thing.”
Beck agreed with the irony and the idea that consumers want to have more information on where their food comes from and move away from heavily processed, or chemically processed foods and have a connection with the farm. “So, how consumers will respond to meat grown in a lab remains to be seen,” she said.
The next step, in what Beck described as a “bureaucratic labyrinth,” is for USDA to read and review the comments submitted on the petition and decide how it might proceed. However, the agency does not have a legal obligation to respond within a given timeframe. Beck noted that the 2018 Farm Bill will likely be passed and enacted into law before a resolution on fake meat labeling is reached. The issue doesn’t require congressional action.
NCBA is working on other strategies different than writing to members of Congress. Beck said those strategies to protect the term “beef” will be unveiled in the coming months. — Rae Price, WLJ editor
