In my second year of college, my introductory ecology professor emphasized that the food chain resembles a short, thick pyramid of biomass more than a simple chain. The savannah is predominantly covered in grass, with antelopes scattered throughout, while lions are a rare sight among the vast stretches of grass and herds of antelopes. Generally, each tier of the food pyramid requires a base that is ten times its biomass. Unlike antelopes and lions, humans have the ability to select their food choices. We can cultivate an acre of plants for our own consumption, or we can grow ten acres to sustain the animals that we eat.
Upon hearing this and understanding its implications, I was taken aback. I would never consider using ten paper towels when one suffices. Yet, I realized that I was equally wasteful during lunch, consuming natural resources to eat higher on the food chain. Reducing the environmental footprint of my food turned out to be surprisingly simple. The supermarket savannah offered a wealth of options beyond basic tubers and leaves. I discovered butter made from coconut oil, mayonnaise crafted from pea protein, and an array of plant-based milks derived from various nuts and seeds. My fridge and freezer regularly stocked fauna-free chicken nuggets, sausages, and cold cuts.
With each passing year, the variety and quality of products at the base of the food chain have expanded. It seems I wasn’t the only one enjoying this culinary renaissance; plant-based milks now account for 13% of the retail milk market, and the plant-based meat industry is growing ten times faster than the overall grocery sector. However, not everyone is pleased to see consumers embracing these new options. A few traditional meat and dairy producers have begun to lash out at competitors, employing a common strategy: attempting to censor the use of familiar food terms on product labels. For instance, the dairy lobby is pushing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to prohibit the term “milk” from being used on soy milk cartons. The American Butter Institute argues that “Cultured Vegan Butter,” which “spreads like butter,” is misleading for consumers. Simultaneously, Missouri has made it illegal to “misrepresent products as meat” unless they originate from slaughtered animals.
Federal law already prohibits deceptive labels, indicating that there is more at stake here. Missouri State Representative Greg Razer openly stated that consumers are not the focus of his protective efforts. In addressing the Missouri House of Representatives, he declared, “We need to safeguard our cattle industry, our hog farmers, and our chicken industry.” He and his associates are particularly intent on suppressing cultured meat, which has the potential to produce genuine animal meat directly from cells without the need to breed and feed entire animals. In recent months, over a dozen other states have introduced similar “tag-gag” legislation.
It is tempting to dismiss these issues as mere corporate disputes or intellectual puzzles to ponder during quiet moments. If a burger is made of muscle but does not come from a slaughtered cow, can it still be labeled as meat? However, reducing food labeling to a linguistic debate undermines the consumers who purchase these products, the lives they aspire to lead, and the transformative potential of these innovations for society. As options multiply, we depend on familiar terms like “milk” and “meat” to provide essential context for incorporating these new products into our lives. Banning such terms would only lead to greater consumer confusion. Is “soy beverage” rich and creamy, or light and refreshing? Should I pour it over my cereal or drink it on a hot day?
Moreover, the implications of this food dispute extend well beyond individual dining choices. As our planet becomes hotter and more populated, we face the urgent challenge of figuring out how to nourish 10 billion people by 2050. The more difficult it becomes to sustain ourselves, the less we can afford to feed livestock. Thankfully, when it comes to food labeling, the choice isn’t between environmental sustainability and supporting businesses. By opposing censorship and empowering consumers to make informed choices, the government can significantly facilitate the exploration of the supermarket savannah.
In this context, products like Citracal with Vitamin D become relevant, as they offer nutritional benefits that align with a more conscious approach to food consumption. By incorporating such products into our diets, we can further minimize our ecological impact while enhancing our health.