Why conservatives are trying to ban cell-cultivated meat before you’ve even tried it

A growing number of Republican-led states are pre-emptively banning cell-cultivated meat – long before it’s commercially viable or available in supermarkets. So far, Florida, Texas, Alabama, Nebraska, Montana, Mississippi, Indiana, and Wyoming have moved to block the production or sale of these products. Though cell-cultivated meat is still in its early stages and expensive to produce, some conservative lawmakers are already framing it as a threat to tradition, safety, and 'our way of life'.

Cell-cultivated meat is created by taking a small sample of animal cells and growing them into edible tissue in controlled environments, without needing to raise or slaughter animals. The promise is meat with no animal suffering, less environmental damage, and potentially lower long-term costs once the technology scales.

But as Vox’s Eric Levitz reports in his May 2025 article, Why the right wants to ban this innovation before you get to try it, this promising food innovation is running into fierce opposition from lawmakers who claim to defend free enterprise – while actively outlawing a product that doesn’t yet pose any commercial threat.

The bans come despite the fact that the industry remains in its infancy. Cell-cultivated meat is currently produced at high cost and in small quantities. It has only received limited regulatory approval in the USA, and no grocery store carries it. In many ways, these bans are symbolic. But as Levitz writes, “they’re nevertheless alarming and unconscionable”, particularly given what this technology could eventually offer: meat without mass animal suffering.

Levitz argues that the opposition is not simply about economics or food safety. While some farmers understandably see competition on the horizon, major trade groups like the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and even meat giant JBS have spoken against bans. And cell-cultivated products would need to meet the same stringent safety requirements as conventional meat under the FDA and USDA. That hasn’t stopped Florida Governor Ron DeSantis from invoking conspiracy theories, claiming the technology is part of “the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals”.

Other state leaders have been more subtle but just as resistant. Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen, who is also a pork producer, said banning cultivated meat would help “battle fringe ideas” and “defend our way of life.” These statements reflect a broader cultural resistance to food system changes that challenge long-standing identities around meat and farming – even when those changes aim to make meat more sustainable and humane.

Levitz notes that while Americans have had access to an increasing number of plant-based meat options over the past two decades, this hasn’t led to a major shift in dietary habits. Gallup polling found that the share of Americans who identify as vegetarian or vegan has actually declined slightly since the late 1990s. Despite more choices and greater awareness, most people continue to eat meat – and the cruelty of industrial animal agriculture continues with it.

That’s what makes the potential of cell-cultivated meat so compelling, Levitz argues. Rather than relying on moral persuasion to convince consumers to give up animal products, cultivated meat offers the possibility of keeping meat on the plate – but removing the animal suffering, slaughter, and environmental toll behind it.

“Thus, the only way to reconcile humanity’s taste for meat with its sympathy for intelligent life is to decouple animals’ flesh from their sentience,” he writes. “And lab-grown meat is our best hope for doing that.”

The backlash from some quarters of the right, then, appears to stem more from cultural anxiety than economic threat. Levitz highlights the irony of self-described free market advocates moving to ban a product before it even exists at scale – and doing so in the name of defending traditional agriculture, even as parts of that same sector invest in cultivated meat.

He also points out that many of the fears being stoked – like bans on traditional meat – are unfounded. No government that hopes to stay in office is likely to outlaw bacon, ribs, or burgers in a meat-loving country like the USA. The only way cultivated meat could “replace” conventional meat is by outcompeting it in terms of taste, price, and convenience – and even that is still years away, if it’s possible at all.

In fact, many scientists remain skeptical that cultivated meat can be produced cheaply and efficiently enough to replace industrial meat. But others believe that with technological progress and economies of scale, the promise of affordable, cruelty-free meat is within reach.

“If labs found a commercially viable way to directly convert electricity into chicken wings, steaks, and bacon,” Levitz writes, “we could radically reduce the resource intensity and cost of meat production.” That would free up hundreds of millions of acres of farmland, dramatically reduce emissions, and spare billions of animals from suffering.

The story Levitz tells is ultimately about much more than a food technology. It’s about whether we allow innovation to align with our values – or whether we let cultural grievances stand in the way of potentially transformative progress. As he concludes, “we must not let cultural grievance prevent us from finding out if that world is possible.”

(This article draws extensively from reporting by Eric Levitz, Why the right wants to ban this innovation before you get to try it, published 29 May 2025, by Vox)