Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34828869›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Brazilian Consumers' Attitudes towards So-Called "Cell-Based Meat".

Sghaier Chriki, Vincent Payet, Sérgio Bertelli Pflanzer, Marie-Pierre Ellies-Oury, Jingjing Liu, Élise Hocquette, Jonatã Henrique Rezende-de-Souza, Jean-François Hocquette

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. AFrontiers in nutrition · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sghaier ChrikiIsara, AgroSchool for Life, 23 rue Jean Baldassini, 69364 Lyon, France.
Vincent PayetIsara, AgroSchool for Life, 23 rue Jean Baldassini, 69364 Lyon, France.
Sérgio Bertelli PflanzerDepartment of Food Engineering and Technology, University of Campinas, Rua Monteiro Lobato, 80, Campinas 13083-862, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8482-9569
Marie-Pierre Ellies-OuryBordeaux Science Agro, 33175 Gradignan, France.
Jingjing LiuINRAE, Université d'Auvergne, Vetagro Sup, UMR Herbivores, 63122 Saint Genès Champanelle, France.
Élise HocquetteIsara, AgroSchool for Life, 23 rue Jean Baldassini, 69364 Lyon, France.
Jonatã Henrique Rezende-de-SouzaDepartment of Food Engineering and Technology, University of Campinas, Rua Monteiro Lobato, 80, Campinas 13083-862, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9868-3123
Jean-François HocquetteINRAE, Université d'Auvergne, Vetagro Sup, UMR Herbivores, 63122 Saint Genès Champanelle, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main goal of this online survey was to investigate the attitudes of Brazilians towards "cell-based meat", which has become the subject of great scientific and media enthusiasm. The answers of 4471 respondents concluded that 46.6% of them thought "cell-based meat" was promising and acceptable. More than 66% would be willing to try this novel product compared to 23% who expressed reluctance to do so. Nearly 40% of the total respondents did not want to eat "cell-based meat" regularly at all, whereas 29%, 43.2%, and 39.9% were willing to eat it regularly in restaurants, at home, and/or in ready-made meals, respectively. However, the majority of respondents (71%) were keen to pay much less for "cell-based meat" than conventionally produced meat (or even nothing at all), compared to 24.3% who were willing to pay the same price as conventional meat, whereas only 4.8% were willing to pay more. Approximately 51% of them considered that "cell-based meat" should not be called "meat" for marketing purposes. Job, monthly income, age, and gender were major factors impacting consumer acceptance. Meat professionals and consumers with higher incomes were less willing to eat "cell-based meat" regularly. Women (especially younger women) were the most concerned about the ethical and environmental issues related to meat production and were the most convinced that reducing meat consumption could be a good solution to the meat industry's problems. Respondents who did not accept "cell-based meat" and did not eat meat substitutes had a negative attitude to this novel food (they considered it absurd and/or disgusting) and did not believe that "cell-based meat" should be called "meat" for marketing purposes. In contrast, the people who thought that "cell-based meat" could be called "meat" perceived it in a rather positive way. These results are important for consumers of meat and meat substitutes and for companies aiming to enter the potential future Brazilian market of "cell-based meat".

Indexed as

animal productionanimal protectionanimal welfarefood securitylivestock issuesmeat alternativessurvey

Identifiers

PMID34828869
PMCPMC8625506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.