A handful of researchers has been working for the past six years on the technical problem of extracting stem cells from bovine muscle, culturing them in the laboratory and turning them into strips of muscle fibres that can be minced together with synthetic fat cells into an edible product.
The technical challenges have included giving the meat a pinkish colour and the right texture for cooking and eating, as well as ensuring that it feels and tastes like real meat.
Post admitted to being nervous about the final result. "I am a little worried, but seeing and tasting is believing," he said.
Although some animals still have to be slaughtered to provide the bovine stem cells, scientists estimate that a million times more meat could be made from the carcass of a single cow, compared with conventional cattle rearing. As well as reducing the number of beef cattle, it would save the land, water and oil needed to raise cattle for the meat trade, Post said.
"Eventually, my vision is that you have a limited herd of donor animals that you keep in stock in the world. You kill animals and take all the stem cells from them, so you would still need animals for this technology.
"Right now we are using about 70 per cent of all our agricultural capacity to grow meat through livestock. You are going to need alternatives. If we don't do anything, meat will become a luxury food and will become very expensive," he said.
"Livestock also contribute a lot to greenhouse gas emissions, more so than our entire transport system. Livestock produces 39 per cent of the methane, 5 per cent of CO2 and 40 per cent of all the nitrous oxide. Eventually we'll have an 'eco-tax' on meat."
Growing meat in fermentation vats might be better for the environment. It might be more acceptable to vegetarians and people concerned about the welfare of livestock.
Growing artificial meat may allow greater control. It will be possible, for example, to alter the fat content, or the amount of polyunsaturated fats vs saturated fats.
Post declined to reveal who his backer was, except to say that he was well known but not a celebrity. "It's a very reputable source of money," he said. "He's an individual. There may be two reasons why he wants to remain anonymous: as soon as his name is associated with this technology he will draw the attention to himself and he doesn't really want to do that."
The case for and against lab meat
Pros
* Billions of animals would be spared from factory farms and slaughterhouses.
* Would reduce environmental impacts of livestock production, which the UN estimates accounts for 18 per cent of greenhouse-gas emissions.
* Could reduce by 90 per cent the land- and water-use footprint of production.
* A more sustainable way to meet growing demand from China and India; expected to double global consumption by 2040.
* Free of hormones, antibiotics, bacteria and engineered to contain less fat.
* Would reduce the threat of swine and avian flu outbreaks.
Cons
* Consumers may find the notion of lab-grown meat creepy or unnatural.
* For some vegetarians, it perpetuates "meat addiction" rather than promoting non-meat alternatives.
* Risks of eating red meat, such as an increased threat of bowel cancer, remain.
* Animals will still have to be slaughtered to provide the bovine stem cells.
* Could have unforeseen health consequences
* Step in the wrong direction for those who believe problems in our food system have origins in distance between production and consumer.
- Independent
