ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2023
Evaluation of public submissions to the USDA for labeling of cell-cultured meat in the United States.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutritional, Ethical and Ecological Aspects of Cultured Meat with Particular Emphasis on Functional Food Production: A Comprehensive Literature Review.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Perceptions of cell-cultured "meat" embedded in the cultural context: public surveys in Japan and the United Kingdom.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Nutrient Equivalence of Plant-Based and Cultured Meat: Gaps, Bioavailability, and Health Perspectives.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Cultured Meat Reformulation: Health Potential and Sustainable Food Challenges-Narrative Review.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025Review
- Innovations, Challenges, and Regulatory Pathways in Cultured Meat for a Sustainable Future.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Comprehensive Review of Alternative Proteins in Pet Food: Research Publications, Patents, and Product Trends in Plant, Aquatic, Insect, and Cell-Based Sources.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Scaling Cultured Meat: Challenges and Solutions for Affordable Mass Production.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025Review
- Establishment & characterization of a non-adherent insect cell line for cultivated meat.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Systematic Literature Review of Cultured Meat Through the Conceptual Frameworks of the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem and Global Value Chain.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A Glance into the Near Future: Cultivated Meat from Mammalian and Insect Cells.Small science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the rapid advancement of cell-cultured meat processing technologies and regulations, commercialization of cell-cultured meat to market shelves requires the implementation of labeling that informs and protects consumers while ensuring economic competitiveness. In November 2022, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completed its first pre-market consultation of cell-cultured meat and did not question the safety of these products for human consumption. As of June 2023, commercialization of cell-cultured meat products has become a reality in the United States. To derive potential label terms and gain insight into how different stakeholders refer to these novel products, we analyzed 1,151 comments submitted to the 2021 U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Services (USDA-FSIS) call on the labeling of cell-cultured meat and poultry. Our first aim was to systematically assess the nature of comments with regards to their length, cited references, and supplemental materials. In addition, we aimed to identify the most used terms to refer to these products through text analysis. We also asked how these analyses would vary by affiliation category and economic interest. Using the listed organizations for each comment, we first determined financial ties: 77 (7%) comments came from those with an economic interest, 12 (1%) of the comments did not have an identifiable economic interest, while for the remaining 1,062 (92%) comments economic interest could not be determined. We then grouped comments into affiliation categories. Cell-cultured meat companies and animal welfare non-profits had the highest median word count, whereas comments from the unknown affiliation category had the lowest. We found across all comments the predominantly mentioned potential label terms, in descending order, to be
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.