There is another faux meat company called Impossible Foods that I follow incidentally because its CEO is named Patrick Brown, a name I have a google alert for thanks to reporting on Ontario politics.
haha! Thank you. Yes a good example but not Canadian. Their meat-like products are plant-based (not cell) so that's one reason they are on shelves. Another cool agri-tech innovation (or food tech? not sure of the phrase).
In general I find the evocation of the word "semantics" to be problematic. Usually when someone suggests that a difference in position is just a semantic difference, they are misunderstanding or dismissing what could otherwise be legitimate concerns. In this case I think the suggestion that the word "meat" should itself be regulated, and not be applied to protein grown in a lab, is a valid debate I'm not sure is addressed in this issue or in the policy space in general (and it is definitely not an issue of semantics). Farmers have a knowledge base that is often ignored by non-farmers and I worry this is another in a long line of examples. Otherwise great issue. Although is there a spelling mistake in that first tweet?
You are right - I could have explored that regulatory debate around the nomenclature more, it’s an important part of this. Definitely a role for farmers, too. Thank you for making this point and helping me think through it all. I was focusing more on the entrepreneurs that are super dependent on a clear regulatory pathway being co-created.
There is another faux meat company called Impossible Foods that I follow incidentally because its CEO is named Patrick Brown, a name I have a google alert for thanks to reporting on Ontario politics.
haha! Thank you. Yes a good example but not Canadian. Their meat-like products are plant-based (not cell) so that's one reason they are on shelves. Another cool agri-tech innovation (or food tech? not sure of the phrase).
In general I find the evocation of the word "semantics" to be problematic. Usually when someone suggests that a difference in position is just a semantic difference, they are misunderstanding or dismissing what could otherwise be legitimate concerns. In this case I think the suggestion that the word "meat" should itself be regulated, and not be applied to protein grown in a lab, is a valid debate I'm not sure is addressed in this issue or in the policy space in general (and it is definitely not an issue of semantics). Farmers have a knowledge base that is often ignored by non-farmers and I worry this is another in a long line of examples. Otherwise great issue. Although is there a spelling mistake in that first tweet?
You are right - I could have explored that regulatory debate around the nomenclature more, it’s an important part of this. Definitely a role for farmers, too. Thank you for making this point and helping me think through it all. I was focusing more on the entrepreneurs that are super dependent on a clear regulatory pathway being co-created.