The French Government Patronises its Citizens yet Again! Vive la liberté!

Published: December 22, 2023

These developments suggest a protectionist approach towards France’s traditional meat industry and could be interpreted as a political strategy to align with more conservative or traditionalist viewpoints. It does reflect a growing debate in Europe regarding the role and acceptance of alternative protein sources, like cell-cultured meat, in the face of outdated unethical agricultural practices.

“France’s les Républicains party has submitted a proposal to ban cultivated meat in the country” (1, Green Queen Media, Anay Mridul), and there’s more: Marc Fesneau would like to increase animal suffering, I mean “factory farming”. The bill proposes it be forbidden to produce, process or market cultured meat in the country “in the interests of human health, animal health and the environment” (1).

Let’s Break Down the Ignorance: Marc Fesneau

Marc Fesneau, the serving Minister of Agriculture and Food in France, is affiliated with the Democratic Movement (MoDem), which was established in 2007 by François Bayrou. MoDem is a centrist political party with a broadly third-way ideology, combining aspects of social and economic liberalism, and is notably pro-European. MoDem’s ideology also includes elements of social liberalism and Christian democracy, positioning it in the centre to centre-right spectrum of French politics. Just in case anyone was wondering where the dominion over animals rhetoric stems from.

Of course you can’t blame Emmanuel Macron’s government for wanting to support the population’s demand for cheap meat while literally reversing this exact policy to his face and moving away from the push for organic meat (2, PressReader). The people want cheap meat and refuse to pay for animal welfare; L’état, c’est moi.

“The number of people who can afford premium meat has reduced from 50% in 2017 to 30% now. This was the reason put forward by French agriculture minister Marc Fesneau when he called for increased factory farming in the country to take “back the market from imports”, saying that animal welfare only works for the rich. (1)”.

Marc Fesneau’s statement dismisses the ethical arguments for animal welfare as a luxury for the rich, blatantly prioritising economic gain over moral considerations. It’s a brazen challenge to the ethical underpinnings of the food industry, effectively declaring that financial imperatives trump any concerns for animal rights. This stance undermines the growing global consensus on ethical farming, asserting a cold, hard economic logic, blind to the moral responsibilities of food production.

Let’s Break Down the Ignorance: Julien Denormandie

Julien Denormandie, a former French Minister of Agriculture and Food with a shaping role in the nation’s agricultural policies, demonstrates a surprisingly limited understanding of basic scientific principles, particularly concerning cellular processes in food production. His staunch opposition to modern food technologies like cultured meat seems to be steeped more in fallacies and biases than in scientific rationale. His statements about laboratory-grown meat contradict fundamental scientific knowledge and seemingly thrust France’s agricultural perspective back into a less enlightened era.

This individual’s rigid stance fails to acknowledge the environmental and health implications of traditional agriculture, whether factory-based or otherwise. Traditional farming practices, often romanticised, carry issues like pollutants, including heavy metals, PCBs, and other chemicals prevalent in the surrounding food chain. In stark contrast, the process of cultivating meat in laboratory settings offers a solution with the potential to circumvent these environmental and health hazards, producing meat devoid of the carcinogens, poisons, and toxins typical of conventional meat production (2 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)).

Compounding this issue is the fact that France has witnessed a significant loss of over 20% (101,000) of its small and local farms, a trend seemingly absent from his advocacy for traditional farming methods (3 Radio France Internationale). This disregard highlights a critical gap in his understanding and appreciation of the broader agricultural landscape and its evolving challenges. His approach, filled with a complete lack of compassion and a lack of scientific comprehension, suggests a disregard for the potential benefits of embracing innovative food technologies, which align more closely with contemporary environmental and health standards.

“The size is human scale and very, very, very far from what some people want to make us believe about a galloping industrialisation of our agriculture,” France’s Agriculture Minister Julien Denormandie told reporters at a presentation of the census results. The minister said French farms were on a par in size with Germany but that North American farms remained far bigger. Canadian farms were 332 hectares on average in 2016 (five times the size of French farms), while US farms averaged 178 hectares (3).

He likes to compare sizes clearly but he’s missing one vital aspect; the Americas are rapidly scaling up their cultivated meat industry. This expansion is characterised by a surge in factory constructions across the continents, indicating a shift towards alternative protein sources. Those boring animal ethics aside, this trend highlights a broader, global movement towards sustainable food production, which transcends traditional agricultural boundaries and embraces technological innovation.

To The Farmers

Farmers, as custodians of traditional agricultural methods, play an essential role in maintaining our food supply, in upholding cultural traditions, and in caring for the environment. Their concerns regarding the emergence of cultivated meat are entirely justified. This new form of meat production marks a substantial departure from traditional farming, posing potential risks to the livelihoods of people in animal husbandry. Such apprehensions are natural, rooted in worries about economic stability and the desire to protect a multigenerational heritage.

Yet, we must acknowledge the ever-evolving nature of agricultural markets and farmers’ inherent capacity for adaptation. The experience of South American farmers is particularly instructive in this context. They have adeptly shifted their agricultural focus over the years, moving towards more profitable and sustainable avenues in response to shifting market trends. This adaptability underscores the resilience and innovative spirit characteristic of the farming community.

For traditional livestock farmers up against the challenges from alternatives like cultivated meat, diversification offers a promising path forward. Venturing into high-value, specialised markets or even agritourism could open up new avenues for revenue. Furthermore, embracing sustainable and organic farming practices can command higher prices and aligns with increasing consumer demand for ethically produced food.

Importantly, the rise of new technologies in agriculture, including the development of cultivated meat, leaves room for traditional farming to endure. It presents an opportunity to blend new techniques with time-honoured practices, potentially leading to a more robust and sustainable food system. By adopting a progressive mindset and viewing change as a chance for growth and innovation, farmers can ensure they remain at the forefront of feeding the world, all while safeguarding their treasured way of life.

An immediate example is Omeat: to produce Plenty Bio, which in turn creates meat, they keep 70 cows. With more cows, a farmer can source the plasma more ethically, without harm to the animal.

Ministère de l’Agriculture et de la Souveraineté alimentaire

Cherry Picking Government

There appears to be a notable inconsistency in les Républicains’ perception of what is deemed natural. While they have embraced in vitro fertilisation (IVF), acknowledging its role in supporting human reproduction, their stance on cultivated meat is different, labelling it as ‘unnatural’. This poses the question: Why is there governmental support for one scientific breakthrough but not for another? Both IVF and cultivated meat signify significant departures from traditional practices in their respective domains. Could this disparity hint at a deeper philosophical or ethical perspective regarding the application of scientific advancements in different areas of human life? How crucial is understanding this contrast for enriching public discourse on these important issues?

By framing cultivated meat as contrary to French and Italian culinary traditions, the argument leverages the status quo bias, in which people prefer things to remain the same by doing nothing or by sticking with a previous decision. This framing appeals to a sense of national identity and tradition, making the public more likely to reject cultivated meat as it’s portrayed as alien to their cultural values.

The discussion about the potential threat of cultivated meat to traditional livestock farming taps into loss aversion. This principle suggests that people prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains. By suggesting that cultivated meat poses a “real threat” to existing agricultural practices, the argument plays on the fear of losing a familiar and established industry.

Referring to cultivated meat as “junk food” or “paillasse meat” (lab meat) frames it negatively. This kind of framing can influence public opinion by associating cultivated meat with poor quality and health standards, despite the lack of substantial evidence to support these claims.

By stating concerns about human health, animal health, and environmental impacts, the argument uses the framing effect, prioritising these aspects in the public’s perception. Even if the actual data on these aspects is unclear or nuanced, the mere mention of them in a negative context can sway opinion.

Mentioning the economic impact on farmers and framing cultivated meat as devoid of benefit for the farming community utilises the framing effect, aligning public opinion with the interests of traditional farmers. This approach can influence individuals with concerns about economic stability and the livelihoods of local farmers.

So, with actual solutions to a changing world within reach, the French government opts to cling to past traditions, stubbornly ignoring the potential of innovative alternatives. This approach stifles progress and risks leaving France lagging behind in the global race towards sustainable and technologically advanced food solutions.

The Truth About Our Meat

Traditional Agriculture

Apart from having been classified as a major carcinogen on its own, meat straight from animals includes, among others, the following substances (whether through organic or non-organic farming):

• Arsenic, Cadmium, Mercury, and Lead: These heavy metals can cause various health issues including neurological damage, kidney and liver problems, and increased risk of cancer.
• Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): Exposure to PAHs is linked to an increased risk of cancers, particularly lung and skin cancers, and can affect foetal development.
• Heterocyclic Amines: Formed in cooked meats, these compounds are associated with an increased risk of various cancers, including colorectal and stomach cancer.
• Dioxins: Long-term exposure can lead to immune system impairment, reproductive and developmental problems, and increased risk of cancer.
• Pesticides: Can cause a range of health issues from short-term impacts like nausea and dizziness to chronic impacts including cancer and reproductive harm.
• Persistent Organic Pollutants (PCBs): Linked to cancer risk, immune dysfunction, and potential impacts on the nervous system.
• Industrial Chemicals: Can vary widely in their effects, potentially causing organ damage, neurological issues, and increased cancer risk.
• Toxic Metabolites of Microorganisms (e.g., Mycotoxins): Can lead to acute poisoning, immune deficiency, and increased cancer risk.
• Endogenous Plant Toxicants (e.g., Ptaquilosides): May cause acute toxicity or chronic health issues such as cancer.
• Animal Endogenous Poisons (e.g., Phytanic Acid): Associated with metabolic disorders and potential toxic effects on organs.
• Heat-induced Toxic Compounds (e.g., Acrolein, Acrylamide): Linked to increased cancer risk, neurological damage, and reproductive health issues.

Additionally, heavy metals can migrate into food during various stages of the food supply chain, including post-harvest, distribution, processing, and consumption. Prolonged exposure can result in chronic poisoning, neurological problems, and developmental disorders. Dioxins and PCBs, both natural and anthropogenic toxic chemicals, accumulate in the food chain, with certain compounds recognised as food hazards due to their binding to the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR).

Just in case anyone was wondering why so many people are getting cancer. And that’s before E-coli and Salmonella, among a myriad of pathogens in the food processing cycle.

Cultivated Meat

Cultivated meat, produced in highly controlled laboratory environments, ensures enhanced safety and quality due to the precise regulation of growth conditions. This controlled setting significantly minimises the risk of contamination by pathogens and environmental pollutants, which are common challenges in traditional meat production. Furthermore, the process is monitored with advanced technologies, which enable immediate detection of any deviations or deficiencies, ensuring rapid response and correction. This meticulous oversight and the ability to quickly adjust conditions guarantee the safety of cultivated meat and contribute to its consistent quality (4 World Health Organization).

Sources

1. Au Revoir, Cultivated Meat?: France Follows in Italy’s Footsteps with Proposed Ban By Parliamentarians, https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/france-cultivated-meat-lab-grown-ban-italy/
2. France pushes for more factory farming, https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-guardian-usa/20230915/282303914735685
3. Contaminants in the Food Chain, https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/scientific-committee-and-panels/contam
4. France loses 20 percent of farms as large-scale agriculture gains ground, https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20211210-france-loses-20-percent-of-farms-as-large-scale-agriculture-gains-ground
5. Food Safety Aspects of Cell-Based Food, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240070943