By Janelle Stecklein, Oklahoma Voice
OKLAHOMA CITY — Citing safety concerns and Oklahomans’ ability to eat “real meat from real animals,” House lawmakers advanced a measure Tuesday that would ban lab-grown meat alternatives.
Critics, though, said House Bill 2829, which targets the science of using animal cells to grow meat in laboratories, is based in fear, is protectionist, and impedes Oklahomans’ freedom to choose what they want to eat and how to practice their religions.
Rep. Ty Burns, R-Morrison, said the measure is necessary to protect Oklahomans and their culture as well as the agriculture industry, which is one of the state’s biggest economic drivers. He said cell-cultivated meat is popular in Israel. While it may not be in Oklahoma yet, the bill aims to ban it before it arrives, he said.
Burns, the bill’s author, said the government’s top job is to protect and promote general welfare and health, and this bill does that.
“I don’t think it’s about being afraid of competition, obviously,” Burns said. “We start talking about protecting Oklahomans and consumption of a product that we have naturally done healthier and better for you. I think it’s an easy protective measure to put ahead of before we get it here.”
Last year, Florida and Alabama both passed laws banning lab-grown meats.
Rep. Tom Gann, R-Inola, said the product should be considered dangerous until it’s known to be safe.
“It’s not about free market. It’s about really making sense,” he said. “We have plenty of opportunity to eat real meat from real animals, and the fact that this stuff is being developed is nothing more than it is just acquiescing to the climate change agenda, the animal rights agenda, and everything green. And it’s an attack on our growers who produce our food.”
Oklahomans need to “play it safe” by banning the product, he said.
“Let somebody else experiment and keep the people of the state of Oklahoma safe,” Gann said.
But Rep. Jared Deck, D-Norman, said when there are so many other health concerns in the state, he wonders why his colleagues are so afraid of this option.
“We put Twinkies in our body. Heck we deep fat fry them even,” he said. “These are the things that we eat on a daily basis, that we feed our children, that we stock our grocery shelves with, and we’re going to ban something that we don’t even know about supposedly, but a lot of religions and cultures use such products in order to help abide by their own faith.”
Deck said the state’s agricultural industry isn’t afraid of anything that’s cultivated, including this product. He said genetic cultivation is also being used to develop seeds and vegetation, but that’s not being targeted.
“We ought to be afraid of this stuff because it’s not meat,” said Rep. Rick West, R-Heavener. “It’s cells that have been modified to grow forever and ever and ever. It’s closer to a science experiment than it is to a steak. The cells used to grow it act like cancer cells, and the legal ground it stands on is shaky at best.”
He said nobody knows the long-term health effects of eating lab-grown meats. Consumers need to ask if these are safe to eat because it’s not just about biology, but about what’s legal, he said.
West said the Federal Meat Inspection Act overseas meat products. Lab grown meat is “a blob of cells cooked up in a tank.” He said federal law also bans food labels that mislead people.
“If you buy chicken expecting a drumstick and you get a pile of lab cells instead, have you been duped?” he said. “My answer to that is yes, you have.”
Forrest Bennett, D-Oklahoma City, said he’s “caught a lot of grief” for liking boneless chicken wings and suggesting that the people who developed the technology to remove the bones from the wing be honored. And even though critics argue that it’s not “real chicken,” it’s still his prerogative to eat it, he said.
If lawmakers are so certain lab-grown meat is bad, he looks forward to watching them reject a bread roll because it’s also made of duplicating cells, Bennett said.
“I just wish my colleagues would call this what it is,” Bennett said. “We want to pick winners and losers in this building, and in this case, the winner is the beef industry, and the loser is an innovative new science that’s trying to create non-meat alternatives for people who need that for their diets.”
The bill, which passed 72-18, now heads to the Senate for consideration.
