PRODUCERS should be aware of the threat synthetic meat poses to the livestock industry, but not alarmed by it, according to Meat & Livestock Australia research, development and innovation general manager Sean Starling, who was a guest speaker at the recent Ag Excellence Alliance forum held in Adelaide.
“It’s probably not something that’s going to bring the industry unstuck, but we can’t turn a blind eye to it either,” he said.
The global demand for protein and consumers looking for ethical meals are two of the factors behind the rise of meat grown in a laboratory.
Lab-based or in vitro meat is a cultured product created from cellular material.
While meat substitutes are not new, this lab-grown alternative is better at replicating the sensory experience of eating beef than plant-based options such as soy products.
“With synthetic meat, the taste is not all that different, and that’s a concern, especially when you’re talking about an industry that runs on a 5 per cent profit margin,” Mr Starling said.
“I don’t see the primal side of the meat trade being threatened by synthetic meat.
“The technology is nowhere near ready to compete with primal cuts.”
Mr Starling believes the area that could be affected is mince meat.
“I think the first place the marketplace will see an effect is in mince meat,” he said.
“That’s why we’re looking at alternatives for trim use.
“What else do you do with the trims if a meat replacement can perform the same service? It’s an area we’re watching very closely.”
Chief marketing and communications officer Lisa Sharp said MLA was monitoring the roll out of lab meat in the United States to gauge consumer reactions and understand whether it stands to be an addition to, or a substitute for, consumption of farmed red meat.
Studies have shown that consumers are willing to try lab-based meat but are not keen to replace farmed meat with synthetic alternatives.
Price is also a barrier. In the US, ground beef costs about $7 a kilogram compared with $5291/kg for lab-grown meat.
