LET’S REGULATE LAB-GROWN MEAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

LET’S REGULATE LAB-GROWN MEAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

I do not want to sound like an alarmist, but lab-grown meat is no longer science fiction. It is already a commercial reality in some countries, and I believe it is only a matter of time before Filipino consumers encounter more of these products.

Let me clarify one important point. Lab-grown meat is not necessarily genetically modified meat. Genetically modified meat, in principle, could still come from an actual animal whose genes have been altered. Cultivated meat, on the other hand, is produced by growing animal cells in a controlled environment. It is not simply a plant-based substitute, nor is it necessarily made using 3D printing. Some manufacturing techniques may use 3D printing, but the essential process is growing animal cells.

So, what should we call it? Cultured meat? Cultivated meat? Cell-grown meat? Whatever name manufacturers choose, should consumers not be entitled to know exactly what they are buying?

I remember controversies over products marketed as cheese when they were not traditional cheese. We have also seen juice drinks whose labels reveal that their actual fruit-juice content may be very low. A manufacturer might argue that the label is technically correct, but what matters is whether ordinary consumers understand what they are purchasing.

I do not believe that a product should be allowed to create a misleading impression simply because its manufacturer has found an acceptable technical name for it.

Now comes a question I intend to keep asking in future essays: If the US Food and Drug Administration approves a food product, should our own Philippine FDA automatically approve it too?

My answer is that we should conduct our own assessment. Foreign scientific findings can certainly help us, but our regulators must consider Philippine food-safety requirements, local conditions and the information Filipino consumers need. An approval by another country should not automatically become a shortcut around our own regulatory responsibilities.

The United States, for example, has a system in which the FDA and the US Department of Agriculture share regulatory responsibilities for certain cultivated meat products. Singapore has also authorized particular cultivated-meat products. These developments show that regulation is possible, but they do not mean every product is automatically safe or approved everywhere.

Here in the Philippines, Republic Act No. 10611, or the Food Safety Act of 2013, already provides a framework for protecting consumers against unsafe food, misleading labeling and fraudulent practices. 

What we need is clear guidance specifically addressing cultivated meat, including the source of the cells, culture-medium residues, possible contamination, nutritional composition, allergens, production standards and labeling.

I also ask the Department of Health and the FDA to work with the Department of Agriculture, the National Meat Inspection Service, local scientists and consumer groups. They should clarify which agencies are responsible, what approvals are required, and whether any cultivated-meat products have been authorized for sale in our country.

I am not saying that we should automatically reject this technology. It may offer benefits, but those benefits must be weighed against the risks, costs and possible effects on Filipino livestock and poultry farmers.

My point is simple: Let us establish the rules before the market gets ahead of the regulators.

Consumers deserve safe food, honest labels and the freedom to make informed choices. Should that not be the minimum standard?

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres  iseneres@yahoo.com  senseneres.blogspot.com  09088877282/09-24-2027