THE MUTTI HOLY TRINITY
MUTTI Tomato Puree with basil meets Chef Sharon’s Holy Trinity of mushroom, onions, and peppers . A little peach juice, extra virgin olive oil, more basil, sliced garlic a little smoke – and WOW!
Makes 6 cups
THE MUTTI HOLY TRINITY
MUTTI Tomato Puree with basil meets Chef Sharon’s Holy Trinity of mushroom, onions, and peppers . A little peach juice, extra virgin olive oil, more basil, sliced garlic a little smoke – and WOW!
Makes 6 cups
|Pesticide toxicity to invertebrates and pollinators increasing in GM crops||Results demolish claims of decrease in the environmental impacts of pesticide use|
|“Insect ‘apocalypse’ in US driven by 50x increase in toxic pesticides” is the startling headline of an article in National Geographic about some just published research in the journal Science that completely demolishes claims that the impact of pesticides is declining and that GM crops are contributing to this positive trend.|
In fact, the new study shows that not only is the toxic impact of pesticides increasing in the US but that GM crops are no better than conventional non-GM crops in that regard. As The Guardian notes in its report on the study by German researchers, using US government data, it “shows that the toxic impact of pesticides used on genetically modified crops remains the same as conventional crops, despite claims that GM crops would reduce the need for pesticides”.
And it quotes the lead researcher Prof Ralf Schulz, of the University Koblenz and Landau in Germany, as saying, “GM crops were introduced using the argument that they would reduce the dependency of agriculture on chemical pesticides. This is obviously not true if you look at toxicity levels.”
Check the toxicity, not just the quantity
Debates about the effects of pesticides on humans and the environment have been dominated by the comparison of use rates (e.g. kilograms per hectare) or applied amounts (e.g. kilograms per year). But these weight-based measures are not necessarily informative because the toxicity of different pesticides varies hugely. In other words, the toxicity will depend not just on amount applied, but which pesticides are used.
That is why when the researchers looked at the type, amount, and toxicity of pesticides applied in the US over the last 25 years, they found that despite decreasing total amounts applied, toxicity — in particular to insects and aquatic invertebrates — has increased substantially.
With regard to GM crops, the researchers report increasing toxicity of applied pesticides to aquatic invertebrates and pollinators in GM maize and to terrestrial plants in herbicide-tolerant soybeans since approximately 2010.
The researchers call the toxicity arising from pesticides applied to crops the “Total Applied Toxicity (TAT)”.
GM Bt crops
In the most widely grown GM crop that produces a Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) insecticidal toxin, maize, the insecticide TAT increased. Considering only data for maize, of which 79% in the US in 2016 was Bt hybrids, TAT increased for both aquatic invertebrates (mainly because of pyrethroids) and terrestrial pollinators (mainly because of neonicotinoids) at the same rate observed for US agriculture as a whole.
The researchers verified that the toxicity per hectare of insecticides applied to Bt maize is equal to that for non-Bt maize. They suggest that the increasing insecticide TAT may be a result of preemptive, possibly unnecessary applications or pest resistance to the Bt toxins in Bt maize.
The authors reach a devastating conclusion for proponents of GM Bt crops: “Our analysis suggests that claims of reduced chemical insecticide use in US Bt crops simply reflect the considerably lower application rates required for more recently developed, more toxic insecticide classes,” whereas the TAT for pollinators and for aquatic invertebrates both continue to increase.
This finding will come as no surprise to regular readers of GMWatch as we flagged up flaws in the claims of reduced need for insecticides with GM crops that researchers were pointing to in 2012 and again in 2015, based on the failure to take account of rising toxicity in the insecticides applied.
Herbicide-tolerant GM crops
The researchers note that herbicide use has increased with the spread of herbicide-tolerant GM crops, which has led to a strong increase in the use of glyphosate. The TAT to terrestrial plants has increased steadily since approximately 2008 for herbicides in herbicide-tolerant soybeans, likely in response to glyphosate resistance.
While the researchers cite previous research as showing a downward trends for GM soybean herbicide toxicity to humans, this is false because the paper cited assumes a “relatively low chronic toxicity” for glyphosate. This assumption has been blown out of the water by the success of the lawsuits in the US, which blame exposure to Roundup (a glyphosate-based herbicide) for causing cancer. It is also belied by numerous studies attesting to other long-term toxic effects of glyphosate-based herbicides, including birth defects, neurological disease and DNA damage.
The focus of the paper is firmly on environmental effects, but the researchers point out that there are implications for human health, too: “Because 61% of US drinking water originates from surface waters, according to the EPA, TAT-based pesticide evaluations may also benefit human health evaluations.”
The researchers recommend “a system-centric view” of pest management in agriculture and suggest that organic agriculture can provide one of several useful strategies.
GMWatch agrees with the “system-centric” approach and notes that it is diametrically opposed to the reductionist approach of gene editing proponents, who claim that pesticide use can be reduced by altering individual genes in individual crops. An agriculture that relies on such supposed solutions is doomed to repeat the mistakes of the first-generation of GM crops, which are clearly laid out in the new paper.
Report: Claire Robinson and Jonathan Matthews
The new study:
Applied pesticide toxicity shifts toward plants and invertebrates, even in GM crops
Ralf Schulz, Sascha Bub, Lara L. Petschick, Sebastian Stehle, Jakob Wolfram
Science 372, 81–84 (2021). 2 April 2021
Read this article on the GMWatch site and access linked sources:
Bill Gates says rich nations need to move to ‘100% synthetic beef’
The assault on the beef industry continues with fake meat proponents seeking to eliminate meat, dairy and eggs from America’s dinner table.
Amanda Radke | Feb 17, 2021
Proponents of fake meats argued that their products would offer more consumer choice to feed a hungry planet. They argued that there was nothing wrong with calling a patty made from pea protein or cultured in a lab “meat.”
They said consumers were excited to try it, and we saw stocks in companies like Beyond Meat skyrocket.
Oh, and they wanted to take the easiest path of regulation and oversight possible, and we had to fight for an even playing field there, as well.
Then the attacks began: Traditional beef is bad for you, for the planet and for the animals. The imitation products, they claimed, were the ethically superior option. This was the wave of the future; get on board or get out of the way.
Then the Silicon Valley investors showed up. Then the traditional meat processors bought in. Then the fast-food chains took these products for a spin. Again, we were told, it’s about more consumer choice, not less.
Yes, we heard all of this, but we also knew that stacked side-by-side in the meat case, beef could compete and would win hands down, everytime. We know what we produce is a nutrient-dense, naturally produced, whole food that tastes great, that satisfies, that fuels the brain, builds muscles and boost immunity. And beef is a traditional food that’s enjoyed at summer barbecues, on date nights, for holiday celebrations and on simple weeknight meals at home. Beef is versatile, delicious and beloved by people here and around the world.
Even in the face of clear opposition where they are willing to steal our nomenclature while disparaging our products, the beef industry said, “BRING IT ON!”
But consumer choice hasn’t been the end game for these market disruptors. It’s an all or nothing deal.
You know, what the first thing that third-world countries do when they improve their economies and have more disposable income? They purchase animal products. They’ve long subsisted on beans and rice, and they want meat! That’s why we have seen such a growing beef demand in exports. People around the world are clamoring for great-tasting and nourishing beef from the United States!
And yet, back at home, folks like Bill Gates are suggesting that rich nations like ours should make the ultimate sacrifice and give up meat to tackle climate change.
To say I’m disturbed by recent trending headlines about fake meats is an understatement, but these headlines underscore the importance of sharing our story, of getting folks to fall in love with beef again and again and of countering the attacks and negative headlines that seek to strip meat, dairy and eggs off the dinner table and livestock producers off the land.
There is a huge payday ahead if they can regulate and shift consumer spending and eating habits. Follow the money and check out these headlines to see if you agree. Debate is always welcome!
Bill Gates: Rich nations should move to ‘100% synthetic beef’ by Cameron Jenkins for The Hill
“I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef,” Gates said when asked about how countries can help to reduce methane emissions when it comes to food production. “You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time.”
What happens when you stop eating meat by Hansa D. Bhargava for Nourish by WebMD
Bhargava claims, “Replacing meat with plant-based foods lowers carbon and other greenhouse emissions. It takes more land to raise livestock than it does to grow food. Growing food also uses less water.”
This cultured meat startup is making animal-free food for your pets by Sally Ho for Green Queen
Ho writes, “While people around the world are getting excited about trying cultivated meats for the first time in the near future, this startup is thinking about offering this experience to your pets. Based in Philadelphia, Because Animals is a biotech working on developing animal-free pet food using cell-based technology, and have already managed to produce the world’s first fetal bovine serum-free (FBS) cultured meat for cats from mouse tissue.”
Future meat technologies reduce cost of cultured chicken breast below $10 featured on PR Newswire
“Future Meat Technologies’ cultured chicken has a single-digit production cost for a quarter pound serving, providing the same texture and distinct aroma of farm-raised chicken meat through a unique blend of cultured chicken and plant proteins. The company plans to market its products to consumers and restaurants within 18 months.
“The company is backed by the leading forces in the food and agriculture industries including Tyson Foods, ADM, Müller Group and Rich’s Products Corporation, alongside leading venture capital investors such as S2G Ventures, ADM Capital, Emerald Technology Ventures, Manta Ray Ventures and Bits x Bites.”
Matrix Meats’ exec details nanofiber system that ‘mimics extracellular matrix found in living animals’ by Benjamin Ferrer for Food Ingredients First
“The Matrix Meats scaffold mimics the extracellular matrix found in living animals,” says Devan Ohst, director of F&D at Matrix Meats.
The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of beefmagazine.com or Farm Progress.
Identity of primary plant-based food consumers may surprise
Omnivores and flexitarians make up the lion’s share of consumers who are eating plant-based products.
Jan 29, 2021
Despite use of plant-based meat or dairy products being highest among those following vegan, vegetarian, or pescatarian diets, it’s omnivores and flexitarians who make up the lion’s share of consumers who eat these products due to their sheer numbers, according to market research firm Packaged Facts in the report “Vegan, Vegetarian, and Flexitarian Consumers”. This reveals that both the current and addressable market for plant-based products depends on omnivores and flexitarians using more of these products, especially beyond this month’s Veganuary campaign encouraging people to try a plant-based diet.
“Although plant-based meat and dairy alternatives do appeal to some vegans and vegetarians, they are more targeted toward the preferences of omnivores and the more plant-focused flexitarians who are most open to replacing animal products in their diet with other foods,” said Jennifer Mapes-Christ, food and beverage publisher for Packaged Facts. “Vegans and vegetarians make up just a small portion of the population, while omnivores and flexitarians combined account for the vast majority. Thus, these large groups represent a larger potential market for plant-based meat and dairy alternatives than the vegans and vegetarians these products were first developed for decades ago.”
Packaged Facts survey data reveals that protein from plant sources is considered healthy by 69% of U.S. consumers, compared to just 42% of consumers who think animal protein is healthy. People who have recently started to be vegan or vegetarian after eating meat or dairy may find these alternatives pleasing if they miss the taste or texture of meat or dairy, whereas experienced vegans and vegetarians may not miss these products and have often adapted their diet and lifestyle around plant-based foods that look and taste like plants. Some vegans and vegetarians simply find the idea of meat or dairy repulsive and thus have no interest in products that attempt to replicate their characteristics.
Many companies in the plant-based meat alternative space openly state their goal is to create an alternative that meat eaters will eat instead of meat. Companies may tout many reasons they make their products as an alternative to meat, such as being better for animal welfare or lessening the environmental impact of raising animals for slaughter.
Additionally, although some vegans and vegetarians may be interested in plant-based alternative products, those that have chosen their diet and lifestyle for health reasons are likely to reject many of these products because they tend to be highly processed and may have ingredients with an unhealthy perception that many consumers try to avoid, such as preservatives, soy, or gluten.
To those who are health-focused, foods that are more “pure” instead of “processed” are most appealing, meaning that alternatives that are engineered as a substitute for another product may be disregarded in favor of other foods. This is especially true of the clean label movement, which rejects foods with “unpronounceable” ingredients and looks for products that are unadulterated and wholesome.
In addition to vegans and those who are simply trying to consume more plant-based foods, plant-based dairy alternatives are also targeted at people who have dairy allergies or are otherwise sensitive to the lactose found in conventional dairy products. Lactose intolerance is increasingly common – or at least people are more aware of it – driving people who are otherwise omnivores to plant-based “milks”.
NOVAMEAT discovered a way to “bio-hack” plant-based proteins so they have a meaty texture. ~ Food Navigator
Making plants imitate the texture of a burger, a chicken nugget, or even a sausage can be tricky, sure; but imitating a chicken breast or fat-marbled steak is a whole other beast. ~ The Spoon
NOVAMEAT has developed a synthetic, 3D-printed meat that can mimic the texture of beef or chicken ~ BUSINESS INSIDER
CHECK OUT THEIR WEBSITE: https://www.novameat.com/ from Barcelona, Spain
Ouroboros Steak could be grown by the diner at home using their own cells, which are harvested from the inside of their cheek and fed serum derived from expired, donated blood.
The resulting bite-sized pieces of meat, currently on display as prototypes at the Beazley Designs of the Year exhibition, are created entirely without causing harm to animals. The creators argued this cannot be said about the growing selection of cultured meat made from animal cells.
Despite the lab-grown meat industry claiming to offer a more sustainable, cruelty-free alternative to factory farming, the process still relies on fetal bovine serum (FBS) as a protein-rich growth supplement for animal cell cultures.
FBS, which costs around £300 to £700 per litre, is derived from the blood of calf fetuses after their pregnant mothers are slaughtered by the meat or dairy industry. So lab-grown meat remains a byproduct of polluting agricultural practices, much like regular meat.
“Fetal bovine serum costs significant amounts of money and the lives of animals,” said scientist Andrew Pelling, who developed the Ouroboros Steak with industrial designer Grace Knight and artist and researcher Orkan Telhan.
“Although some lab-grown meat companies are claiming to have solved this problem, to our knowledge no independent, peer-reviewed, scientific studies have validated these claims,” Pelling continued.
“As the lab-grown meat industry is developing rapidly, it is important to develop designs that expose some of its underlying constraints in order to see beyond the hype.”
Ouroboros Steak, named after the ancient symbol of the snake eating its own tail, cuts out the need for other animals by drawing exclusively on human blood and cells.
The version on display at London’s Design Museum was made using human cell cultures, which can be purchased for research and development purposes from the American Tissue Culture Collection (ATCC). They were fed with human serum derived from expired blood donations that would otherwise have been discarded or incinerated.
Amuse-bouche-sized steaks are preserved in resin and laid out on a plate complete with a placemat and silverware as a tongue-in-cheek nod to American diner culture.
As part of the DIY kit, the team envisions users collecting cells from the inside of their own cheek using a cotton swab and depositing them onto pre-grown scaffolds made from mushroom mycelium.
For around three months, these are stored in a warm environment such as a low-temperature oven and fed with human serum until the steak is fully grown.
“Expired human blood is a waste material in the medical system and is cheaper and more sustainable than FBS, but culturally less-accepted. People think that eating oneself is cannibalism, which technically this is not,” said Knight.
“Our design is scientifically and economically feasible but also ironic in many ways,” Telhan added.
“We are not promoting ‘eating ourselves’ as a realistic solution that will fix humans’ protein needs. We rather ask a question: what would be the sacrifices we need to make to be able to keep consuming meat at the pace that we are? In the future, who will be able to afford animal meat and who may have no other option than culturing meat from themselves?”
Although no lab-grown meat has so far approved for sale in any part of the world, the market is estimated to be worth $206 million and expected to grow to $572 million by 2025, largely due to the increasing environmental and ethical concerns about the mass rearing of livestock for human consumption.
Among the companies hoping to bring cultured meat to market are Aleph Farms, which claims to have been the first company to make a lab-grown steak. Others have focused on substituting meat entirely, with Novameat creating a 3D-printed steak from vegetable proteins.
Warning — blog post may contain disturbing material about fake meats grown from human cells.
Amanda Radke | Dec 04, 2020
In recent years, I’ve provided updates from the meat case, where fake imitation products are inching their way into the traditional space where beef, poultry, pork and fish have been sold.
I’ve always contended that consumer choice and advancements in food science and technology are a good thing. But I also believe that transparency is critical to allow consumers to make informed choices when they are deciding what to add to their grocery cart.
And make no mistake, I don’t want to accidentally purchase a copycat substitute derived from a laboratory or plants. To ensure clarity and transparency, these products need to be clearly labeled, without hijacking our nomenclature, and designated to the vegan section of the store away from the animal products in the meat case.
Of course, that’s just my personal bias shining through. If you want to follow a plant-based diet, more power to you. I think it is critical to maintain our right to choose the diets that best fit our health and nutritional needs, our ethics and values, our budgets, our taste preferences and our personal choices.
Unfortunately, there are some who not only want to disrupt the meat case and introduce new, innovative products, but they want to eliminate our choice to enjoy animal fats and proteins. They want cattle off the range, producers off the farm and meat off the dinner table?
And these folks have come a long way from the initial introduction of the $300,000 lab-produced meat patty; however, I’ve always wondered exactly how far they would take this technology.
Turns out, they’ve got way, way too far in my book. In recent headlines, we see advancements in the fake meat movement here and around the world, and while companies are free to explore new pathways to success in a free market society, I simply must ring the bell on morality and ethics when it comes to this recent development.
A new company, called Ouroborus Steak,” will allow customers to grow their own meat using their own cells and donated blood. Cannibalism is here, I guess, but in this crazy 2020, is anybody really surprised we have sunk this low? Here’s a couple of headlines on this new company, along with a few others with updates on the general fake meat movement. Check them out and let me know what you think.
In the meantime, I’ll be over here praying for humanity. And if my appetite ever returns after reading these headlines, I’m going to go enjoy a real steak, produced from a real live steer, that grazed grass on the range and ate corn grown in a field — you know traditional, natural, wholesome beef. But I guess that’s taboo these days?
1. “Ouroborus Steak grow-your-own human meat kit is ‘technically’ not cannibalism” by Jennifer Hahn for Dezeen
“A group of American scientists and designers have developed a concept for a grow-your-own steak kit using human cells and blood to question the ethics of the cultured meat industry.
Ouroboros Steak could be grown by the diner at home using their own cells, which are harvested from the inside of their cheek and fed serum derived from expired, donated blood.”
2. “You are what you eat: DIY human steak installation ignites debate around the ultimate taboo – cannibalism” by Laura Brehaut for the National Post
Brehaut writes, “Human cells, mycelium, paper, plastic. This story starts benignly enough. But as with so many points of contention in our polarized world, it’s about context, engrained beliefs and a sliding scale of willingness to consider other points of view. A DIY meat kit is the crux of the debate — but this isn’t just any protein.
“Instead of using animal cells to produce chicken nuggets, meatballs or slices of steak, Ottawa scientist Andrew Pelling, industrial designer and scientist Grace Knight, and interdisciplinary artist, designer and researcher Orkan Telhan cultured human cells in human serum to grow blobs of, you guessed it, human meat.”
3. “1,000 years of fake meats” featured on Grist
In a video series, Grist features video footage of fake meat products. Here’s a description of the video: “We prepared six faux meat dishes from the past 1,000 years, ranging from mock lamb chops in 965 to the ‘bleeding’ Impossible Burger in 2016.”
4. “The other side of climate friendly foods” by Vibha Varshney for Down To Earth
Varshney writes, “Eating is intrinsic to every living organism. We eat what is around us, be it plants or animals, as long as we eat moderately. But now, making good food choices is progressively becoming difficult.
“Consider this. Managing the food system is now part of the new formula for fighting climate change. The food systems — that includes cultivation, storage, processing and managing waste — produce somewhere between 21-37% of greenhouse emissions.”
5. “In a global first, lab-grown chicken nuggets will soon be on the menu in Singapore” by Rasha Aridi for Smithsonian Magazine
“This is a historic moment in the food system,” Josh Tetrick, Eat Just’s chief executive, tells Mike Ives of the New York Times. “We’ve been eating meat for thousands of years, and every time we’ve eaten meat, we’ve had to kill an animal—until now.”
The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of beefmagazine.com or Farm Progress.
Could Beyond Meat Be a Millionaire-Maker Stock?
There remains a world of opportunity for growth, but whether it can be done profitably is the question.
Jan 5, 2021 at 8:45AM
After a disappointing third-quarter earnings report from Beyond Meat (NASDAQ:BYND), investors are questioning whether the growth story is already over. Shares of the plant-based meat alternative manufacturer have fallen 36% from their October highs.
While the stock soared 65% in 2020 and has risen nearly fivefold from its initial public offering price, undoubtedly creating quite a few millionaires who bet on the business early on, growth seems to have faltered significantly in a time when it should be expanding, so let’s see whether Beyond Meat still has what it takes to be a millionaire-maker stock in the future.
The elephant in the room
So why did Beyond Meat stumble? President and CEO Ethan Brown says consumers were still “freezer loading,” or bulk-buying products to ensure they had plenty of food available, but they simply weren’t doing it at the same rate as they had earlier on in the pandemic.
Sales tailed off dramatically in the latest period, rising only 2.7%, compared with 69% in the second and a 141% surge in the first. Coupled with a food service business that has been damaged by COVID-19-related shutdowns and reduced capacity limitations, Beyond Meat suffered a setback.
Yet another meat shortage like the one that hit early on in the coronavirus outbreak may be on the horizon, which could lead to a new round of panic buying. JBS, for example, the world’s largest meat supplier, has sent home about 8% of its U.S. workforce over rising COVID-19 cases. Beyond Meat could see consumers turn to its products once more.
The need for new and better products
Yet Beyond Meat can’t grow if all it’s doing is lurching from one crisis to another; that’s not a viable long-term strategy. It needs to continuously attract new customers to its products, who then become repeat customers.
To do so, it needs to continually innovate and look at all areas of protein substitution, including pork and chicken, which is allowing the plant-based meat alternative maker to enter new partnerships beyond just burger chains and the beef section of the supermarket.
Moreover, it plans to bring more production in-house to both lower its costs as well as allow it to expand distribution. It just completed the acquisition of a former co-manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania while also expanding capacity in Europe and China, all of which should help lower the cost of its products to be more competitive with “real” meat.
International expansion opportunities
International markets give Beyond Meat new avenues for growth as well. For example, it recently developed a new pork product specifically for the China market — a plant-based minced pork.
As China is the world’s largest consumer of pork, this represents a rich opportunity, though whether a plant-based alternative can shake cultural norms surrounding pork consumption remains to be seen. Rival Impossible Foods is also tackling the Chinese market.
This past summer, it also entered the Brazilian market of Sao Paulo with burgers, sausages, and ground beef substitutes. Brazil is the third largest meat-consuming country in the world, but Beyond Meat will have to face JBS and Mafrig, which also have plant-based alternatives.
That may be part of the problem. For as much as analysts forecast meat substitutes are becoming a multibillion-dollar opportunity in the years ahead, the expanding market has attracted numerous competitors, including international giants such as Nestle and home-grown rivals such as Tyson Foods. The list of consumer goods companies developing their own plant-based products is actually quite large and growing.
A rich future?
Analysts are famous for extrapolating out in an ever rising straight line the growth prospects of a fad or trend. All too often those forecasts turn out to be wildly exaggerated. Yet even if they’re right about plant-based meat alternatives, the field is crowded.
Beyond Meat as an early mover in the space still has a lot of growth left in it, and it has arguably tapped into consumer demand for plant-based meat alternatives better than the competition. Yet there also seems to be a finite market for its product — and only a certain subset of consumers are likely to be regular repeat customers.
Its stock is also quite pricey, it needs to show that it can have sustained growth outside of a global pandemic, and can rise above the competition. So while Beyond Meat has a long future in front of it, its ability to be a millionaire-maker stock looks constrained.
Should you invest $1,000 in Beyond Meat right now?
Before you consider Beyond Meat, you’ll want to hear this.
Investing legends and Motley Fool Co-founders David and Tom Gardner just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Beyond Meat wasn’t one of them.
The online investing service they’ve run for nearly two decades, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has beaten the stock market by over 4X.* And right now, they think there are 10 stocks that are better buys.
*Stock Advisor returns as of November 20, 2020
Trending Headlines: Policy changes on the way
Change is coming to rural America faster than the speed of light. Here’s a roundup of what’s new that will impact agriculturalists in the future.
1. “’30 x 30′ — Progressives pushing for massive federal land grab” by Spike Jordan for The Fence Post
Just a few days into office, President Joe Biden released a flurry of executive orders, among them, Executive Order 14008, “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad” (86 Fed. Reg. 7,619), which he signed Jan. 27. Contained in that order is the “30 x 30” program, a radical and aggressive push forwarded by environmental and climate change activists to put 30 percent of the land and water in the United States under permanent protection by 2030.
2. “Senate bill eyes $15 bill in grants for rural broadband buildups” featured on Merit Talk
The American Broadband Buildout Act is meant to bridge the digital divide between urban and rural America by “matching grants to assist states and state-approved entities build the ‘last-mile’ infrastructure to bring high-speed broadband directly to homes and businesses that lack it,” the senators said.
3. “Protect Animals from Unnecessary Suffering and Exploitation — Proposed ballot initiative could affect ranching” by Tabatha Stewart for Elbert County News
“The Protect Animals from Unnecessary Suffering and Exploitation — or PAUSE — proposed initiative for the 2022 ballot was filed with Colorado legislative staff last month. It aims to make some serious changes to the existing animal cruelty laws across the state.”
4. “Hammonds’ grazing permit rescinded by Biden administration” by David Steves and Monica Samayoa for OPB
The Biden administration’s Bureau of Land Management on Friday rescinded a grazing permit that was granted to Eastern Oregon ranchers who were previously convicted of arson on public lands. It reverses the decision by former President Donald Trump’s Interior secretary, David Bernhardt. He had granted the permit to Dwight and Steven Hammond on Trump’s final day in office. The permit gave the Hammonds the privilege to graze livestock on public land for 10 years.
5. “What’s in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 for agriculture?” for American Farm Bureau Federation
“Agricultural provisions of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 appropriate an estimated $10.4 billion for programs designed to strengthen the agricultural and food supply chain, e.g., animal surveillance or COVD-19 mitigation efforts for agricultural workers; additional resources to purchase and distribute agricultural commodities to nonprofits, restaurants or other food-related entities; increase access to health care in rural communities; and provide debt relief and other support programs for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.”
The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of beefmagazine.com or Farm Progress.
This Cultured Meat Startup Is Making Animal-Free Food For Your Pets
By Sally Ho Published on Feb 2, 2021 Last updated Feb 2, 2021
While people around the world are getting excited about trying cultivated meats for the first time in the near future, this startup is thinking about offering this experience to your pets. Based in Philadelphia, Because Animals is a biotech working on developing animal-free pet food using cell-based technology, and have already managed to produce the world’s first fetal bovine serum-free (FBS) cultured meat for cats from mouse tissue.
If you’re among the lucky few who have participated in cooking demonstrations and taste tests launched by cultivated food techs over the past years, or more recently have had the chance to order Eat Just’s cultured chicken bites in Singapore, then you’ve already had the experience of eating cruelty-free, sustainable yet real meat made directly from the cells of animals.
But what about your pets? While us humans are finding sustainable solutions to produce enough protein for our needs, this biotech wants to use cellular agriculture technology to bring a safer, more nutritious and environmentally-friendly alternative to current commercial pet food made from factory farmed meat.
Founded by Dr. Shannon Falconer and Joshua Errett in 2016, Because Animals is using the same cell-based technology that we currently use to make everything from cultivated burgers to seafood, to make 100% animal-free pet food. By 2018, the company launched its first product, a cell-based probiotic supplement for cats and dogs to support digestion and immunity.
Then in 2019, armed with its first seed funding from venture capitals like KEEN Growth Capital, Draper Associates and SOSV, Because Animals launched “noochies” for dogs, a certified-organic cookie made with cultivated nutritional yeast that provides B vitamins and proteins. Both products are currently sold via its e-commerce website.
But where Because Animals plan on taking it to the next level is creating an entire line of cultured meat pet food products, which it is hoping to release this year.
They’ve already developed their first prototype, which they claim is the world’s first cultured meat pet food made from cell-based mouse tissue, the ancestral diet of the cat, and notably required no antibiotics, growth hormones or the controversial fetal bovine serum (FBS) to produce – something that many startups still rely on to develop cultivated proteins.
By developing a proprietary media that provides the nutrients and growth factors needed for tissue to grow, Because Animals can ditch FBS, which is not considered cruelty-free because it involves extracting blood from pregnant cows at slaughter.
Not only does this mean that your pets don’t have to munch on something that contributes harm to other animals, but also that their food is far safer, healthier and doesn’t destroy the planet either.
While human food products undergo stringent tests and regulations, many pet food products slip through the cracks in terms of safety checks, with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) having to issue recalls on products due to reasons like pentobarbital contamination, an agent used to euthanise animals for their meat.
Current commercial pet food is also estimated to account for as much as a quarter of the environmental impacts of factory farms.
Because Animals isn’t the only startup developing pet food alternatives, though it remains a nascent category within the alternative protein space. Colorado-based Bond Pet Foods, for instance, is also focused on using cultivated meat technology to create animal-free proteins for pets, and has developed animal-free cultured chicken meat protein for cats and dogs.
V-planet, on the other hand, offer dog owners a range of 100% plant-based kibble products made from vegan non-GMO ingredients such as peas, ground oats, brown rice and potato protein, all of which are corn-free, soy-free, wheat-free and nutritionally complete for dogs. Since the San Francisco-born company launched in 2005, it has grown presence to more than 10 countries and has most recently entered the Japanese market.
Lead image courtesy of Because Animals.
Avant Meats Forms Strategic Partnership With Vietnam Seafood Giant To Bring Cultivated Fish To Market
By Sally Ho Published on Jan 27, 2021 Last updated Jan 26, 2021
Avant Meats, the Hong Kong-based food tech developing cell-based seafood, has announced a new strategic partnership with Vinh Hoan Corporation (VHC), the world’s largest pangasius fish producer based in Vietnam. The partnership will see Avant Meats leverage VHC’s global sales network and manufacturing capabilities, with the view to accelerate the commercialisation of its cultivated fish products.
Announced on Monday (January 25), the strategic partnership between Avant Meats and VHC stems from the Vietnamese seafood giant’s recent acquisition of Vinh Technology, its Singapore-based arm that holds a minority stake in the Hong Kong-headquartered food tech. Avant Meats will be able to tap into VHC’s vast global sales and industrial production capacities, which will help speed up its scale-up and go-to-market strategy.
VHC’s knowledge of customer requirements will provide valuable guidance for our product development and commercialisation.
Carrie Chan, Co-Founder & CEO, Avant Meats
The startup, who recently debuted the region’s first-ever prototype of fish fillet cultured directly using fish cells in a cooking demonstration by prominent Hong Kong-based Chef Eddy, will also gain access to Vinh Technology’s resources in agri-tech, food tech and biotech in relation to seafood.
“VHC is a global leader in aquaculture and functional proteins,” said Carrie Chan, co-founder and CEO of Avant Meats. “VHC’s knowledge of customer requirements will provide valuable guidance for our product development and commercialisation.”
“We look forward to working with Avant to commercialise a new generation of cultivated fish proteins for food and functional applications,” added Mdm Khanh Truong, founder and chairwoman of VHC.
As the world’s largest pangasius fish company, VHC’s decision to team up with Avant Meats is an indication of the pressure that conventional food and agriculture businesses are under to capitalise on shifting consumer trends towards healthier, safer and sustainable proteins.
Alternative protein solutions like cultivated meats have also been keenly eyed by industry stakeholders as a remedy to supply chain disruptions. Production sites for cell-based proteins can be set up virtually anywhere to boost local production, and would also eradicate the issue of livestock and aquaculture diseases that have wreaked havoc on farm stocks, from African swine fever to Div1 shrimp virus.
Avant offers a unique opportunity for us to diversify our future product portfolio to offer additional choices to address emerging consumer needs and trends.
Tam Nguyen, CEO, VHC
With regard to the seafood industry in particular, cell-based fish would present a solution to overfishing – an issue that is set to worsen due to a spike in demand as more people begin to replace red meats with seafood – as well as other environmental disasters related to fishing, from plastic pollution to carbon emissions and bycatch.
“Avant offers a unique opportunity for us to diversify our future product portfolio to offer additional choices to address emerging consumer needs and trends,” commented Tam Nguyen, CEO of VHC.
This news comes shortly after the Hong Kong cell-based startup bagged US$3.1 million in a seed funding round, which notably saw the participation of Markus Haefeli, the chairman of leading tilapia fish producer Regal Springs. At the time, Avant said it will use the financing to accelerate R&D and lower production costs in order to bring their cultivated seafood products to market in 2021.
While the world has yet to see the first cell-based seafood land on the market, it is likely that it would be far into the future, given Singapore has already given the first-ever regulatory approval for the commercial sale of cultured meat made by San Francisco food tech Eat Just.
All images courtesy of Avant Meats.
Russian Nonprofit To Launch Country’s First Animal-Free Food Tech Accelerator With ProVeg
By Sally Ho
Published on Feb 1, 2021 Last updated Feb 1, 2021
The newly-established nonprofit Association of Alternative Food Producers (AAFPP) has teamed up with ProVeg Incubator to launch Russia’s first-ever food tech accelerator. The partnership will see the two organisations work together to support startups developing sustainable alternatives to animal-based foods using plant-based, cell-based and other related technologies such as 3D bioprinting.
Russia will soon see the launch of its first-ever food tech startup incubator, created by AAFPP, a newly-formed nonprofit organisation founded by Julia Marsel and Tim Ponomarev, co-founders of Greenwise, one of Russia’s first plant-based meat brands and a ProVeg Incubator alumni. AAFPP will work together with Berlin-based ProVeg Incubator for the new incubator that will support companies developing animal-free alternatives.
Based in the Moscow and Kaluga region, the incubator is looking for entrepreneurs in Russia or the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) or are targeting the Russian and CIS market. Startups supported include those working on plant-based and cell-based foods, ingredients or proteins, as well as those developing novel food technologies such as bioprinting.
“We started as a plant-based brand but, over the years, we’ve broadened the scope of our activities and now see ourselves as drivers of Russian food tech,” said Marsel.
“In Russia, and other Russian-speaking regions, the alternative food market is still in its infancy and needs support. That’s why we decided to set up an organisation that, together with the ProVeg Incubator, will support startups and help to achieve our shared goal of a future food system that doesn’t rely on animal ingredients.”
Startups accepted into the program will go through four modules, which will help them refine their business concept, give them guidance on technological, legal and marketing skills, as well as connect them with experts, potential buyers and professionals in the food industry. At the end of the incubation program, startups will also get the chance to pitch their innovations to a panel of investors.
We started as a plant-based brand but, over the years, we’ve broadened the scope of our activities and now see ourselves as drivers of Russian food tech.
Julia Marsel, Co-Founder, AAFPP
ProVeg Incubator’s know-how and expertise in supporting startups will be leveraged in this new partnership, given its role in supporting more than 45 startups globally and having helped them secure funds totalling more than US$36 million since its founding two years ago.
Among some of its successful graduates are microbial fermentation dairy firm Remilk who bagged US$11.3 million last year, and Haofood, one of the first companies to develop vegan chicken out of peanut protein.
The potential impact of this project is enormous, given that the target region has a population of around 240 million people.
Albrecht Wolfmeyer, Head of ProVeg Incubator
Greenwise, an alumni of ProVeg Incubator themselves, have since their graduation in 2019, are selling their plant-based patties, strips, jerkies, fillets and cold cuts across more than 2,000 retailers in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, and have expanded their distribution footprint to Hungary, Estonia, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
“We are excited to be developing the market for animal-free food innovations in the Russian-speaking countries, together with the AAFPP. The potential impact of this project is enormous, given that the target region has a population of around 240 million people,” commented Albrecht Wolfmeyer, head of ProVeg Incubator.
“We will bring our experience and know-how to the table, having already built a pioneering food incubator, and look forward to mentoring startup founders and connecting them to partners from Germany and beyond.”
Lead image courtesy of Greenwise.
The complete Asia alternative protein directory, a databse of startups and ecosystem players from cell-based/cultivated to plant-based to fermented to whole foods.
Project Pollo: This Vegan Chicken Chain Founder’s Business Plan? Take Over 100 Fast Food Locations By 2024
By Tanuvi Joe Published on Mar 29, 2021 Last updated Mar 29, 2021
Through Project Pollo, a plant-based chicken fast casual dining chain featuring an entirely vegan menu, entrepreneur and founder Lucas Bradbury aims to make animal-free meat alternatives mainstream by opening 100 shops all across the United States within four years. The catch? He only takes over fast food chain store locations.
Kansas-based Bradbury had worked as a high-level executive with several traditional fast food companies including Hunt Brothers Pizza, Pizza Hut and Wing Stop. When he saw that traditional fast food chains were facing closures due to the pandemic, Bradbury, a vegan for the past four years, saw an opportunity to replace them with a cruelty-free concept.
He set up the first Project Pollo store in Texas in September 2020, right in the midst of the pandemic, in order to offer consumers vegan versions of sandwiches, strips, wraps, mac and cheese, and many more. On World Vegan Day, the shop served 1,600 vegan chicken sandwiches to customers, and riding on this success and demand, Bradbury plans to grow his animal-free products to reach wider audiences. Today, he has five locations in San Antonio and Austin and plans to have 12 over the course of 12 months across the State, most specifically in the Dallas and Houston areas. By 2024, he aims to have 100 shops across the country.
Each shop replaces a former fast-food restaurants. His most recent opening took over a former Jack-in-the-Box. For the next two location, the company plans to displace a Subway and a Church’s Chicken in April and May respectively. This coming spring, Project Pollo will open in a former Carl’s Jr.
So far, Project Pollo has been met with an enthusiastic response. In an interview with Veg News, Bradbury, who is also the co-founder of cocktail concepts Jet Setter and Pastiche, said: “We have seen a lot of businesses surrounding us that have lost everything, and it hurts. But we have also been fortunate to see some national chains shutter locations which give us the opportunity to try the alternative and save thousands of chicken lives every day.”
We have seen a lot of businesses surrounding us that have lost everything, and it hurts. But we have also been fortunate to see some national chains shutter locations which give us the opportunity to try the alternative and save thousands of chicken lives every day
Lucas Bradbury, Founder of Project Pollo
Bradbury further believes that vegan meat can be equally delicious and affordable, much like traditional meat, with the added benefits that it is being sustainable. “The future of consumption is without a doubt in plant-based foods; modern consumption favors such. [Fast-food] concepts are all at a pivotal point and must either adapt to the market, or step aside and let Project Pollo take over.”
Apart from its ‘make vegan meat mainstream’ mission, the shop ensures that it pays its employees higher than the regulated minimum wage. In addition, Project Pollo has initiatives in place such as the Original Project, whereby for each chicken sandwich sold, US$1 sales is donated to animal welfare charities. Bradbury also supports Free People Project, which aims to make plant-based food affordable and accessible for everyone. Through the pay-what-you-can item, customers can pay US$5.50 per sandwich, meaning that it not only includes your payment but also pays it forward for the next two people who can’t afford the meals.
The future of consumption is without a doubt in plant-based foods; modern consumption favors such. [Fast-food] concepts are all at a pivotal point and must either adapt to the market, or step aside and let Project Pollo take over
Lucas Bradbury, Founder of Project Pollo
The company’s aggressive expansion is underscored by Bradbury’s drive to displace as many meat businesses as possible. “Right now we are on pace to save more than one million chickens this year from being slaughtered and by doing so at scale, we can really challenge the system. I’m making it a priority to start shutting down Chick-fil-A’s, one of the largest U.S. chicken fast-food chains because there is an alternative and you do not have to sacrifice quality—we call it ‘challenging chicken.”
The alternative protein industry is showing explosive growth in the fast food space. For instance, recently, U.K.-based movement Veganuary’s co-founder Mathew Glover’s vegan fried chicken brand called VFC raised a total of GBP£2.5M (approx. US$3.4M) round of seed funding that will help the company scale its production of meat alternatives.
The Good Food Institute, a non-profit that tracks and supports the industry, recently published data that highlighted the sector’s growth, as it reached an all-time high with US$3.1 billion invested into the industry in just the last year.
Lead image courtesy of Project Pollo.
Plant-Based Boxer Claressa Shields Wins Big, Highlights The Benefits Of Animal-Free Diets
By Tanuvi Joe Published on Mar 31, 2021 Last updated Mar 31, 2021
Existing titleholder in the middleweight division of professional boxing, Claressa Shields, who recently won again at the junior middleweight division thus becoming the first woman fighter to win an undisputed championship in two weight classes, made use of the occasion to raise awareness about plant-based diets.
On March 5 2021, American professional boxer Claressa Shields entered the ring in her hometown Flint Michigan and dedicated her fight to raising awareness about the benefits of plant-based diets as well as equality for all women. The fight was also sponsored by Vejii, a vegan online market where consumers can purchase cruelty-free and plant-based foods, in a big to help increase the profile of plant protein diets.
By beating contender Marie-Eve Dicaire and winning the title of the World Champion, Junior Middleweight Division, Shields now holds the enviable GWOAT title, or ‘Greatest Woman of All Time’.
According to DAZN News, Shields told reporters after the fight: “It just doesn’t feel real to say undisputed twice. It’s kind of weird. It’s like some epic s—t. Also, I was trying to get the knockout. That’s what I really wanted. I’m happy, but I still wanted the KO. I just didn’t have enough time.”
The boxer emerged victorious from a young age- she won her first Olympic gold medal back when she was only 17 years old. After defending her middleweight gold medal in the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Olympics, she became a professional boxer, and has since has won nine world championship belts and two Olympic gold medals, making her the only boxer to ever win back-to-back.
I have been very vocal about (women’s sports) but after being vocal now you have to take action. And right here is taking action. Not being given chances by networks that don’t want to pay us what we want or need to be paid. This is where it all starts. And to me, this is taking a stand for equal pay and equal fight timeClaressa Shields, undisputed champion in two weight classes of U.S. professional boxing
With this win and her many achievements that she has, the GWOAT champion has been an important voice in raising awareness about the power of plant-based eating regimes, proving to the world that being on an animal-free diet that includes vegetables, fruit, legumes, nuts, and seeds, doesn’t make your performance any less than other athletes who aren’t on these diets, rather it helps you to excel in your sport.
Apart from supporting plant-based diets, Shields also raises her voice for qual pay and gender equality in the sport of boxing as well as outside it.
In an interview with Fox Business, Shields said: “I have been very vocal about (women’s sports) but after being vocal now you have to take action. And right here is taking action. Not being given chances by networks that don’t want to pay us what we want or need to be paid. This is where it all starts. And to me, this is taking a stand for equal pay and equal fight time.”
Apart from boxing, Shields also competes in mixed martial arts.
Several athletes have joined Shields in the adoption of plant-based diets and have shown the world its tremendous benefits like Novak Djokovic winning his ninth grand slam at the Australian Open, World Class Champion Surfer Tia Blanco, Chris Paul, Lewis Hamilton, and many more.
In a recent survey, data found that over a third of Brits are avoiding animal products due to documentaries like The Game Changers, famously backed by James Cameron and Arnold Schwarzenegger, that shows professional athletes praising vegan diets and holds their diets responsible for their wins across their various sports, including receiving titles like ‘Strongest Man in the World.”
The documentary highlighted that a switch to a plant-based diet leads to quicker recovery times, reduced delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS), faster injury healing, less joint pain, and increased career longevity as plants contain anti-inflammatory compounds and powerful antioxidants.
Recently, football team Real Madrid joined forces with plant-based meat brand, Meatless Farm, to reduce meat consumption and encourage sustainable eating habits among players’ as well as show the world that plant-based foods can be a part of a ‘balanced diet’, and only helps in the athletes’ performance.
To learn about powerful women that are forging the future of food and leading the way ahead in alternative protein, check out this power list here.
Lead image courtesy of Claressa Shields Facebook Page.
Fermentation-Based MeliBio Closes US$850K Pre-Seed To Make Real Honey Without Bees
By Sally Ho Published on Mar 31, 2021 Last updated Mar 31, 2021
California-based food tech MeliBio has announced a US$850,000 pre-seed round for its fermentation-based technology enabling the production of real honey without bees. The funding comes ahead of its soft launch slated for the end of this year, before a further commercial roll-out planned for early 2022.
MeliBio, the startup that uses synthetic biology, precision fermentation and plant science to create molecularly identical honey – with the same health benefits and delicious taste – but requiring no bees, has bagged US$850,000 in a pre-seed round of funding. The investment saw participation from Big Idea Ventures (BIV), the accelerator program that MeliBio has graduated from in New York, as well as Joyance Partners, 18.Ventures, Capital V and Sparklabs Cultiv8.
The first alternative protein rolling fund on AngelList, Sustainable Food Ventures (SFV), angel investor Courtney Reum and two impact-driven family offices from GlassWall Syndicate also joined the pre-seed round, MeliBio announced on Tuesday (March 30).
Commenting on the funding, CEO Darko Mandich, who founded MeliBio with Aaron Schaller, PhD in 2020, said: “We are thrilled to have support from the investors who believe in the world our company wants to create. That world is the place where the most delicious and nutritious food is accessible to everyone, but not at the expense of the sustainability of our planet.”
Until MeliBio, innovation was lacking in the alternative honey, with many vegans who avoid the bee-derived product due to ethical and environmental reasons relying on not-quite-the-same substitutes like maple syrup or blackstrap molasses.
With their proprietary technology, the food tech is taking aim at the lucrative US$9 billion money market and its destructive impact on the 20,000 wild and native bee species essential to our planet’s flora and fauna.
“If we don’t bring sustainability through innovation into this industry, it could seriously harm bees and humans. So I decided to move from Europe to California and join the emerging community that is working on producing animal products just without the animals,” Mandich previously explained in an interview with Green Queen Media.
We are thrilled to have support from the investors who believe in the world our company wants to create.Darko Mandich, Co-Founder & CEO, MeliBio
Biodiversity experts have for years raised alarm bells over the consequences of continued decline in pollinators like wild bees, who are different from honeybees. Almost three-quarters of the world’s food crops are dependent on these pollinators and their suffering numbers could pose serious problems for global food security. Some of the crops already vulnerable to the loss of bees are apples, cherries and blueberries, a recent study found.
MeliBio has the real potential to change not just the honey category but the whole sweetener and skincare industries with a new and sustainable way to create real honey without the bees.Andrew D. Ive, Founder & General Managing Partner, BIV
MeliBio says that the funding will fuel its growth, and puts the startup on track to deliver its vegan-friendly honey via a soft launch by the end of 2021 to supply B2B orders it received during its BIV accelerator program. The company is also in discussions with “potential partners from several countries,” and is planning to be able to make a commercial debut by the first half of 2022.
As the first player to be able to develop ethical and sustainable real animal-free honey, investors expect MeliBio to bring the much-needed disruption to not only the food industry, but also the widespread use of honey in skincare, cosmetics and medicine.
“MeliBio has the real potential to change not just the honey category but the whole sweetener and skincare industries with a new and sustainable way to create real honey without the bees. MeliBio has created the first truly vegan honey,” said Andrew D. Ive, founder and general managing partner of BIV.
18.Ventures partner Nik Talreja agreed, saying: “MeliBio’s honey is indistinguishable from traditional bee-made honey, and its properties enable food and cosmetic processors to cost-effectively and scalably introduce a variety of complex sugars into consumer products, with potentially broader appeal.”
Lead image courtesy of MeliBio.
Animal-Free Fats Startup Nourish Ingredients Bags US$11M In Li Ka-Shing Backed Round
ALT PROTEIN FERMENTED FOODS FUTURE FOODS
By Sally Ho Published on Mar 30, 2021 Last updated Mar 29, 2021
Canberra-based Nourish Ingredients has closed a US$11 million financing round co-led by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing’s Horizons Ventures and Main Sequence Ventures, the manager of the Australian government’s CSIRO Innovation Fund. Nourish says that the funding will go towards growing its team and range of sustainable animal-free fats and oils.
Nourish Ingredients has raised US$11 million in an initial investment round led by Horizons Ventures and Main Sequence Ventures, the company announced on Friday (March 26). Using its proprietary fermentation technology, the Australian biotech “brews” alternative fats and oils that are sustainable and animal-free, which can also be customised to suit varied flavour profiles and applications in alternative protein products.
The fresh capital raised will go towards Nourish Ingredients’ expansion plan, which includes growing its team and researchers and scientists and its product portfolio.
“This sizable funding allows us to add more brilliant, world-class talent to our team, expand our product range, and bring our fats and oils to even more customers across the globe,” said co-founder and CEO James Petrie in a statement. Petrie started Nourish Ingredients last year with co-founder Ben Leita.
“It’s a huge step toward the realisation of our biggest goal – to bring to the world tastier, more sustainable fats and oils that don’t necessitate the use of animal products.”
Nourish’s fats and oils will change the way the planet looks at this market by making their products taste just as good as the original, but better.James Petrie, Co-Founder & CEO, Nourish Ingredients
Fermentation is the rising “third pillar” within the alternative protein industry, with food tech players leveraging the technology to create novel animal-free alternatives that can range from super sustainable complete plant-based fungi proteins developed by Bill Gates-backed Nature’s Fynd, to Perfect Day’s animal-free real dairy ice cream.
Nourish Ingredients stands out as one of the few fermentation food techs dedicated to creating animal-free fats and oils, an essential ingredient to make alternative proteins replicate the sensorial, textural and taste of its real meat counterparts – such as the marbling on a cut of steak, or the elasticity of melted dairy cheese.
“We believe we are only in the infancy of how big the plant-based and alternative proteins market can really become,” said Petrie. “Nourish’s fats and oils will change the way the planet looks at this market by making their products taste just as good as the original, but better – and we couldn’t be more excited to be on the forefront of innovation in this category.”
Perhaps one of the most exciting innovations that Nourish Ingredients presents to the table is its platform that enables customisation – its fermentation process can be tweaked and tailored for different products, from seafood to pork and beef, so alternative protein producers can mimic the flavour and mouthfeel that consumers crave.
Our process allows us to create endless options sustainably from sugar-based feedstocks, with the flexibility to tune the triglycerides to the exact taste and feel that’s needed. The use cases for our fats and oils are literally limitless.Nourish Ingredients
“We’ve engineered a way to literally brew fats that have the same makeup as animal fats, without the animal,” the company explains on its website.
“Our process allows us to create endless options sustainably from sugar-based feedstocks, with the flexibility to tune the triglycerides to the exact taste and feel that’s needed. The use cases for our fats and oils are literally limitless.”
While Nourish is among the few food tech startups focused on fats, there are already a handful applying different technologies to develop animal-free alternatives.
While some firms such as London-based Hoxton Farms, Barcelona’s Cubiq Foods and Belgian startup Peace of Meat – who has recently been acquired by Israeli cultivated meat company Meat-Tech 3D – are tapping cellular agriculture to create molecularly identical animal fats, Boston-based Motif FoodWorks is aiming to create plant-based fats that are solid at room temperature.
Lead image courtesy of Nourish Ingredients.
FOOD SERVICE DIRECT
Looking for vegan grocery foods online?
I haven’t used this service, but as soon as I work my freezer and pantry down I’m going to.
They sell food online and in bulk primarily for restaurants but also for home consumer use.
To date they sell 564 vegan items – all located in one place, which makes shopping easier. Plus all the accidental vegan items, like pasta, rice, coffee etc. I don’t know of many grocery stores that sell 564 vegan items. And the ones that do sell vegan items are not easily accessible for most people.
Free shipping over $750.00. I know it sounds like a huge amount, but keep in mind that these items by the case are heavy.
You might want to get a few vegan or non-vegan friends to share the cost and product, since many of the brand names we’re all familiar with come by the case.
Check it out at their website: https://foodservicedirect.com
FACTORY FARM CONVERSIONS
There’s no better time nor climate in which to convert your animal factory farms to plant factory farms.
With unpredictable climate changes everlooming, the farms of the future will be more easily sustainable indoors.
Every facet of the operation can be controlled, from seed to harvest.
Imagine your plants thriving in absence of pesticides.
No animal products to be used in the process including fertilizers.
Imagine immigrants coming to America to work in state of the art converted PLANT FACTORY FARMS instead of coming to slaughter diseased animals in animal factory farms. I’m looking through God’s eyes to the future which is now, and so are you!
PURE PLANT FARMS by AFC GLOBAL.
It’s possible, prudent and economically viable.
WORD TO THE WISE: Don’t wait till it starts raining to buy an umbrella.
~ Sharon Lee Davies-Tight, The Animal-Free Chef
Most of your happiest most rewarding uplifting and even sad memories even funny memories are centered around eating a slaughtered animal. On a platter usually but it doesn’t need to be. Pizzas, subs and sandwiches are platters of sorts.
It’s hard to separate the two. The platter from the event.
The public relations departments of all slaughter industries and Madison Avenue know this and exploit it.
You are always at a momentous event when they advertise you with family friends lovers and neighbors gorging /binging on the slaughtered animal with oh so nice manners as you lift the tale of a zillion slaughters to your lips that tell the story behind the scenes always careful not to touch the mouth until the mouth door is shut and you continue to the end of the slaughter chain with the chew and swallow leaving no trace except what goes into the sewer to be processed into drinking water.
All in a meals work. Clean efficient and no suffering. Not at your end. That makes you safe. Clears you of all wrong doing. It’s the environmental conservation and reprocessing of dead animals into something life-affirming at it’s best. The animals didn’t die in vain after all.
Well, it seems to me that we could have found a better way to satisfy our appetite for energy and quench our thirst for mineral balance than pooing and peeing up the waterways that we would have had to purify and disinfect anyway.
That we found a way to turn a shit and piss hole into drinking water doesn’t excuse the barbarism against animals who resist the slaughter like any human animal would. If you can’t show your kids, then you know you’re doing wrong. Even most adults couldn’t stomach the noise and struggles to be free of the hanging people.
That we found a way to enslave torture slaughter does not mean we found a greener way. Not by a long shot.
As long as we keep animals under our command control and ownership, however we exploit them does not make the process green or greener.
To those who feign to care we can make a healthier drinking water out of poo and pee made from plants instead of animals.
Go for it.
I taste Monsanto in my produce.
My limes are too bitter, strong bitter.
My cabbage boils two hours and it’s still rubbery. It’s taking forever to boil potatoes, so I’m not any more.
My lettuce looks crisp on the outside and rotted in the middle.
My tomato skins texture like plastic. My salad is gone, yet those red skins remain in my mouth until I delicately remove them so they don’t stick to my esophagus while forcing to swallow them, because I’m in a restaurant and don’t want to spit them into my napkin.
My sweet red peppers have skin like plastic too.
My apples have skins so thick I have to peel them.
My grapefruits don’t look the same or taste the same inside.
My bananas, forget it. I haven’t had a normal one in months.
What’s this leading to? Everything gets put into a blender? Digestion beings in the mouth and with the chew. But this is too much chew. Should we bypass the first part of the digestive process? Do we need sharper teeth? Maybe that will happen on it’s own?
Is evolution in play here or is it Monsanto playing with evolution again?
Be careful said every wise person, only to be ignored until it was too late.
Then they all said the same, ‘If we had only listened to our own doubts instead of trying to make the nay sayers wrong. If we hadn’t stuck to our guns because somebody got in our face and we didn’t like it. If we hadn’t wanted to feed the world using unnatural substances by calling them organic because they could grow in a petrie dish. We fed our families what we fed the world. We thought we wouldn’t do that unless it was safe.
Was it safe? Was it worth it?
We don’t know. We don’t know.
Airlines facing huge COVID-related cost increases at Cleveland Hopkins airportAirlines facing huge COVID-related cost increases at Cleveland Hopkins airport
TAFC: BLAME IT ALL ON COVID. This is just the beginning.
Costs per passenger rising $10-12 dollars to start? Or more? If they don’t get public funding? Is this going to start looking like public housing? I’m not sure where the article was going with this except to warn the public that costs will be rising – dramatically.
Chances are, they’ll start with a small rise in fares. But then you begin getting charged for all the baggage or maybe they’ll even start weighing you and the baggage, then it goes up $30-40 dollars for the skinny people – just to be fair and not make the fat people angry, and on and on until only the people with large incomes will be able to fly; everyone else takes the rails, bus or car.
All the wealthy people will foot the high cost bills of flying, get plenty of leg space, in fact they’ll be able to get rid of some seats to accommodate social distancing. They’ll get great meals, and the carriers will be called Privilege Flights. Yeah, “It’s been a privilege to fly with you!”
“Let’s do it again, real soon, okay? Bring a friend with deep pockets. You know how we love pockets, the deeper the better.”
Free vaccinations too. Maybe a swag bag. And roll out a red carpet – in fact change all the carpet to red inside the plane. Guzzy it up.
I thought the airlines already got a huge bailout with the first allocation from CORONA give-aways. No? A $25 billion dollar bailout in 2020? What did they do with all that money?
People talk about a billion dollars like it’s a drop in the bucket. Like it’s a Kentucky Fried Chicken bucket, done extra-crispy.
What happens to all those investment dollars? How does accepting money from the government in the form of a bailout affect stock prices of airlines? Are people getting rich off of the bailouts, when they sell their stock, leaving the airlines without any money? How does that work? Does the bailout money get factored in? The public deserves to know.
How could a runway cost $645 million dollars two decades ago, that they’re still paying for? It’s practically a billion dollars for a runway at a minor airport. Something must be wrong with that figure. What banks are getting rich off of the interest on THOSE loans? I hope they’re at least Cleveland-based.
An investigation is warranted. Too big to fail usually means too big to be investigated and prosecuted for mismanagement of funds. Cleveland has a big corruption problem, so I’d start there.
Cleveland airport is small in comparison to other cities. People leave Cleveland, they don’t come here to live and work unless it’s for the government – generally. Is there going to be a big government expansion?
So what’s the rush to expand the airport when they haven’t paid for the last upgrades from two decades ago?
The thought of free money is burning a hole in their pocket.
Is this article a prelude advertisement for a new airport?
BLAME IT ALL ON COVID. In two years, COVID may be reduced to the common cold.
Then they’ll say, did we really need all of this?
Updated Feb 24, 2021; Posted Feb 24, 2021
Airlines operating at Cleveland Hopkins are facing a steep increase in airport fees due to the pandemic. The Plain Dealer
By Susan Glaser, cleveland.com
CLEVELAND, Ohio — The cost to airlines operating at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport skyrocketed last year, a function of the huge drop in passenger numbers and the facility’s high debt.
The loss of revenue in parking, food and beverage, retail and other non-aeronautical areas has to be made up somewhere – and the airlines are bearing the brunt of it, said Airport Director Robert Kennedy, in a discussion with Cleveland City Council’s Finance Committee this week.
The extra cost to the airlines couldn’t come at a worse time – as carriers are dealing with catastrophic financial issues of their own because of the coronavirus pandemic, and as the city gears up to ask them for a huge sum to build a new terminal in the years to come.
“This is going to be a difficult discussion over the next couple of years,” said Kennedy.
The airport’s budget – projected to be $151.5 million in 2021 – must be balanced without any city tax dollars. Revenues come from both the airlines, in landing and other fees, and non-airline areas, including rent, parking and other sources.
In recent years, airport officials have worked to decrease the costs to airlines of operating at Cleveland Hopkins, by increasing parking and passenger drop-off fees, for example, with the goal of making the facility more competitive as it vies for new service.
The airlines funded 46% of the airport’s costs in 2019. In 2021, the airlines’ costs to operate in Cleveland will increase by $21 million and make up 66% of the airport’s revenue, according to city figures.
The airport did receive $46 million in federal stimulus money in 2020, and is expected to receive another $9.7 million in 2021, but it’s not enough to stem the losses from the steep drop in passengers.
Airport officials project that 5.2 million passengers will travel through Cleveland Hopkins in 2021, a 48% decrease from 2019 numbers.
Industry analyst Robert Mann said Cleveland isn’t facing this financial crisis in isolation. “It’s an industry-wide problem,” said Mann, noting that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates three of the nation’s largest airports, recently asked the federal government for $3 billion to help make up revenue shortfalls.
He added, “Airlines aren’t in a mood to see increases on anything.”
At the same time, there’s only so much that airports can do to reduce expenses. “You have to maintain the ramps and the runways,” said Mann, principal at R.W. Mann & Co. in New York. “And you really don’t save very much by mothballing a terminal.”
In 2020, Hopkins’ cost per enplanement – that’s the average cost per passenger that an airline pays to operate at an airport – was projected to be $12. Instead, it was nearly $32, and is expected to be even higher in 2021.
Other airports in Cleveland’s competitive set – Columbus, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and others – also will see per-passenger costs increase, but are expected to top out at $10 to $15, according to Kennedy. “We are damaging our competitiveness,” he said. “This is what drives airlines elsewhere.”
Part of the reason for Cleveland’s high costs is the airport’s large debt, much of which stems from the construction of a new runway nearly two decades ago. At $645 million in 2019, Cleveland’s debt is significantly higher than Columbus’ $172 million, and Pittsburgh’s $43 million.
Payment on the airport’s debt in 2021 is expected to be more than $65 million – that’s 43% of the airport’s $151.5 million budget.
TAFC: BLAME IT ALL ON COVID. This is just the beginning.
How China Could Change the World By Taking Meat Off the Menu
Fri, January 22, 2021, 3:10 PM
A customer tucks into a meat-free banquet at Green Common café in Shanghai on Jan. 13
Credit – Xiaopeng Yuan for TIME
It’s lunchtime in Shanghai’s leafy former French Concession, and every table is crammed at David Yeung’s new café and grocery, Green Common. Office workers and shoppers huddled against the January chill are wolfing down plates of katsu curry, noodles and spicy dumplings.
For Yeung, the popularity of his first outlet on the Chinese mainland is a source of considerable pride, given that its doors opened barely two weeks earlier. But he’s more pleased by its other distinction: no animal products grace the menu at all. Instead, plant-based alternative proteins, sourced from China, Korea and the U.S., are used in these traditionally meat-based dishes. “The idea is to showcase some of the best products from around the world so that people can enjoy a mind-blowing vegan meal,” says Yeung, who is also the founder of the Hong Kong plant-based protein firm OmniFoods.
The buzz around Green Common is another sign that China is on the cusp of a plant-based-protein revolution that has investors as well as diners licking their lips. China came by its love of meat only recently; in the 1960s, the average Chinese person consumed less than 5 kg of meat annually. But as in comes soared following Deng Xiaoping’s market-driven “reform and opening” of the late 1970s, consumption rose to 20 kg per capita by the late 1980s and has now reached 63 kg. Today, China consumes 28% of the world’s meat, including half of all pork.
But as in rapidly modernizing societies everywhere, today’s Chinese are embracing healthier lifestyles, not least following health crises like the coronavirus pandemic and African swine fever (ASF), which wiped out half of China’s hog herd between 2018 and 2019.
China’s market for plant-based meat substitutes was estimated at $910 million in 2018—compared with $684 million in the U.S.—and is projected to grow 20% to 25% annually. KFC has begun selling plant-based chicken nuggets. Yeung’s pork substitute OmniPork is now on the menu across China at thousands of Taco Bell and Starbucks branches, where it is used to make everything from tacos to salads.
Competitor Z-Rou—rou is Mandarin for meat—is offered by supermarkets, restaurants and two dozen school canteens.
The implications could be transformative not just for China but also for the world. More than any other nation, China has the ability to leverage economies of scale. It has done so many times before: some of China’s richest entrepreneurs positioned themselves at the vanguard of breakthrough technology slated to receive huge state backing, such as solar panels, mobile payments and electric vehicles.
Li Hejun, dubbed the nation’s solar-panel king, rose to become China’s richest man in 2015 with a fortune worth $30 billion by riding a wave of renewable-energy subsidies that also caused prices to plummet and spurred widespread their adoption. State backing for AI unveiled in 2016 helped spawn top tech firms including TikTok parent ByteDance, the world’s most valuable unicorn, worth some $100 billion.
Could the state do the same for meatless meat? Just as international food conglomerates like Nestlé, Unilever and Cargill are plowing millions into plant-based protein, Chinese competitors are jostling for market share in anticipation of huge state contracts and government perks like tax breaks and free factory space.
David Ettinger, a partner at Keller and Heckman LLP’s Shanghai office, says now is “the most exciting time” of his two decades specializing in food law: “Rather than managing things, I think China will let the industry lead.”
The largest impact may be not on the economy but on the environment. China has already pledged to see carbon emissions peak by 2030 and make the world’s worst polluter carbon-neutral by 2060. As livestock farming produces 20% to 50% of all man-made greenhouse gases, finding alternative protein sources is crucial to meeting these targets. Halving China’s animal-agriculture sector could result in a 1 billion metric-ton reduction of CO2 emissions.
Crucially, state action could have real consequences—China’s authoritarian system enables it to dictate commercial priorities and consumer behavior across its 1.4 billion population. While Donald Trump disparaged global warming as “an expensive hoax,” Joe Biden has called it “an existential threat.”
Whether the superpowers can work together on this issue may ultimately define whether the world can meet its emissions targets over the next decade. “You can’t do anything on climate change unless you bring China with you,” says professor Nick Bisley, dean of humanities and social sciences at Australia’s La Trobe University.
The ripple effects would be felt globally. Apart from reducing carbon emissions, water consumption and the risk of zoonotic pathogens entering the human population, switching to plant-based protein can help safeguard rain forests cleared for the cultivation of animal feed and protect people against the heart disease, cancer and diabetes associated with heavy meat consumption.
There’s still some way to go before China eagerly embraces novel proteins. The higher cost and un-familiar taste of meat substitutes may prove to be obstacles to turning plant-based protein into an everyday staple across the world’s largest population. Regulators also need to give the industry sufficient room to flourish.
But entrepreneurs like Yeung say it’s getting easier to make a case to bureaucrats and consumers alike. “After the last few years, it’s no secret that meat production is infinitely risky,” he says. “Disease and extreme climate issues are sadly not going to change unless we make a change first.”
Until recently, the primary motivation for people to shun meat was concern for animal welfare. Not anymore. Today, broader concerns about the environment and health are energizing millennials and Gen Z globally to embrace flexitarian lifestyles, where animal products are purged from diets at least some of the time. As in the U.S., China’s cosmopolitan cities are leading the way. In 2008, just 5% of Hong Kongers classified themselves as vegan or flexitarian, according to a Hong Kong Vegetarian Society survey. Today, it’s 40%.
Following the coronavirus outbreak, which was first detected in China, governments and consumers around the world are more cognizant of the swelling risks posed by industrial farming and reliance on imported food. But COVID-19 wasn’t the only, or even the first, alarm bell.
The ASF outbreak that decimated China’s pig population in 2019 resulted in national pork output hitting a 16-year low. In December, Japan suffered its worst avian flu outbreak on record, which led to the culling of 5 million chickens. Vince Lu, the founder of Beijing-based alternative-protein firm Zhenmeat, says the pandemic, the trade war and environmental degradation are galvanizing interest in plant-based proteins.
“China urgently needs an alternative meat supply,” he says. “It’s about national security.”
Chinese consumers have turned plant-based meat alternatives into a $910 million industry and growingXiaopeng Yuan for TIME
Signs are building that the state will put its weight behind plant-based meat.
China’s government has published guidelines to cut meat consumption in half by 2030 to reduce pollution and combat obesity. In August, President Xi Jinping launched a “clean plate campaign,” calling food waste “shocking and distressing” and highlighting the need to “maintain a sense of crisis about food security” in China.
For David Laris, an Australian celebrity chef and environmentalist who has had restaurants in New York, Hong Kong, Shanghai and London, “It’s just a matter of time before Xi says we’ve all got to eat less meat in a big way.”
Culturally, the Chinese are perhaps better placed to embrace plant-based protein than Americans indoctrinated by a powerful meat lobby and a founding myth built around cowboys and beef ranches. (Even so, many Americans are fast changing their eating habits; alternative milks like soy, oat and almond accounted for less than 1% of the overall U.S. market a decade ago. Now it’s 12% and growing.)
In China, by contrast, “mock meat” has been popular with Buddhists, who often do not eat meat, since the Tang dynasty, with tofu a substitute for fish and taro for shrimp. Fried dough sticks dunked in soy milk—records of which date back 1,000 years—remain a popular breakfast across the Middle Kingdom. Vegetarian restaurants are commonplace near Buddhist temples and shrines.
Every Chinese supermarket stocks a dazzling array of bean curd and substitute meat products made with gluten.
This kind of familiarity is helping plant-based protein go beyond the purview of “tree huggers,” as Yeung puts it.
In January, Chinese fried-chicken franchise Dicos—a KFC rival and one of China’s top three fast-food chains—swapped the real egg in all its breakfast sandwiches with an alternative derived from mung beans made by California-based Eat Just.
At the BrewDog pub in Shanghai, customers quaff craft porters and pilsners over games of shuffleboard while ordering nachos and burgers from a menu that proudly offers both meat- and plant-based options. “Around 30% of sales today are plant-based,” says general manager Gabriel Wang.
Eat Just CEO Josh Tetrick, who recently opened his first foreign office in Shanghai, predicts that by 2030 the majority of eggs, chicken, pork and beef consumed by urban Chinese won’t require animal ingredients. “It’s going to happen a lot faster than people realize, and Asia will lead the way,” he says.
But popularizing plant-based meat beyond China’s cities might be a greater challenge. Government guidelines promoting plant-based proteins for factory canteens and school cafeterias would play an enormous part in reducing costs and raising public awareness. Some private schools are already electing to feed students with meat alternatives; for example, Dulwich College high school in
Shanghai serves weekly meals prepared with Z-Rou. But as budgets for lunches in government-run schools stand around 7 rmb ($1.08) per student, state intervention in the form of subsidies and mandatory quotas may be necessary to make plant-based options feasible across the board. Given the potential size of school contracts, this could be transformative—and also familiarize the next generation with meat alternatives. “If we want to win a customer for life, students are a great place to start,” says Z-Rou founder Frank Yao.
The fact that plant-based proteins are currently priced considerably higher than their animal equivalents is an undeniable hurdle for notoriously thrifty Chinese consumers. Yet this is expected to change as competition and scale drive down costs.
Moreover, snowballing agricultural crises like avian flu and ASF can make meat prices extremely erratic. Pork prices more than doubled in China in 2019 following an ASF outbreak, making it extremely difficult for restaurateurs to both keep customers smiling and turn a profit. That plant-based proteins are largely immune to such fluctuations—and help mitigate disease outbreaks that cause spikes in meat prices—is a huge boon across the industry.
The biggest barrier to plant-based meats might be its most elemental: taste. While the industry has come on by leaps and bounds over recent years, elderly Chinese so obsessed with freshness that they trawl wet markets that sell meat and fish could prove a stumbling block to widespread adoption of processed, packaged alternatives.
That will change over generations, for sure, although now the race is on to engineer plant-based meat products specifically to Chinese tastes. Whereas the popularity of ground beef in the West makes it the obvious starting point, Chinese diners typically have far wider tastes, including meatballs for hot pot, filling for dumplings or strips of meat for stir-fries. Zhenmeat is even working on a plant-based shrimp substitute. “Right now, the technology’s not ready for plant protein to make the texture of a chunk or slice of meat,” says Zhenmeat’s Lu. “It will require investment and patience.”
Still, the technology is so undeveloped that there is endless potential to improve taste and cut costs. There are existing protein-synthesis techniques—incorporating fermentation, micro-algae and insects—used in cosmetics, biomedicine or industry processes that could potentially be repurposed for food.
“We’re starting from scratch here,” says Yao of Z-Rou. “So why can’t China create brands and have a seat on the table for what the future of food is going to be?”
Albert Tseng, co-founder of impact investment firm Dao Foods, is backing 30 startups that focus on the Chinese plant-based-protein market, including established player Starfield.
One venture is utilizing cell-based meat, or animal protein grown in a laboratory. Although more controversial than synthesizing meat from everyday plant materials like soy or wheat, the technology is growing fast. In 2017, China signed a $300 million deal to import cultured-meat technology from Israel.
At last year’s Two Sessions annual parliament, Sun Baoguo, president of the Beijing Technology and Business University, argued cell-based meat alternatives were a matter of “strategic importance” to “guarantee China’s future meat supply.” For Tseng, “there are the talent, resources and capital in China to really build this industry.”
It’s already happening elsewhere. In November, Eat Just, the maker of Just Egg, became the first firm anywhere to receive regulatory approval for selling cultivated meat, after being given the green light in Singapore for its lab-grown chicken.
With the coronavirus galvanizing anxiety over the fragility of food supply chains, the tiny city-state has set ambitious new targets to produce 30% of its food domestically by 2030. But given that less than 1% of Singapore’s 270-sq.-mi. area is agricultural land, innovations like vertical farming and cellular meat will be key. Many other governments are becoming more accepting of alternatives.
“In places like China and Singapore, there’s less of a fixation about what happened yesterday and more on what makes sense for today and tomorrow,” says Tetrick.
There would be losers in a major shift toward meat alternatives. Beyond the disruption to China’s $82 billion meat market, there’s also the fact that 60% of soy grown across the world is currently shipped to China, mainly for animal feed.
The success of plant-based protein may decimate crop demand and prices worldwide, upending markets and roiling politics. The question for all, says Yeung, “is do the collective wins outweigh the losses?”
Given the weight of scientific evidence, it’s growing ever harder to justify eating meat as simply a personal choice. Much like smoking in public, Yeung says, eating steak and bacon every day has collateral environmental impact that jeopardizes the future of everyone.
China, like the world, is waking up to the risks of asking our planet to support 7.7 billion people as well as 677 million pigs, 1.5 billion cattle, 1 billion sheep and 23 billion chickens. “The reality is that industrial livestock farming isn’t sustainable,” says Yeung. “We don’t have a choice. We have to change.”
With reporting by Madeline Roache/London
This appears in the February 1, 2021 issue of TIME.
GMO boosters suffer logic bypass in using COVID vaccines to promote GMO deregulation
Authors arguing for deregulation of GM crops and foods fail to mention that vaccines are tightly regulated – scientist
Earlier this month we published an article reporting how pro-GMO spin doctors are using COVID-19 vaccines to promote GM crops. Examples of this phenomenon are now coming thick and fast, with the latest being published in a peer-reviewed journal. But that doesn’t make it any less fatuous than the other examples. And notably, many COVID vaccines are not genetically engineered at all.
So the authors have to fudge the issue by using vague wording.
In the new article in EuroChoices, a journal focusing on agricultural and food issues, agricultural economist Justus Wesseler and life sciences professor Kai Purnhagen cite “the contribution of biotechnologies to the creation of a vaccine” for COVID-19 to argue for a weakening of the EU’s GMO regulations. They argue that this will allow the “potential” of GMOs, and in particular new GM techniques such as gene editing, to be realised.
Their article is titled, in hope, “COVID-19: A game changer in GMO regulation?”
Dr Judy Carman, epidemiologist, biochemist, and director of the Institute of Health and Environmental Research in South Australia, took issue with their argument.
She commented, “It seems that the authors would like to hitch a ride on the roll-out of the vaccines for COVID-19, in order to push an agenda for GM crops. I’m sure we are going to see a lot more of this argument in the future.
“However, my concern about GM crops has always been their lack of safety testing.
“The authors are conveniently forgetting that the vaccines were safety tested on animals, then went through Phases I, II and III of human clinical trials to determine safety, and are undergoing post-vaccination monitoring for safety (Phase IV), whereas those who make GM crops have no intention of putting their crops through any of that, because, based on a series of assumptions rather than evidence, these crops are apparently so safe, they don’t need such testing.
“So in my view, if they want to argue that their crops are as safe as these vaccines, they can first safety test them like these vaccines, publish the evidence in peer-reviewed scientific journals for us all to see, and then go through the kind of regulatory process that the vaccines have gone through.
“Instead, they want their GM crops to avoid safety testing and be deregulated.”
Clearly these GMO boosters have suffered a logic bypass in attempting to exploit people’s fear of COVID-19 to justify allowing untested GMOs into our food supply.
Read this article on the GMWatch site and access linked sources:
1st CASE PASSED FROM BIRD TO HUMAN – when will the world learn to stop eating animals? I wouldn’t feel safe with this situation unfolding.
Wendy’s unveils new chicken sandwich week ahead of McDonald’s
FILE PHOTO: Chickens await vaccination against bird flu at the settlement Peredovoi near Stavropol
Polina Devitt and Gabrielle Tétrault-Farber
Sat, February 20, 2021, 6:19 AM
By Polina Devitt and Gabrielle Tétrault-Farber
MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russia has registered the first case of a strain of bird flu virus named A(H5N8) being passed to humans from birds and has reported the matter to the World Health Organization (WHO), Anna Popova, head of consumer health watchdog Rospotrebnadzor, said on Saturday.
Outbreaks of the H5N8 strain have been reported in Russia, Europe, China, the Middle East and North Africa in recent months but only in poultry. Other strains – H5N1, H7N9 and H9N2 – have been known to spread to humans.
Russia reported the case of human infection to the WHO “several days ago, just as we became absolutely certain of our results,” Popova said on Rossiya 24 state TV. There was no sign of transmission between humans so far, she added.
The majority of human bird flu infections have been associated with direct contact with infected live or dead poultry, though properly cooked food is considered to be safe.
Bird flu outbreaks often prompt poultry plants to kill their birds to prevent the virus from spreading, and avoid importing countries having to impose trade restrictions.
The vast majority of cases are spread by migrating wild birds, so producing countries tend to keep their poultry indoors or protected from contact with wildlife.
Seven workers at a poultry plant in Russia’s south had been infected with the H5N8 strain when there was an outbreak at the plant in December, Popova said, adding that the individuals involved felt fine now.
“This situation did not develop further,” she added.
Siberia’s Vector Institute said on Saturday it would start developing human tests and a vaccine against H5N8, RIA news agency reported.
The WHO did not reply to a Reuters request for comment.
(Reporting by Polina Devitt and Gabrielle Tétrault-Farber; Editing by Mark Heinrich and David Holmes)
After receiving no satisfaction from Facebook on being allowed to respond to their banning actions, except to say I disagreed, I saw a support tab where I could make a complaint to be used by Facebook to better their service – nothing to do with the ban. It was a separate location for complaints.
This was the gist of what I wrote:
‘I’ve had a massive attack on my Facebook page and profile, most of which I was able to delete, then you banned me for 3 days, without appeal, like this is a court and I’m being denied due process.
I can easily do without Facebook, but you need to be fair. I did not engage with any of the attackers.
Even after I was banned you allowed them back in to verbally assault me again. I have a right to my views. The posts referred to were from Word Press. But they attacked multiple posts and there were some pretty gruesome threats.
I never once called anybody a name, like I said I didn’t engage.
They attacked me en masse, knowing that it would appear like my posts were inciting them, when that was their strategy to take me down, because they don’t want my voice to be heard.’
The only voice allowed is theirs. They know that Facebook will remove anybody who incites people, so they feign incitement, by flash commenting their hatred toward an individual. Their language was despicable. Facebook said they reviewed it and agreed with them.
I woke up to the carnage this morning. It took me hours to remove all the hate comments.
I wasn’t even on Facebook when it happened, which means it was a planned attack against my first amendment rights. Facebook took mine away, and gave the attackers free reign. I’ve seen the same scenario in multiple cities in the USA where attackers were allowed to unleash their hatred onto people with impunity.
Given that the attack was personal and given that many of the commenters appeared familiar with my writing, it is my view that the attack was orchestrated by Black Lives Terrorists and the British Antifa supporters.
They targeted my profile picture and individual posts on the animal-free chef page.They simultaneously went to my profile page and used a lot of frowns and laughter on multiple posts, then accessed my messages.
They also went to my YouTube and Twitter accounts to continue the attack. Also my Word Press account.
They also gained access to my home telephone number and evidently while the attack was in progress tried to call me numerous times. I immediately deleted them. Just before the phone rang, it started signaling multiple notifications from Facebook, so I put the phone on silent mode as the phone instructed me to do in another notification.
Now for three days that I’m banned, the attackers are already continuing their hate-filled spree. All name-calling and shaming using multiple slurs. Yet, to Facebook that is appropriate.
One of the posts that was in question was a news story on a black father beating his two sons while waiting at a train or bus stop.
If this is the British answer to making the world a better place, then the British lost.
If this is the African answer to making the world a better place, then the Africans lost.
They both lost when they worked in tandem to plan the attack.
P.S. MADISON AVENUE must not have liked my article on criticizing their M&Ms SUPER BOWL AD regarding the gender and racial slur, KAREN. That was one of the posts taken down. Money talks. It got 614 views and rising.
Looking back now, there were some comments that now make me think those posts were paid for ads. I didn’t pay for any ads. A few years ago I paid for one animal rights ad and was slaughtered for it. That’s not something I would do again.
Frankly, I was shocked that they went to the animal-free page, since there’s hardly any activity there. It just acts as a depository for my Word Press articles, since Facebook stopped allowing Word Press to post articles in the news feed of profile pages a while ago.
The attackers knew that on an ads page advertisers don’t like anything controversial on the sites. But since I wasn’t taking out any ads, then what’s the problem; the posts just sit there. One commenter even said I could have used my money a bit better, but I didn’t know what she meant. I wasn’t able to respond to the comment.
If somebody paid for an ad on my site, then I have a right to know who, and if someone didn’t, then I’d have to suspect that someone employed by Facebook circulated my posts on behalf of Black Lives and Antifa – they have people everywhere waiting for an opportunity to exploit someone. Maybe they think I have a bunch of money.
Any time I look at that Bull Market Kitchen page, most posts don’t get put in other people’s feeds, and some show 1-2 people can see it in their feed. It doesn’t mean it’s viewed.
Quite a while ago Facebook locked me out of my regular Facebook account until I opened an ads page claiming I was a business. I protested, because I’m not selling anything, but they didn’t budge, so in order to get into my regular Facebook account I had to design another site on a Facebook page – The Animal-Free Chef. They wanted me to pay for people to see my work, but when I did, like I say, I was slaughtered. It wasn’t controversial, but Facebook said I needed to declare it was political, which I did.
There were so many posts corrupted with filth and insults meant to render me hopeless and drive people away from the site, so I closed that page and opened another one called Bull Market Test Kitchen.
And here I am – slaughtered again, when I didn’t even take out an ad. If I delete the page, they’ll freeze my regular Facebook account.
I’m not selling anything, so why the need for a Facebook ads page?
Now I have to think about my options and freedom of speech concerns. If Facebook looked at it, like they said they did, then they’d have to see the awful names I was called – gender and racial slurs. How Facebook could justify the attack and the hateful slurs against well-written educational articles on race and gender might have to be litigated in a real court room to find the real answers.
THE CATTLE MARKET perspective on vaccines:
From BEEF MAGAZINE:
What they should be doing is administering these to the cattle.
86 POSTS ON VACCINES on BEEF MAGAZINE site proves cows and other animals receive vaccines.
Frozen Vaccines for cattle – they do it with other vaccines, for other cow diseases, but are not yet doing it with coronacovid19
Clint Peck Contributing editor | Jan 01, 2007
Chances are, when you purchased a new refrigerator for the house, you moved the old one to the barn. Problem is, in addition to being worn out, these old units can be very inefficient compared to modern refrigerators. They freeze items placed near the rear element; in the summer, they barely keep cool because the doors don’t seal well.
Freezing is one of the worst events that can happen to livestock pharmaceutical products. It’s something that can easily happen to everything in the old ‘fridge over a large part of the country during the winter.
“Improperly stored vaccines are a leading cause of immune response failure,” he says. “Not only can this mean money down the drain, but when we use these improperly stored vaccines, we get a false sense of security that our cattle are protected.”
Most labels suggest storing vaccines between 35°F and 45°F….
Humans are animals, so the virus jumped from animal to animal! Have they started testing cows, pigs, lambs, chickens and all the animals the world eats yet?
No, because there’s no science to warrant it.
If it can spread rapidly from human animal to human animal and from non-human animal to human animal, then we need to look at all the non-human animals we eat and see if the virus jumped from non-human animal to non-human animal. Of course it did. Just like it jumped from human animal to human animal. You don’t need a degree in how to raise animals for slaughter to figure that out.
The slaughter industries and governments around the globe are blocking it. That’s a lot of power invested in keeping silent about the food the world eats.
Cattle are given vaccines against other viruses, so we know they can catch viruses. From whom, what animal, do these cows catch these viruses? And do they pass them into the food you eat?
Well yes, if they’re infected and you eat an infected animal. So why so slow to focus on the animals we eat as being carriers and spreaders? Why would they be given vaccines if they can’t spread viruses?
MONEY TAKES THE PLACE OF SCIENCE when someone says there’s no science to back the claim. There’s no science, because there was no testing. And even if they’re pressured to test, they’ll conduct the research in such a way as to obtain the results they seek = no connection.
Animal exploiting industries are the foundation of the world economies. Mess with those economies by messing with the animals they use to support those economies and the people who drive to protect those economies will mess with you.
Two people eating M&M’s a boy and a girl:
“Sorry for calling you Karen.
My name is Karen.
Sorry your name is Karen”.
TAFC ClipBoard: Goodwill says himself it’s about money. Sports is a product. What happened to all the black vegans that surfaced during the riots, claiming if white people joined their camp, they’d stop eating animals? Did they? Lots of white people joined the riots and lots of black people claiming to be vegan still eat animals.
Sharon Lee Davies-Tight 2.7.2021
MADAV shows it pays to trash white people. That’s just the beginning of what they exposed.
MADISON AVENUE Exposes The Truth In Super Bowl 55 choreography and ADs
Don’t you think you have the right to know what vaccines they are?
Or maybe that right to know what’s in what you’re buying and eating has been wiped out by some law allowing ranchers to keep you unaware. Then, who wrote and passed those laws unbeknownst to the consumer?
Demand total transparency.
How many different vaccines do animals get and how often from birth to slaughter?
In addition demand a list of all the drugs and foods with ingredient lists, consumed by and/or administered to each animal.
How effective are they and what diseases do the the vaccines prevent?
How about side effects and adverse reactions? How do the animals report side effects and adverse reactions?
How do they affect humans? Somebody must know the science behind it. Or is there any science?
These are valid questions every consumer needs to have answered.
Before consuming any product demand to know it’s history. Being raised in a pasture with loving caretakers is not the answer to the questions needing answering, so don’t try to evade the issue.
Eating animals kills people.
SUPREME WESTERN SCRAMBLE
Decades ago when I was a kid, we had Western omelets for Sunday supper, that is if we had ham for Sunday dinner. A Western omelet is made out of ham, green pepper, onion and egg. An Eastern omelet is made from ham, green pepper and egg. We always chose the Western and I added the tomato to mine. They’re really good. This is my animal-free version of that Sunday supper!