What 'Unnatural' Really Means to Cultivarians
- David Bell
- 18 hours ago
- 9 min read
Few terms spark debate like "unnatural", especially when it comes to cultivated meat. Cultivated meat is real meat grown from animal cells without slaughter. For Cultivarians - those who love meat but oppose killing animals - this innovation offers an ethical alternative to conventional meat.
The word "unnatural" often raises concerns, but it’s worth exploring what it truly means. Critics use it to highlight fears about science, morality, and social impacts. However, many everyday items we accept today, like pasteurised milk or IVF, were once labelled unnatural too. Cultivarians argue that industrial farming, with its confinement and slaughter, is far more unnatural than cultivated meat.
Cultivated meat addresses ethical, safety, and environmental concerns. It’s grown in controlled settings, reducing contamination risks and resource use. Producing 1 kg of cultivated meat uses up to 96% less water and 99% less land than beef. Although energy-intensive now, renewable energy can make it even more efficient.
For Cultivarians, naturalness isn’t about outdated habits but aligning food choices with compassion and honesty. Cultivated meat offers a way to enjoy meat without compromising values.
Have we been overpromised on lab-grown meat? A journalist reveals what they’ve seen firsthand
sbb-itb-4eaa753
How 'Unnatural' Gets Used Against Cultivated Meat
When critics describe cultivated meat as "unnatural", they aren't just making a single claim. The term bundles together various concerns - biological, moral, and social - which amplifies its emotional impact. Breaking down these layers can help us understand the arguments more clearly. Each of these concerns leads to specific critiques that deserve closer scrutiny.
The Main Arguments Behind the 'Unnatural' Label
On a biological level, phrases like "Franken-meat" and "test-tube burger" - common in UK media - are designed to evoke unease. Words such as bioreactor, growth factors, and cell culture media often spark fears of harmful chemicals. In truth, these media contain the same nutrients that cells naturally use within an animal's body: amino acids, vitamins, minerals, and sugars [2][4].
Moral objections are rooted in claims of "playing God" or the belief that bypassing the traditional costs of meat production feels like cheating —even if it could eventually end animal slaughter [1].
Then there are the social fears. Critics worry about corporate dominance, the marginalisation of British farmers, and the potential loss of rural food traditions. These concerns often stem from past controversies around new food technologies, such as BSE and early debates over GM crops, which have left a legacy of distrust. In this context, "unnatural" becomes shorthand for something seen as a product of corporate innovation rather than community heritage [1][3].
At its heart, the "unnatural therefore bad" argument reflects an appeal to nature - the idea that anything unnatural must inherently be harmful or wrong. But this reasoning doesn't hold up. Modern medicine, pasteurisation, glasses, and vaccines are all "unnatural" by the same logic, yet they are widely accepted as beneficial. Conversely, many natural phenomena - diseases, toxins, and parasites - are far from harmless [1].
'Unfamiliar' Is Not the Same as 'Unnatural'
History shows us that what feels unfamiliar is often mistaken for unnatural. Take pasteurisation: when it was introduced in the early 20th century, many in the UK and US viewed pasteurised milk as "dead" or "unnatural", believing raw milk to be healthier. It took government action and public education to shift perceptions [5]. Similarly, when Louise Brown, the first IVF baby, was born in Oldham in July 1978, IVF was criticised as "unnatural" and accused of "playing God." Today, IVF is a routine medical procedure that has enabled millions of births worldwide [6]. Even GM crops faced similar resistance, with many in Europe perceiving them as more "unnatural" and dangerous than traditional foods, despite scientific bodies like the Royal Society concluding that approved GM foods are no riskier than their conventional counterparts [5][6].
These examples highlight a recurring pattern: unfamiliarity is often confused with actual risk. A 2023 study by Sinke et al. found that people who viewed cultivated meat as "unnatural" were less willing to try it, even when they recognised its potential health and environmental advantages [4]. This shows how powerful the "unnatural" label can be - it influences behaviour regardless of evidence. Understanding this distinction allows advocates of cultivated meat to engage with these criticisms thoughtfully rather than dismissively. These historical insights pave the way for a deeper discussion about the ethical and scientific principles shaping the Cultivarian viewpoint.
How Cultivarians Think About 'Natural' and 'Unnatural'
The Cultivarian Ethical Framework
For Cultivarians, the concept of 'natural' ties directly to their core values: compassion, honesty, and understanding. Honesty involves confronting the reality of cultivated meat vs traditional meat production - the confinement, the conditions, and the slaughter - and acknowledging the truth behind it. Compassion pushes individuals to act on this knowledge rather than ignoring it for convenience. Understanding, meanwhile, recognises the genuine struggle many people face when trying to stop eating meat, even if they feel uneasy about the way it’s produced. Instead of judging this difficulty, Cultivarians see cultivated meat as a practical solution - a way to bridge the gap between people’s values and their dietary choices [2].
This ethical framework also influences how Cultivarians view industrial farming practices and their alignment with what feels 'natural'.
Why Industrial Animal Agriculture Looks Unnatural
Industrial animal farming, which involves confining billions of animals in artificial conditions and slaughtering them on a massive scale, is seen by Cultivarians as the true definition of 'unnatural'. By shedding light on the hidden cruelties of these practices, their ethical perspective highlights how far removed industrial farming is from nature. Philosopher Rosalind Hursthouse captures this sentiment well:
"The practices that bring cheap meat to our tables are cruel, so we shouldn't be party to them." [2]
Interestingly, research suggests that the perception of conventional meat as 'natural' is more a product of familiarity than factual evidence. As researcher Jo Anderson explains:
"Reading an argument that conventional meat is unnatural makes people more accepting of clean meat." [1]
This shift in perspective underscores how cultivated meat challenges conventional ideas about what is natural.
Cultivated Meat as a Science-Aligned Choice
Building on these ethical concerns, Cultivarians advocate for a scientific alternative that reduces harm. Cultivated meat, produced without slaughter, applies biological knowledge to create a system that aligns with values of compassion and fairness. This approach has been described as "a virtuously merciful form of animal agriculture" [2] and as a method that "reduces the inherent cruelty" of traditional meat production [2]. These viewpoints highlight how the ethical and scientific arguments for cultivated meat intertwine seamlessly. They’re not separate ideas but two sides of the same coin.
For Cultivarians, the aim isn’t to achieve an unattainable ideal but to make honest, meaningful progress. Choosing cultivated meat allows individuals to align their eating habits with their beliefs, without pretending that the current system is acceptable or natural.
The Science and Facts Behind Cultivated Meat
How Cultivated Meat Is Produced
Cultivated meat starts with a small biopsy taken from a living animal. This process doesn’t harm the animal and avoids the need for slaughter. The harvested stem cells are then placed in a bioreactor, an environment designed to provide the perfect conditions for cell growth. Here, warmth, nutrients, and other factors are carefully controlled to encourage the cells to multiply rapidly. Once enough cells have grown, they are guided to develop into muscle fibres and fat, mimicking the composition of traditional meat.
To create the familiar structure and texture of meat, these cells are grown on 3D scaffolds. These scaffolds, made from edible materials like gelatin, cellulose, or plant-based proteins, allow the cells to form a realistic meat product. The end result? Real meat, but without the need for traditional farming or slaughter.
Safety and Nutrition: What the Evidence Shows
Once production is complete, cultivated meat undergoes rigorous safety and nutritional checks to ensure it meets or exceeds the standards of conventional meat. A common myth is that lab-grown meat might be less safe than traditional options. However, the opposite is often true. Cultivated meat is produced in sterile, tightly regulated environments, which significantly reduces the risk of contamination from foodborne pathogens. Additionally, because antibiotics are rarely, if ever, needed in these controlled settings, the concerns associated with antibiotic use in factory farming are largely eliminated.
Nutritionally, cultivated meat is designed to match the composition of traditional meat, providing the same macro- and micronutrients. But it doesn’t stop there. This technology allows for customised nutrient profiles, such as reducing saturated fat or increasing certain vitamins, offering possibilities that traditional farming methods simply cannot achieve [7].
"Lab-grown meat aims to create a product that is exactly like traditional meat in all respects, without causing any adverse effects on consumers regarding appearance, smell, texture, nutrition, or flavor." - Discover Biotechnology [7]
Beyond safety and nutrition, cultivated meat also addresses pressing environmental issues.
Land, Water, and Emissions: The Numbers
Traditional cattle farming is a major contributor to environmental challenges. It accounts for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions and takes up 40% of the world’s land [7]. Producing just 1 kg of beef requires around 15,000 litres of water, with most of that used to grow feed for the animals [7].
Cultivated meat offers a much more resource-efficient alternative. A 2011 life cycle analysis by Tuomisto and Teixeira de Mattos found that cultivated meat could reduce land use by 99% compared to conventional European meat production [7]. More recent studies suggest that if the world transitioned to cellular agriculture by 2050, it could cut annual food-related greenhouse gas emissions by 52% and reduce global phosphorus demand by 53% [8].
Metric | Traditional Beef (per kg) | Cultivated Meat (Estimated) | Reduction |
Land Use | High (pasture + feed crops) | Minimal (facility-based) | 83–99% |
Water Use | ~15,000 litres | 550–700 litres | 82–96% |
GHG Emissions | 14.5% of global total | ~50% of livestock levels | ~52% |
Phosphorus Demand | High (runoff and waste) | Controlled and recycled | 53% |
One challenge, however, is that cultivated meat production is currently energy-intensive. The full environmental benefits of this approach depend on powering production facilities with renewable energy sources. This aligns with the broader global push towards sustainable energy solutions, further reinforcing the potential of cultivated meat to transform the food system.
The Cultivarian View: Moving Past "Unnatural"
How Food Norms Change Over Time
History shows us that food norms are anything but static. Take pasteurised milk, for instance - it was once met with scepticism but is now a household standard. Cultivated meat seems to be following a similar path. Research reveals that only 20% of consumers initially see conventional meat as "unnatural." However, this figure jumps to 28% when they learn more about the conditions of industrial farming. On the other hand, 66% of people are open to trying cultivated meat when given transparent and straightforward information, and 46% express interest in purchasing it regularly [1]. These numbers highlight that the main hurdle isn’t about biology or flavour - it’s about familiarity. This shift is a key step toward ending agricultural dependence on traditional farming methods.
The Role of The Cultivarian Society
Founded by David Bell, The Cultivarian Society aims to establish Cultivarianism as a recognised dietary identity. The Society educates the public about cultivated meat and encourages ethical food choices. It also addresses what ethicists call omnivore’s akrasia - the disconnect between believing that harming animals is wrong and continuing to eat meat out of habit or societal norms. Cultivated meat offers a middle ground, allowing people to make ethical food choices without requiring an all-or-nothing approach [2]. This work is central to reshaping perceptions of what is considered "natural."
Defining Natural by Ethics, Not by Habit
From the Cultivarian perspective, what is "natural" should be defined by ethical principles, not outdated traditions. A food system built on confinement, suffering, and large-scale slaughter cannot claim moral legitimacy. Cultivarians argue that compassion and integrity should guide our understanding of naturalness. Ethicist Christopher Bobier puts it succinctly:
"The virtuous diet will likely change over time... it's not unthinkable that virtuous people will eat [cultivated] meat when it is no longer prohibitively expensive." [2]
Ultimately, the Cultivarian approach asks whether our food choices reflect values like compassion and honesty. As the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics notes:
"Cultivated meat wouldn't make meat-eating virtuous, but it would lessen its viciousness." [2]
This perspective challenges us to rethink our habits and align our diets with our values.
FAQs
Is cultivated meat actually meat?
Yes, cultivated meat is indeed real meat. It's produced by growing animal cells in bioreactors, resulting in edible tissue that is biologically the same as conventional meat. This method replicates the structure, flavour, and nutritional content of meat from slaughtered animals, but eliminates the need for farming or killing animals.
What makes cultivated meat safe to eat?
Cultivated meat is considered safe for consumption because it follows stringent food safety protocols. These include using edible or GRAS (generally recognised as safe) inputs, maintaining tightly regulated production processes to avoid contamination, and employing serum-free, chemically defined culture media to reduce potential risks. These precautions ensure that cultivated meat complies with high safety standards before it is made available to consumers.
How does cultivated meat reduce environmental impact?
Cultivated meat offers a way to lessen the strain on the planet by using far fewer resources and generating less pollution compared to traditional livestock farming. It can cut water usage by up to 96%, require 99% less land, and significantly reduce emissions of methane and nitrous oxide - two major contributors to climate change. By moving away from large-scale animal farming, it also addresses issues like deforestation and excessive water consumption. Incorporating renewable energy into its production process can amplify these benefits, paving the way for a more eco-friendly food system.
Comments