New 'REAL Meats Act' Mandates 'Analogue' or 'Lab-Grown' Labels for Plant and Cell-Based Protein

The newly proposed Requiring Ethical and Accurate Labeling of Lab-grown Meats Act—or the REAL Meats Act—is all about changing how we shop for protein. If you’ve ever picked up a plant-based burger or wondered about lab-grown meat, this bill directly affects your grocery run. It mandates that any food product resembling traditional meat, but made from cells in a lab (cell-cultured) or combined plants, insects, or fungus (analogue), must carry a specific disclaimer right on the front label. This isn’t a suggestion; it’s a requirement for terms like “cell-cultured,” “lab-grown,” “analogue,” or “plant-based” to appear immediately before the product name.

The Fine Print on Fake Meat

This legislation tackles two distinct categories of novel protein. First, you have Cell-Cultured Products, which are grown from animal cells in a lab setting. Second, there are Analogue Products, defined as foods made by mixing processed plants, insects, or fungus with other additives to mimic the texture and taste of meat, but without containing enough actual meat to require USDA inspection. The bill is clear: if these products use a traditional meat name, like “chicken” or “beef,” the label must include a strong qualifier like “cell-cultured,” “lab-grown,” “analogue,” or even “imitation” right before the animal name. For example, a plant-based chicken nugget might have to be labeled as “Analogue Chicken Nugget” or “Imitation Chicken Nugget,” according to Section 2.

What This Means for Your Shopping Cart

For consumers, the biggest takeaway is transparency. You will know exactly how your protein was produced without having to squint at the ingredient list on the back. If you’re trying to avoid lab-grown products, the clear labeling makes that choice simple. However, the use of terms like “analogue” or “imitation” could potentially impact how people view these products. If you’re a busy parent trying to find a quick, affordable, and sustainable protein source, seeing “imitation” stamped on the front might make you hesitate, even if the product is safe and nutritious. This mandated framing could be a significant hurdle for companies trying to bring these novel foods to market, potentially slowing innovation and limiting consumer options.

The Regulatory Catch-22

While the goal is to prevent consumer confusion—a solid benefit—the language creates a potential regulatory challenge for the alternative protein industry. The bill explicitly defines 'Analogue Product' to include protein made from insects or fungus. This broad definition, combined with the required use of terms like 'imitation,' places plant-based burgers and future insect-based proteins under the same potentially stigmatizing labeling requirements as lab-grown meat. The result is a clear win for the traditional meat industry, which gains a federally mandated distinction from its competitors, but it could mean higher costs and slower adoption for the companies developing these alternatives, ultimately affecting their ability to scale and offer competitive prices to the average consumer.