Analysis of the danger of cultured meat
- Authors: Shur P.Z.1, Barg A.O.1, Suvorov D.V.1, Zelenkin S.E.1, Lir D.N.1
-
Affiliations:
- Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies
- Issue: Vol 103, No 11 (2024)
- Pages: 1385-1391
- Section: FOOD HYGIENE
- Published: 15.12.2024
- URL: https://rjsocmed.com/0016-9900/article/view/646121
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2024-103-11-1385-1391
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/zvezya
- ID: 646121
Cite item
Abstract
Introduction. Synthetic food products, including cultured meat, promise many benefits but require the careful assessment of the safety before mass introduction. The potential health risks associated with the consumption of cultured meat may vary among different populations. Identifying target consumer groups will allow individual risk factors being taken into account and appropriate precautions developing.
The aim of the study was to analyse the hazards of cultured meat and predict the groups of potential consumers for targeted information on adverse effects from its consumption
Materials and methods. A systematic analysis of scientific literature and a sociological study among four hundred twenty three residents of the Perm region (February-August 2023) were conducted. The data were processed using SPSS for Windows 21.0.
Results. Potential hazards in the consumption of cultured meat are related to the presence of chemical contaminants, possible immune system hypersensitivity and changes in the biological value of protein. The study showed that different age groups have varying degrees of vulnerability to these hazards. More than 45% of the respondents are willing to consume cultured meat, especially young people. About 22% of the respondents are willing to include cultured meat in the diet of children, making them the most vulnerable. Willingness to consume cultured meat increases with positive social influence (addressing agricultural, environmental, and biological issues).
Limitations. Only residents of Perm Krai are represented among the respondents who participated in the survey.
Conclusion. The results of the study emphasise the need to inform target groups about the risks associated with cultured meat, taking into account age-specific and individual risk factors. The findings may form the basis for recommendations to ensure the safety of cultured meat before consumption.
Compliance with ethical standards. A favourable opinion of the local ethical committee was obtained for the sociological study. Minutes of the meeting of the Local Ethics Committee No. 2 dated February, 10, 2022. All participants gave informed voluntary written consent to participate in the study.
Contribution:
Shur P.Z., Barg A.O., Suvorov D.V. – concept and design of research, data collection and processing, writing text;
Zelenkin S.E., Lir D.N. – data collection and processing, writing text.
All co-authors – editing, approval of the final version of the article, responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the article.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgement. The study had no sponsorship.
Received: August 8, 2024 / Revised: September 9, 2024 / Accepted: November 19, 2024 / Published: December 17, 2024
Keywords
About the authors
Pavel Z. Shur
Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies
Email: shur@fcrisk.ru
DSc (Medicine), leading researcher, Secretary of the Academic Council in Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, Perm, 614045, Russian Federation
e-mail: shur@fcrisk.ru
Anastasiya O. Barg
Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies
Email: an-bg@yandex.ru
PhD, senior researcher of health risk analysis department in Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, Perm, 614045, Russian Federation
e-mail: an-bg@yandex.ru
Dmitry V. Suvorov
Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies
Email: suvorov@fcrisk.ru
Researcher of the Health risk analysis department in Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, Perm, 614045, Russian Federation
e-mail: suvorov@fcrisk.ru
Sergey E. Zelenkin
Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies
Email: zelenkin@fcrisk.ru
Researcher of the Health risk analysis department in Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, Perm, 614045, Russian Federation
e-mail: zelenkin@fcrisk.ru
Darya N. Lir
Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies
Author for correspondence.
Email: lir@fcrisk.ru
PhD (Medicine), head of the Health risk analysis department in Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, (Perm, 614045, Russian Federation
e-mail: lir@fcrisk.ru
References
- Rogov I.A., Lisitsyn A.B., Taranova K.G., Volkova I.M. Meat in vitro as a promising source of complete protein. Vse o myase. 2013; (4): 22–5. https://elibrary.ru/qztgyj (in Russian)
- Mezenova O.J. Modern food biotechnology: main problems and challenges. Vestnik Mezhdunarodnoi akademii kholoda. 2023; (1): 35–46. https://doi.org/10.17586/1606-4313-2023-22-1-35-46 https://elibrary.ru/edgumy (in Russian)
- Cellular agriculture and food systems priorities. Nat. Food. 2022; 3(10): 781. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-022-00628-2
- Ben-Ar’e T., Levenberg Sh. Cultured meat compositions. Patent RF № 2778255; 2022. (in Russian)
- Glazkova I.V. Production and application of new proteins for human nutrition – in the spotlight at the “Proprotein-2021” Forum. Myasnye tekhnologii. 2021; 11(227): 56–7. (in Russian)
- Hong T.K., Shin D.M., Choi J., Do J.T., Han S.G. Current issues and technical advances in cultured meat production: a review. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2021; 41(3): 355–72. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e14
- Bhat Z.F., Morton J.D., Mason S.L., Bekhit A.E.A., Bhat H.F. Technological, regulatory, and ethical aspects of in vitro meat: a future slaughter-free harvest. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2019; 18(4): 1192–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12473
- Stamoulis K., Zezza A. A Conceptual Framework for National Agricultural, Rural Development, and Food Security Strategies and Policies. ESA Working Paper No. 03-17. FAO; 2003.
- Gu Y., Li X., Chan E.C.Y. Risk assessment of cultured meat. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2023; 138: 491–9.
- Ramani S., Ko D., Kim B., Cho C., Kim W., Jo C., et al. Technical requirements for cultured meat production: a review. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 2021; 63(4): 681–92. https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2021.e45
- Zaitseva N.V., Zelenkin S.E., Shur P.Z., Suvorov D.V. Identification of potential hazards and analysis of critical control points in cultured meat (in vitro meat) production. Voprosy pitaniya. 2023; 92(6): 45–53. https://doi.org/10.33029/0042-8833-2023-92-6-45-53 https://elibrary.ru/qnjjwv (in Russian)
- Ververis E., Ackerl R., Azzollini D., Colombo P.A., de Sesmaisons A., Dumas C., et al. Novel foods in the European Union: Scientific requirements and challenges of the risk assessment process by the European Food Safety Authority. Food Res. Int. 2020; 137: 109515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109515
- Ong K.J., Tejeda-Saldana Y., Duffy B., Holmes D., Kukk K., Shatkin J.A. Cultured meat safety research priorities: regulatory and governmental perspectives. Foods. 2023; 12(14): 2645. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12142645
- Frohlich K.L., Potvin L. Transcending the known in public health practice: the inequality paradox: the population approach and vulnerable populations. Am. J. Public Health. 2008; 98(2): 216–21. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.114777
- Aagaard-Hansen J., Hindhede A.L., Terkildsen Maindal H. A conceptual framework for selecting appropriate populations for public health interventions. Front. Public Health. 2023; 11: 1161034. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1161034
- Shur P.Z., Suvorov D.V., Zelenkin S.E., Lir D.N. Identification of potential hazard of consumption of novel products to public health (systematic review). Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2023; 102(5): 495–501. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2023-102-5-495-501 https://elibrary.ru/xaqnpz (in Russian)
- Otdel’nova K.A. Determination of the required number of observations in social and hygienic research. Sbornik trudov 2-go MMI. 1980; 150(6): 18–22. (in Russian)
- Bhat Z.F., Fayaz H. Prospectus of cultured meat – advancing meat alternatives. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2011; 48: 125–40.
- Sogore T., Guo M., Sun N., Jiang D., Shen M., Ding T. Microbiological and chemical hazards in cultured meat and methods for their detection. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2024; 23(4): e13392. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.13392
- Leonidova G.V., Dimoni K.O. Labor potential of young people: demands of contemporary labor market. Problemy razvitiya territorii. 2021; 25(6): 7–31. https://doi.org/10.15838/ptd.2021.6.116.1 (in Russian)
- Goyer R.A., Clarkson T.W. Toxic effects of metals. In: Klaasen C.D. Casarett and Doullis Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons. New York; 2001: 861–7.
- Radchenko V.G., Seliverstov P.V. Age-related changes in the liver. Vestnik Severo-Zapadnogo gosudarstvennogo meditsinskogo universiteta. 2017; 9(1): 110–6. https://elibrary.ru/yldzqz (in Russian)
- D’Este M., Alvarado-Morales M., Angelidaki I. Amino acids production focusing on fermentation technologies – a review. Biotechnol. Adv. 2018; 36(1): 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2017.09.001
- Department of Health and Human Services. Report on Carcinogens. Fifteenth Edition: Phenolphthalein; 2021.
- IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Phenolphthalein. In: Some Antiviral and Antineoplastic Drugs, and Other Pharmaceutical Agents. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, No. 76. Lyon; 2000: 387–415.
- Quiroga-Campano A.L., Panoskaltsis N., Mantalaris A. Energy-based culture medium design for biomanufacturing optimization: A case study in monoclonal antibody production by GS-NS0 cells. Metab. Eng. 2018; 47: 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymben.2018.02.013
- Molchanova O.V., Andreeva G.F. Significance of dietary protein intake in the prevention of obesity, hypertension and breast cancer. Profilakticheskaya meditsina. 2015; 18(1): 46–53. https://elibrary.ru/tziuvv (in Russian)
- Zaitseva N.V., Shur P.Z., Atiskova N.G., Kiryanov D.A., Kamaltdinov M.R. Human health hazards associated with tetracycline drugs residues in food. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2014; 2(8): 488–95.
- Goud N.S. Biocompatibility evaluation of medical devices. In: Faqi A.S. A Comprehensive Guide to Toxicology in Non-Clinical Drug Development. Academic Press; 2016: 825–40.
- Lyche J.L., Gutleb A.C., Bergman A., Eriksen G.S., Murk A.J., Ropstad E., et al. Reproductive and developmental toxicity of phthalates. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B Crit. Rev. 2009; 12(4): 225–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937400903094091
- Tsvakirai C.Z. The valency of consumers’ perceptions toward cultured meat: A review. Heliyon. 2024; 10(6): e27649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27649
- Verbeke W., Sans P., Van Loo E.J. Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. J. Integr. Agric. 2015; 14(2): 285–94.
- Slade P. If you build it, will they eat it? Consumer preferences for plant-based and cultured meat burgers. Appetite. 2018; 125: 428–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.02.030
- Wilks M., Phillips C.J. Attitudes to in vitro meat: A survey of potential consumers in the United States. PLoS One. 2017; 12(2): e0171904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171904
- Dupont J., Fiebelkorn F. Attitudes and acceptance of young people toward the consumption of insects and cultured meat in Germany. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020; 85: 103983.
- Dupont J., Harms T., Fiebelkorn F. Acceptance of cultured meat in Germany – application of an extended theory of planned behaviour. Foods. 2022; 11(3): 424. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11030424
Supplementary files
